incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From TerryE <>
Subject Re: Refactoring the brand: Apache ooo + (was branding)
Date Mon, 01 Aug 2011 14:41:34 GMT

Can I give my understanding on this issue of "Apache" being the answer 
to all Qs.  Yes of course it is at one level because anything ongoing 
under the Apache banner must fail under and comply with Apache rules and 
procedures.  However, if we ask the Q: are the Apache resources today 
able to take this over seamlessly then the answer is at best mixed.

As we've discussed, the current OOo maintains the codebase, development 
and release processes.  It also provides a range of services in support 
of OOo and its community.  One thing that does seem clear (at least as 
the forum and wiki are concened) is that as far as the servers running 
in Germany are running on borrowed time, and to be honest that was the 
situation years ago as they aren't housed in what I would regard as a 
data centre complying with Sun and now Oracle enterprise standards.  
Oracle shouldn't tolerate this continuance.

We must now sentence each according to some broad strategy, which could 
include options such as:

1)   shutting down the service, and removing access to its content
2)   shutting down the service, but provide some form of frozen archive 
snapshot of content
3)   rehosting the service on Apache infrastructure, but say on a 
Solaris zone
4)   rehosting the service on Apache infrastructure, but moving to a 
preferred stack (Ubuntu VM or FreeBSD Jail).
5)   migrating the content to the Apache-preferred application in this 

In the case of (3) and (4), we also need to decide whether the project 
can continue to provide active support -- broadly to standard and 
resources of the pre-Apache OOo -- or whether we switch to a sustain 
level of support -- that is keep the service up and running as-is but 
deprecate upgrades and extensions of use.

I would think that for most services (1) and (2) are a matter of last 
resort.  (5) would be wonderful, but in nearly all cases, it's going to 
be entirely impractical within the timescale that I suspect that Oracle 
will require.  So I suggest that what we will be left with is rehosting 
(4) in the short term, with possible migration (5) if and when the 
project resources are secured. Since Apache seems to be in the process 
of retiring its Solaris infrastructure, this means that option (3) is 
also pretty much a last resort only to be considered if the application 
is heavily Solaris dependent.

As we've discussed elsewhere, the OOo forums and OOo wiki can easily 
fall into (4), though whether the wiki moves into sustain support is 
still an issue.  In this case Apache will provide a hosting service 
which is directly supported by the infra team, but they will undoubtedly 
expect the project to provide in VM/Jail/Zone day-to-day administration, 
albiet compliant with wider operations and security standards.

I'll pick this up in detail in the cwiki pages, but I felt that this 
summary would be useful for the DL.  //Terry Ellison

On 01/08/11 14:07, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 4:10 AM, Andre Schnabel<>  wrote:
>> Hi Rob,
>>> Von: Rob Weir<>
>> ...
>>>> Right, OK, but again, where will this and many other ancillary
>>>> sites (like the forums etc.) actually live?
>>> The goal would be to have then continue at
>> ...
>>>> Yes, I know about this and have contributed to this but it doesn't
>>> really
>>>> answer my question...where do we go?
>>> If my answer still doesn't make sense, maybe you can try restating
>>> your question.  I might be answering a different question than you are
>>> asking.
>> I think, Kay is asking for the "physical" solution. Means:
>> - who will be the owner of the website
> Apache
>> - who will pay for the servers and bandwith
> Apache
>> - who will be the admin of the servers
> Apache
>> What seems to be unclear is, if Apache foundation will host content
>> which is not directly under a * domain.
> Since the domain name is being transferred to Apache,
> will in fact be an Apache domain.
> It remains to be seen what is redirected and what ends up being the
> "canonical' URL for the various services.   But the goal is to
> preserve the thousands of linked and bookmarked URL's to various OOo
> website services, so nothing breaks.  That's the ideal.  We can
> certainly do that for the top level services, e.g., Bugzilla, support
> forums, downloads, etc.  It is unclear right now whether we'll be able
> to preserve all of the deep links to individual pages, e.g., a link to
> a specific archived message in a list repository.
>> André

View raw message