incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <apa...@robweir.com>
Subject Re: [www] Ext / Temp repository stability ( was Extensions and templates site down )
Date Mon, 15 Aug 2011 13:01:47 GMT
2011/8/15 Jürgen Schmidt <jogischmidt@googlemail.com>:
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 8:28 PM, Rob Weir <apache@robweir.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 2:06 PM, drew <drew@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>> > On Sun, 2011-08-14 at 13:37 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> >> On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 1:06 PM, drew <drew@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>> >> > [from out of left field]
>> >> > Would members consider transferring ownership of the current
>> repository
>> >> > hosted on the OSUOSL server to a third party, perhaps created
>> >> > specifically to take this over, and then working with them to create
>> the
>> >> > indirect reference site under the AOO project, filtering out
>> >> > un-acceptably licensed items as a way to achieving option #2. This
>> would
>> >> > move the entire repository without needing to locate individual
>> authors.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I don't see how we can claim ownership of the content on the OSUOSL
>> >> server.
>> >
>> > Hi Rob,
>> >
>> > Well, I'm not at all sure I agree with that, what exactly happened then
>> > when the Sun brand came off the site and the Oracle brand went up, that
>> > was window dressing with regards to the site name - Oracle could not of
>> > moved the site to xxx.oracleoffice.org even if they also maintained a
>> > live redirect of the old address?
>> >
>>
>> Generally, you may do whatever the owner of the copyright allows you
>> to do.  The trick is to determine what the copyright owner allows you.
>>  With the lax attention to this detail by the OOo community over the
>> years, this important fact is hard to determine in many cases.  This
>> is something we should not seek to repeat at Apache.
>>
>> Not just with extensions, but throughout the project we are going to find a
>> mix:
>>
>> 1) Things we are certain we have rights to use, e.g., things in the
>> SGA, under Apache 2.0, things with clear provenance
>>
>> 2) Things that we are certain we do not have rights to use, e.g., GPL
>> components.
>>
>> 3) Things that we cannot determine whether or not we have rights to use.
>>
>> We're going to spend most of our time on that 3rd category.  But once
>> we've done that, and documented it, then we've improved the project
>> considerably and made it easier for us and others going forward.  But
>> it might require that we eliminate some contributions that were
>> otherwise excellent, because we cannot confirm our rights to use them.
>>
>> >> It was not part of the Oracle SGA, as far as I know.  So it
>> >> is not ours to give to a 3rd party.
>> >>
>> >> But if a 3rd party steps forward and is willing to navigate the
>> >> licenses and figure out way to host them all, then I'd wish them the
>> >> best of luck.
>> >>
>> >> The main technical things we need to coordinate are:
>> >>
>> >> 1) How are submissions made to the catalog
>>
> i would prefer a web form as in the existing repo
>
>
>> >>
>> >> 2) How is the catalog queried?
>> >>
>> >> 3) How are extension updates propagated?
>> >>
>>
> The existing mechanism works quite well
>
> See also
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Extensions/Online_Update_of_Extensions
> and related sub chapters
>
>
>> >> 4) Do we want a single catalog, in the style of Firefox plugins, or
>> >> allow multiple catalogs, perhaps filtered by support category or
>> >> license, like Ubuntu?
>>
> i would prefer a multi repo (catalog) approach directly from the office to
> allow maximal flexibility
>
>
>> >>
>> >> 5) What do we need to do to ensure a clean programmatic interface to
>> >> the catalog (a RESTful service) as well as a good end-user UI?
>> >>
>> >> 6) Is there a way we can manage, with sufficient user data protection
>> >> provisions, some sort of recommendation engine, where extensions are
>> >> recommended either based on user actions, or based on ratings and
>> >> similarities to other users (collaborative filtering)?
>> >>
>> >> 7) Is there anything we can do to allow the user to interact with
>> >> extensions (browse, sort, filter, download, rate, update, etc.)
>> >> entirely within OOo editors?
>>
> definitely,
> update is already possible but browsing extensions directly form the office
> is a long wanted feature. And not only for extensions. A new designed
> template dialog that allows browsing a template repo, download of templates
> for offline use, allows the upload in this repo (under Apache 2.0),
>
> But for both extensions and templates it is important that we make it
> configurable. Means it should be possible to disable it or to limit it to a
> specific repo only. This is important for enterprises with more
> restrictions. But it allows to manage a local repo for company wide used
> extensions and templates. A single place for maintenance (updates,
> bugifxes)  of these extensions/templates.
>

That is an excellent point.  The ability to define a corporate
extension catalog would be an important enterprise feature.

If could almost be like Atom or RSS -- items and feeds.

>
>> >>
>> >> So in general, I think this is an opportunity to do more than just
>> >> re-host the existing extensions site.  It is an opportunity to rethink
>> >> how users and extensions authors could interact.
>> >
>> > I agree with much of that
>> > - I guess I would opt here to pull us back from either my
>> > out-of-left-field idea, or the perfect solution for the moment.
>> >
>> > Just hit the templates site and it's back, I would rather we ask the
>> > current admin about what, if any, maintenance is needing done on the
>> > site, and then we should offer, if it would help, to try and find some
>> > volunteer help to get that done, asap.
>> >
>>
>> That sounds like a wonderful near-term solution.
>>
>
> indeed and it would give us some more time to think about a good solution
>
>
>>
>> It is a matter of perspective:
>>
>> 1) Is the extensions site an official service provided by the project?
>>
>> or
>>
>> 2) Is the extensions site a 3rd party service for the benefit of the
>> larger community?
>>
>
> i would like to see both.
>
> 1) an official and default Apache extension repository (under Apache 2.0)
>
> and 2) a well defined interface that allow others to run a 3rd party
> repository.
>
> A good and working extension infrastructure and a better integration in the
> office directly is a key element from my point of view for a working
> eco-system.
>
> Juergen
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> I think either one is fine, but each has its own constraints.  With
>> #1, we are then under Apache rules for license, etc.   But we can use
>> Apache hardware.
>>
>> And for #2, we are free to link to the external service from our
>> website, but we should have a disclaimer, along the lines of what
>> Apache Subversion has for its binary releases:
>>
>> "The Apache Subversion project does not officially endorse or maintain
>> any binary packages of the Subversion software. However, volunteers
>> have created binary packages for different distributions and
>> platforms, and as a convenience, we maintain a list of links to them
>> here."
>>
>>
>> > While not to lose focus on working those longer term ideas.
>> >
>> > Best wishes,
>> >
>> > //drew
>> >
>> >
>>
>

Mime
View raw message