incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kay Schenk <kay.sch...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [REVIEW] Staged Migration of OO.o domain properties (long)
Date Thu, 20 Oct 2011 20:56:39 GMT


On 10/17/2011 07:32 AM, Alexandro Colorado wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Shane Curcuru<asf@shanecurcuru.org>  wrote:
>
>> On 10/14/2011 7:56 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>>> I've been pondering what it takes to choreograph migration of the live
>>> OpenOffice.org properties into Apache custodianship.
>> ...snip...
>>
>> Great starts all.
>>
>> Where is the noodling and proposed list of what domains we want to keep
>> (i.e. host as *.oo.o to keep links, or host at ooo.a.o/* because it's
>> project oriented information) and what ones we're not going to keep?
>>
>
> I would preffer an *.oo.o is easier to manage and recognized, create shorter
> URLs and also reinforce branding.

I *thought* sometime back we'd had the discussion on the "user" facing 
area -- www.openoffice.org along with whatever subdomains we wanted to 
use there -- vs the development portion currently on Apache -- e.g 
openoffice.apache.org (or currently 
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/). There was some need 
(reason) to separate these as I recall.


>
>
>
>>
>> In particular, other than keeping some of the highly linked informational
>> domains from oo.o, I would expect that there would be significantly fewer
>> major domain names being used in the future project.  But maybe that's just
>> me.
>>
>
> Surely many projects are not mantained anymore or their existance could be
> reincorporated into larger projects like development.openoffice.org as you
> could see on the traffic of the mailing list some components experience a
> low volume of traffic that could be re-incorporated into a larger project.
> Example the CD-ROM project back into distribution.

see

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/OOo-to-ASF-site-recommendation

for some recommendations/observations I had made a while back.

We really DO need to discuss combining "projects" from the "old" world 
vs the new. Especially with regard to the development areas I would 
think. Maybe I'll start that discussion. It  could be that all previous 
area having to do with development should just be linked to the 
"development" web site.

ALL the web areas have been moved over to our temporary holding area but 
nothing has been done with them currently.

>
>
>>
>> A parallel discussion might be how we use oo.o versus ooo.a.o in the
>> future.  The development core of the project needs to be on ooo.a.o (or
>> whatever name y'all choose), as do the actual future download sites.

yes... this needs better definition.

>>
>> I'm thinking of oo.o as an informational portal, mostly with either
>> immediate redirects or with informational pages that point people towards
>> the appropriate ooo.a.o pages.  Then we can in the future consider adding
>> additional user-based information on the whole OOo ecosystem to the oo.o
>> site.
>>
>> One important aspect is to ensure that user expectations for Apache
>> software are met.  That means anything served off of an *.apache.orgdomain must meet
the project branding requirements, be under the Apache
>> license, etc.  For normal projects, we'd ask that oo.o redirect to the
>> ooo.a.o domain, but in this case, with the huge and valuable history of the
>> OOo project, I think we'll end up treating oo.o subtly different than other
>> Apache domains in terms of what content we're comfortable hosting there.
>>
>> - Shane
>>
>>
>
>

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK

"There is no such thing as coincidence."
            -- Leroy Jethro Gibbs, Rule #39

Mime
View raw message