incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Status of migration of OOo domains?
Date Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:26:49 GMT
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <orcmid@apache.org> wrote:
> I am not sure that a complete list is being dealt with in the manner Shane is
> requesting.
>

Like anything happens around here based on someone's request?
Remember, most people here are volunteers, not employees.  I don;t
think they take requests.

This is really quite simple.  The legacy website migration will triage
itself based on interest of the members.  The critical stuff will be
migrated.  Some of the "nice to have" stuff will get migrated.  And
the stuff that no one cares about will be lost.  That's life.

I was making a list yesterday of what I thought the most critical
parts of the legacy website are.  My list was:

1) Source control, including CWS's

2) Bugzilla

3) phpBB forums

4) Pootle

I'm pleased to say that we've migrated two of these, and we're
discussing a proposal for the 3rd, and the 4th doesn't look too hard.

If someone else thinks that there are other parts of the OOo website
that are critical to them, then great.  Opinions are free.  Here's
what you can do with them:

1) Volunteer to lead a migration of something

2) Plead your case here on the list, or via a blog post or Facebook,
and maybe convince someone else to do the migration.  You might do the
legwork to find out how something is done and help direct volunteers
with expertise to that task.  But saying "I see a big hole" will not
work.  What volunteer wants to fill holes?

3) Pay someone to do the migration

Those are the options.

Note that that is the way that features, bugs, documentation, website
pages, and everything else in the project is prioritized, namely by
those who do.  Not those who request.  Those who do.

-Rob

>  1. I see a big hole around all @openoffice.org migration, since that includes
> mailing lists and a single-sign-on registration and e-mail forwarding (i.e.,
> the orcmid user name that I registered with too many years ago has an orcmid @
> openoffice.org e-mail address and it is also the User ID for log-in to the
> site, to the wiki, to forums, and to a page where I can manage my own
> subscriptions to @ openoffice.org e-mail lists.  (The securityteam@ OO.o list
> is different, because it is a restricted, moderated list in a different
> manner.  There are also administrative lists, such as moderators@ and so on.)
>
> Up to this point there have been no identified individuals that support this
> on the current host and those plus others that can assist in a migration.
> This part impacts the non-disruptive transfer of the custody of all of the
> other features of OpenOffice.org, including those called-out below, especially
> with regard to the preservation of registration and the tying of registrations
> to the provenance of contributed material:
>
>  2. The bugzilla was migrated, but it was done without any advanced-staging at
> <http://openoffice.org>.   On my latest check there is still breakage left
> behind, although someone has provided more links to the new Apache OOo live
> instance.  (It would be really great if folks pitching in would announce their
> intention and at least the results on ooo-dev.  Absent a traditional
> management structure, the only thing that keeps us from being herdless cats is
> communication.  Especially communication that eliminates duplication of effort
> and continual wondering what the current state is.)
>
>  3. The OpenOffice Forums have been brought up on an Apache-hosted system.
> The live instance remains under Oracle hosting and negotiations on governance
> of the migrated forums is proceeding.  (Watch this space.)  Still, the ability
> to provide site administration and coordinated staging and then hook-in of the
> transferred live forums to the Apache server needs more steady hands.
>
>  4. The OpenOffice Wiki had been brought up on an Apache-hosted system.  There
> is proof-of-concept, in effect, and a pilot operation.  There is serious doubt
> whether sufficient skilled hands are available for conducting the server and
> site administration, providing coordinated staging, and operating a
> transferred MediaWiki site on Apache infrastructure.  Instead of acquiring
> that capability, there is ad hoc preparation to convert the OpenOffice
> MediaWiki to Confluence Wiki despite warnings that this is going to take far
> more effort for less appealing result than is foreseen.
>
>  5. I think there are other services (such as the localization services,
> historical archives, repositories for extensions and templates) that have not
> been put on our radar.  The list of OO.o Projects (their term) that Kay Schenk
> has provided may provide more that are not comprehended.  Since security has
> been a topic of late, I confess to having never checked (or learned where to
> check) that there are any previous CVEs on OO.o releases and whether any
> security warnings against specific releases are easily found before someone
> downloads one of the older puppies.
>
>  6. And then there is lining up terms of use, continuing the separation of
> development materials and supports that belong @i.a.o instead of @OO.o, and
> any IP clearance that is needed in regard to existing material and whether
> they are to be considered release deliverables or not.
>
>
> I see two underlying issues here:
>
>  A. Having enough experienced hands to take on the preparation, staging,
> migration, integration and sustained support of all of these established
> OpenOffice.org functions.
>
>  B. Somehow creating a process capability by which this is carried out as a
> successful collaborative effort from the current hosting to rehosting at
> Apache.  This seems to call for a headless management process at a scale I've
> not experienced and I don't see being offered. That is not how OpenOffice.org
> was built, yet the kind of commercial/competitive-firm infrastructure and
> management is unavailable to Apache AOOo.  I don't decry that.  My concern is
> that all of the needed experience is from that sort of enterprise.  An Apache
> Way equivalent does not appear to be at hand for AOOo.  OO.o climbed to a
> particular level.  Now that ladder that supported that climb has been taken
> away.  It's a challenge.
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2wave@comcast.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 08:56
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Status of migration of OOo domains?
>
>
> On Oct 11, 2011, at 8:36 AM, Shane Curcuru wrote:
>
>> It's been almost two months [1] since Oracle officially started assigning
>> the various oo.o domains to the ASF.  Do we have any actual progress on
>> migrating - or at least re-branding to show Apache heritage rather than
>> Oracle - the actual content of various oo.o sites?
>
> Kay and I put all the web content is in the AOOo svn at -
> /incubator/ooo/ooo-site/trunk/
>
> The CMS build is a work in progress as different parts present differing html.
> I planned to work on this some more but I have been down with a pinched nerve.
> Pain killers are the only reason I am typing now.
>
> Joe Schaefer and I discussed this sometime ago when I split the OOo site over
> from the incubator site tree. There is this JIRA ticket for a staging version.
>
> INFRA-3933 www.OpenOffice.org staging site - http://site-ooo.apache.org -
> using the Apache CMS
>
> I'll put up a build on my people site in the next day or two.
>
> Also, we are waiting on Infra for Domain Registration Transfer - see
>
> INFRA-3898 Transfer the openoffice domain from Oracle to ASF
>
>
>>
>> In particular, I'm concerned not just about the technical/code content, but
>> also about other content, especially oo.o sites that may require significant
>> changes to reflect ASF ownership and Apache OOo stewardship of these
>> domains.  There are far too many different kinds of content, I imagine, to
>> have a single way to transfer all of them, so I think we really need to just
>> start on at least some rebranding and figuring out which ones can be moved
>> (or changed) independently.
>>
>> In particular, I'd really like to see people working on the non-code
>> informational sites on oo.o like about, council, marketing, infrastructure
>> (or website), and the other topics of bizdev, certification, distribution,
>> and especially security.
>
> The content is there and I am here to help anyone with the wrapping if they
> are ahead of me. There are instructions.
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/website-local.html
>
>
>>
>> Independent of the great code we've inherited, we've also inherited a rather
>> large brand, and I think we need the PPMC to take a much more active and
>> constructive focus on managing that.
>
> One issue I think we need to address is that the people who will support this
> added infrastructure need to become enabled to work with APache
> Infrastructure. Perhaps these are people who should be offered Commiter and
> not PPMC if elected by the PPMC. Maybe these are the individuals where an ICLA
> first policy should be used. We need many volunteers for AOOo infrastructure.
>
>
>>
>> I'm presuming the best place to get an overall view of what's being done is
>> on the wiki, correct?
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/OOo-to-ASF-site-recommendation
>
> I think so.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>>
>> - Shane
>>
>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/lwfcisvg46fst2cq
>

Mime
View raw message