incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <>
Subject Re: Can we update our migration status table?
Date Mon, 28 Nov 2011 17:25:43 GMT

On Nov 28, 2011, at 8:27 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:

> Am 11/28/2011 05:48 AM, schrieb Dave Fisher:
>> On Nov 27, 2011, at 6:10 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>>> If you recall, this is the site that we are pointing users to for the
>>> current status of the migration effort:
>>> A few things that seem wrong:
>>> 1) Why are we saying "no consensus" for the extension and template
>>> sites?  That makes it sound like we're having a discussion and we
>>> don't yet agree on how to handle these sites.  But isn't the truth
>>> more like we all agree to do nothing for the short term, but continue
>>> having this hosted by OSL?   Does anyone disagree that this is the
>>> plan?  (Psst.  If no one disagrees with that, then we have consensus)
>> I modified the status to that no one has come through to volunteer to improve this.
>> I guess you have a plan. Should you elaborate.
>> I'll note that despite letting people know numerous times, I have been the only person
who has reported otages to
>>> 2) EIS, TCM, QUASTe, QATrack, Registration, Product improvement and
>>> Crash Reporter --- does anyone disagree that the plan is that those
>>> sites are gone and are not coming back?  Instead of "No decision yet",
>>> are there any objections to me changing these to give a final status
>>> of "Will not migrate"?
>>> If there are any other updates, please edit the wiki.
>> I changed the MirrorBrain row to make it clear that this issue only effects the legacy
OOo downloads. All AOO releases will be on the Apache Mirror system.
>> Perhaps is one way that AOO can team up with TOOo?
> Maybe not a bad idea. AOO will take care of the code and produces the source release
(and maybe also some binary releases) and hosting of install files can be done by TOO. Could
be a good thing of collaboration.

You have misunderstood me. I am only considering distributions of the legacy OOo releases
that are LGPL that we cannot put on Apache Infrastructure like the maintenance release that
is being proposed by TOOo.

For all releases of AOO under the AL2.0 we will without any doubt be using the Apache mirror
system. No way we can delegate our releases.


> Marcus

View raw message