incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Re: Extensions and Templates [was: Re: Draft IP Review Plan for OpenOffice]
Date Fri, 18 Nov 2011 16:19:02 GMT
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Dave Fisher <> wrote:
> On Nov 17, 2011, at 9:53 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:40:25AM -0800, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>> If this statement is rewritten for Binary releases to allow informed
>>> installation of a Language Pack whatever it's host, license and
>>> copyright might be - as long as on installation choices were clearly
>>> visible and the user explicitly opts in or out.
>>> This same IP framework could be used for Extensions and Templates - an
>>> area in total limbo with no volunteers active.
>> is down again (5:30 UTC).
>> Is this a problem with the host or a problem of lack of maintenance by
>> OOo side?
>> IIRC both and
>> are hosted by the Oregon State
>> University Open Source Labs, and have been working bad all year long.
> I've discussed this with OSUOSL sysadmin.
> The servers are overloaded. So much so that the Nagios alerts were constant. They turned
them off. Every so often varnish acts up and the machines lock.
> When this happens I have been the only one who emails - they are almost
always responsive during business hours in their time zone - US Pacific.
> Both servers are customized Drupal stacks at different versions. There were people from
Oracle working on upgrades. No one has volunteered to administrate these from the project.
> Since these servers host extensions and templates with all types of licenses they are
not candidates for migration into the ASF.
> What should we do?

We could move to an entirely different model.  Don't host extensions
at all.  With SourceForge, github, Google Code, etc., there is really
no good reason why we need to have a single entity host all of the
extensions.  It would be enough for us to have a browseable
catalog/registry of the extensions: name, description, category,
sreenshot, license and a URL to download.

It would not be hard to scrape the existing extension side to form
this kind of category.

The license issue goes away, since there is no problem with having the
extension info hosted by Apache in a catalog of extensions.

Load is not longer an issue, since the catalog can be very cheap --
static HTML if we want, generated from XML.

I'd be willing to help with such an approach.


> Regards,
> Dave
>> Regards
>> --
>> Ariel Constenla-Haile
>> La Plata, Argentina

View raw message