incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <>
Subject Re: Extensions hosting
Date Wed, 04 Jan 2012 23:49:39 GMT
On 4 January 2012 18:32, Rob Weir <> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Ross Gardler
> <> wrote:
> <snip>
>> Once you've digested and debated the offer from Sourceforge the
>> community needs to come up with a couple of paragraphs indicating a
>> desired route forwards and reasons for it. I will try and attend the
>> appropriate board meeting in order to answer any questions that arise.
> Maybe I'm the only dolt here, but one reason it is hard for me to make
> a recommendation on a "desired route forward" is that I only have SF's
> proposal in front of me.  I don't have any proposal from Infra on what
> they would like to do.  Or did I miss it?

I'm not if you missed it or not. I'll provide what Gav has told me on
the infra list:

Short term: migrate everything to ASF hardware. This is without any tweaking.

Medium term will be to stabilise it (I'm not sure if this means
migration to Drupal 7 or not, I guess that will depend on longer term

Longer term: revamp it into a metadata type site and let the creators
self-host their templates etc.

> Also, as I understand it, even with a short term stabilization effort
> from Infra, we're still out-of-policy for graduation, and we'd need to
> move to another solution after that.

Lets not make too many assumptions. legal@ have said the IPMC can
decide what to do with respect to requirements on graduation. We can't
assume that the IPMC would forbid this kind of service. There has not
been a test case to date. Furthermore, Gavs catalogue site proposal
would solve the problem by simply pointing to third party hosting
sites. The ASF recognises the importance of the extensions site to the
legacy of OOo and thus to the future of AOO. As an Apache project AOO
can expect the ASF to provide support for extensions.

That being said, it would be dangerous to assume that whatever the
PPMC comes up with now will be acceptable. That is one reason why
board guidance is important at this early stage. If, once we ask
board, they feel any required policy changes are too wide ranging they
may decide to consult the members (to be honest I doubt that since the
IPMC has already been given oversight over the graduation decision).

> It sounds like the federated
> approach where host only an index might work.  I think I understand
> what that effort would entail.  Technically it can be clean and
> elegant, but it does have a high coordination cost, dealing with all
> of the extension and templates authors.

This is an important observation. Thanks.

> On the other hand, an external host, like SF, could get us the
> stability we need, as well as deal with the OSS license compatibility
> policy issues. We resolve it all at once.

Agreed - but we potentially introduce an additional problem for the
longer term by having no facility if SourceForge should change their
plans. However, I should point out that SF have made it clear that
they will ensure all code is available to us and are not looking to
own any domain names or other assets (that was a verbal assurance, but
I'm sure Jeff will put it in writing if necessary).

> I wonder whether one blended solution might be:
> 1) Accept SF's offer for the short term stability improvement and
> getting in policy with the copyleft extensions.
> 2) In parallel work with Apache Infra, volunteers from this project,
> and from SF (and maybe LibreOffice?), on an Apache Labs project to
> build a simple open source template/extensions management server.
> Maybe we can start from the existing server? (What license is it?)

If distributed it''s GPL since it's Drupal based. It could be argued
that (assuming it's implemented as modules) that the modules are are
not derivatives, but that is not the policy of the Drupal project [1]

Note, I don't believe there is currently any license applied, Gav
reported that he got permission from Oracle to just take it.

> Extend that to give the kind of loose coupling and federation we want.
>  When that is ready, the SF will be well positioned to host one of the
> first servers of its kind.  But we'll also be making this software
> available to anyone to set up their own repository.

Gav, how do you feel about this? It would allow infra to jump straight
to the long term goal without investing resources in the short term. I
see your reply later in this thread but I'm not sure it addresses the
proposal Rob makes. Which is to let SF handle the short-medium term
goals of stabilisation but still have the ASF pursue the long term
federated goal.

Roberto, would not be a problem for you given that Jeff said you would
be happy to hand everything back to the ASF if necessary. With this
plan there is no intention to take it back (assuming you do it right
of course), but there is an intention to provide facilities for a
broader extensions ecosystem.


> -Rob
>> Please be imaginative in your planning for the future. The optimal
>> solution might be some combination of ASF and SF offerings.
>> Note Roberto Gallopini has joined this list and is ready to make any
>> clarifications necessary. I've also made Gav aware of this post so
>> that he can answer any questions we have about what infra@ are able to
>> do.
>> Thanks,
>> Ross
>> I'm glad we had a chance to talk last week - exciting times for Open
>> Office as the product and community transition into the ASF.
>> For over a decade, SourceForge has been committed to advancing the
>> open source software community.  We host over 300,000 projects and are
>> visited by over 40 MM users per month for free, secure, and fast
>> downloads of open source software.  Trusted and reliable download
>> delivery is an important part of our service, with over 4 million
>> downloads per day and 2 PB from our mirror network each month.  We are
>> committed to helping OSS projects scale and grow.
>> Based on our discussions, we understand there are a few things you are
>> solving for as part of the Open Office Incubation effort:
>> Supporting a diverse licensing terms for Open Office extensions, that
>> may not all comply with the Apache OSS policy;
>> Stabilizing your Drupal OO Extensions site and ensuring high
>> availability and download bandwidth without cost
>> Expanding both the developer base who will move into working on the
>> Apache framework as well as adoption of the Open Office product and
>> extensions.
>> We think we can help and that there would be mutual benefit.  To that
>> end, we propose the following for your consideration:
>> 1.) Stabilize the your OO Extensions Drupal instance by moving the it
>> and all services to SourceForge.  Our Site Operations team will do teh
>> work and oversee the operations for you as we do other services.  To
>> your community the directory will look the same and extension and
>> template files will move to SourceForge's globally-distributed
>> download mirror network where we can ensure reliable, scalable
>> delivery.  Drupal will be hosted on our project web service, serving
>> your existing domain via a VHOST.  Standard infrastructure
>> (monitoring, backups, etc.) and service levels (99.9% availability
>> target) apply.
>> These SourceForge services will be provided gratis, and without
>> lock-in -- you are open to change your mind later.  We anticipate this
>> migration would involve a week of planning and preparation, followed
>> by a week of migration and pre/post-migration communications.  We're
>> prepared to commence this work the next week if provided your approval
>> and support.
>> 2.) Once stabilized, we will work with you on a timeline to evaluate
>> and execute a migration from Drupal 5 to Drupal 7.
>> Allowing us to host the Extensions community will solve the license
>> challenges - or at least give you time to work through a longer term
>> solution.  We would also be able to cross promote the software titles
>> to the development community as well - so perhaps expand not only your
>> user base but developers.
>> Roberto (our Sr. Director of Business Development) has been involved
>> in the community for many years -- he will continue to
>> be your point-of-contact.  If we secure the go-ahead this week, we
>> will start on Tuesday next week and expect to be complete by 1/15 with
>> step 1.  I have asked our head of Site Ops to oversee the
>> implementation and he'll partner up with your technical folks to
>> ensure the hosting transition goes well.
>> Our motivation here is quite simple, it is all part of our mission to
>> help Open Source Software initiatives succeed.  To that end,
>> SourceForge and Geeknet Media are able to fund these services and make
>> them free to the community through advertising largely on the download
>> and directory pages.  So there won't ever be a charge back to your
>> community and we are able to reinvest in R&D on our developer tools as
>> well.
>> We look forward to hearing back from you this week if possible.  Feel
>> free to forward this on to whomever you would like in terms of getting
>> to an aligned decision.
>> I wish you a happy new year!
>> --
>> Thank you,
>> Jeff
>> --- End of copied text ---
>> --
>> Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
>> Programme Leader (Open Development)
>> OpenDirective

Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
Programme Leader (Open Development)

View raw message