incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net>
Subject Re: Request to use Extension / Templat drupal code
Date Sun, 29 Jan 2012 23:37:56 GMT

On Jan 29, 2012, at 2:37 PM, drew wrote:

> On Sat, 2012-01-28 at 18:11 -0500, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
>> Drew,
>> Sorry for late reply….
>> 
>> On 25 January 2012 13:20, drew <drew@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I put this request to the infra ML the other day, but likely should of
>>> put it here first.
>>> 
>>> I would like to get a copy of the Drupal code currently running the
>>> extension and template sites.
>>> 
>>> After re-branding, of course, and other changes TBD would use this for
>>> distribution with the Small Business Server VM I'm working on -
>>> specifically: use as a OTB local repository service.
>> 
>> What would be a real use case scenario? Being concrete here would be
>> useful, though I doubt it would affect the decision.
> 
> Sure - A number of school systems, in the US, as an example setup local
> repositories. There is one instance I've heard of of a corporations that
> do the same thing. As best as I can gather the drivers for this decision
> is: Security and Corp. IT desktop configuration. So instead of saying
> here is a list of all acceptable extensions and then installing all on
> every desktop a repository is setup withe the vetted and accepted
> optional extensions (or locally produced extensions) and the end user is
> allowed to install from that set, as needed, to their local
> configuration.
> 
> Now OOo of course offers the ability to have a shared location for
> templates right out of the box already - however this is not an optimal
> solution for all network configurations.
> 
> So - when I refer to a local repository I'm referring to a repository
> sitting behind a corporate firewall or within their intranet if you
> will.
> 
>>> 
>>> License wise for the custom modules etc, from what I gather would have
>>> to be GPL2 or newer so for hosting of custom pieces sourceforge would
>>> seem a natural fit in this case :)
>>> 
>>> Speaking of SF - I suppose it could be done that way also, instead of
>>> getting the code via ASF, acquire it from SF.
>> 
>> Yes, but I tend to think, from experience, that centralizing efforts
>> actually helps things, though SF is such well-trod territory that I
>> doubt there'd be surprises. My reasoning has to do not with proximate
>> location but license coherence. Not much of an issue here, now, but it
>> could be, as we are all aware.
>>> 
>>> Anyway not a big rush for my purposes but would like to get the ball
>>> rolling if possible.
>>> 
>>> Any thoughts, suggestions would be most welcomed.
>> 
>> If I understand you rightly, I think the more ideas you have on this
>> subject you are willing to share, the better.
>>> 
> 
> There are of course three options:
> 
> 1 - start from scratch
> 2 - start from an existing implementation
> 2a - the OOo site
> 2b - the LibO site
> 
> I already know I could use the LibO site, however some of what was added
> work flow wise probably doesn't make a lot sense for this purpose. (of
> course I could be wrong on that and this needs to be looked at in more
> detail) The license on the LibO Pootle based implementation leaves me a
> bit cold also.

FWIW - I have implemented an Apache CMS based site within a corporate firewall. Not too hard
and I think that Joe has made changes recently to make the Apache CMS more easily configurable.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> Thanks for the questions.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> //drew
> 


Mime
View raw message