incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <rgard...@opendirective.com>
Subject Re: Sourceforge and extensions download site
Date Wed, 01 Feb 2012 09:13:11 GMT
Roberto,

I'm sorry nobody had responded as yet. I've nagged the PPMC to get itself
together over this (on the private list). This is a more gentle nag on the
public list, just so you know you are not being ignored.

Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Jan 27, 2012 8:13 PM, "Roberto Galoppini" <rgaloppini@geek.net> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 6:50 PM, Kay Schenk <kay.schenk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 1:27 AM, Ross Gardler <
> rgardler@opendirective.com>wrote:
> >
> >> As some of you will know the board meeting got pushed back 6 days. It
> >> was, however, held last night and I was able to attend. Consequently I
> >> am pleased to confirm that we now have a go-ahead with respect to the
> >> Sourceforge offer to host the extensions site. However, there is one
> >> important restriction on what we can do, so I'll cover that first.
> >>
> >> There cannot be any advertising on a domain name owned by the ASF,
> >> this includes openoffice.org.
> >>
> >> The board felt the most appropriate action would be to have users
> >> directed to *.openoffice,org or *.apache.org where they will be
> >> greeted by a page listing appropriate extensions sites with a
> >> disclaimer. At a later date this would become the meta-data server. I
> >> figured this would not be a problem as it is one of the options we
> >> discussed.
> >>
> >> We did discuss whether this would break behaviour for older OOo
> >> releases. If this is the case then it would be acceptable to provide a
> >> redirect for appropriate URLs. This may need to be removed for at
> >> graduation time, we didn't go into details about this as I felt it
> >> would be acceptable to deprecate the old behaviour whilst in
> >> incubation. Let me know if this is an incorrect assumption.
> >>
> >> I had some specific questions for the board, I copy them below but
> >> please not these are my notes and not from the minutes. They have not
> >> been approved yet, I'll let you know if I misunderstood anything.
> >>
> >> Can the PPMC accept SF's offer?
> >> Yes
> >>
> >> MOU necessary? What should it cover?
> >> PPMC to decide if necessary (with mentor guidance).
> >> Since the long term plan is to move to a
> >> PPMC owned meta-server it might make most sense to just let SF own
> >> this extensions site and not be distracted by what they are doing (we
> >> have trademarks policy to ensure they don't misbehave).
> >>
> >> Assuming trademarks are respected are we OK?
> >> Yes (as long as no advertising on apache owned domain)
> >>
> >> Will this address IP issues since non-ASF code will be offsite
> >> Probably (I believe this to be a yes, but allowing for edge cases)
> >>
> >> Advertising on the extensions download site?
> >> OK as long as not an apache domain (incl. openoffice.org)
> >>
> >> Redirection preferred?
> >> Yes (see no advertising requirement). Would be better to go via an
> >> informational page on an openoffice.org or apache.org.
> >>
> >> So there you go. It's now over to the PPMC to get it moving. I'll
> >> forward this mail to the infra team so that they can be ready to hand
> >> over the keys to the current extensions site at an appropriate time.
> >> Who is going to drive this?
> >>
> >> Ross
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
> >> Programme Leader (Open Development)
> >> OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
> >>
> >
> >
> > Ross--
> >
> > Thanks for this update. Yes, Apache OpenOffice PPMC will need to spend
> some
> > time mulling this over. But -- good news!
>
> > --
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > MzK
> >
> > "Follow your bliss."
> >         -- attributed to Joseph Campbell
>
> Hi all,
>
> we look forward to start working on it as soon as possible, and we are
> open to do what is necessary to make it (MoU, define how to handle ads
> out of Apache domains, IP issues, etc).
>
> Since we committed to deploy the Extension website in a short time, I
> wonder if in the meantime we might get a copy of the Drupal
> application and of the database of extensions to do our home work,
> eventually providing you with all necessary warranties.
>
> Roberto
> ====
> This e- mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. It
> may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the
> intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this e-mail and any attachment(s) is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately
> notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any
> attachment(s) from your system. Thank you.
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message