incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <joe_schae...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Date Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:54:52 GMT
Note: httpd server logs are available on people.apache.org
under /x1/logarchive/eosnew/www/

Up until recently ooo-site.apache.org was the line prefix
for www.openoffice.org, but I've reconfigured things so
www.openoffice.org is the right line prefix for relevant
logfile entries.

HTH




>________________________________
> From: drew <drew@baseanswers.com>
>To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org 
>Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 2:46 PM
>Subject: Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
> 
>On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 10:40 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts <luispo@gmail.com>wrote:
>> 
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> >
>> > On 2012-03-23, at 12:03 , Kay Schenk wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On 03/21/2012 07:23 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>> > >> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
>> > >>
>> > >> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
>> > >> geographical distribution of download requests.  This information
has
>> > >> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
>> > >> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
>> > >> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
>> > >>
>> > >> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way
of
>> > >> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it.  But I think GA is
the
>> > >> most direct method.
>> > >>
>> > >> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
>> > >>
>> > >> -Rob
>> > > This sounds fine with me. Yes, we should state our privacy policy on
>> > use, and at some point, if you do produce a public report, maybe nix IP
>> > addresses if that's a concern.
>> >
>> > I think nixing IP addresses is a necessity, if one were to publish this
>> > data, as is informing the downloader of the privacy issues.
>> >
>> >
>> 
>> This part is really easy, since Google Analytics does not provide us with
>> IP addresses.  It is giving us aggregate information, not per-user
>> information.
>> 
>> FWIW, we used to use several means to track downloads of the binaries. None
>> > was particularly great and none satisfied the desires of corporate
>> > marketing. And all made some in the corporate hierarchy uncomfortable, if
>> > only because a download of a binary is hardly the same as a contribution to
>> > source.
>> >
>> > We used Google Analytics but also, as was then called, Omniture. Selected
>> > data were published in graphical form to the services wiki.
>> >
>> > In addition, more or less from the start, I published spreadsheets of
>> > downloads, and particularized it according to language but not region. (I
>> > also listed OS of version downloaded.)  There were many problems to these
>> > spreadsheets, as I noted at http://stats.openoffice.org/, not least of
>> > which was spurious duplication and misleading numeration.
>> >
>> > What I always desired was a mechanism by which a successful download could
>> > "call home", thus supplying rather useful information. In the end, a
>> > version of just this was indeed done, via update calls, extensions, etc.
>> > However, there was no direct insertion of such a mechanism. If we were ever
>> > to do that, I would argue that we do need then to inform any would-be
>> > downloader of the privacy issues.
>> >
>> > -louis
>> >
>> > PS Roberto asked me about the old data and if it a) was extant and b)
>> > reflected geolocation. Answers: It was not extant, and I didn't keep the
>> > raw data. (I could probably find it stuffed into some archive, but why? As
>> > I pointed out to Roberto, the ODF Alliance information regarding ODF uptake
>> > is actually a better indicator, as most ODF implementations they track were
>> > or are based on OOo.)
>> >
>> >
>
>Howdy Louis, Kay, Rob, et al
>
>I've certainly delayed this long enough, longer then my intent in fact.
>
>There is no real question that analytics are important, Google is likely
>the fastest and easiest road to acquiring them, I suppose.
>
>I'm glad that Louis added some historic view to the subject, it might be
>worth noting that in the case of the Omniture data gathering campaign
>individual site users could opt out.
>
>The real real question is access IMO, Louis also broached the subject of
>his employer when he uses the phrase, "the desires of corporate
>marketing". Historically of course, SUN or Oracle, the analytics where
>the purview of the corporate owner. With Apache OpenOffice there of
>course is no corporate owner, analytics are then a resource of the
>Apache Software Foundation and from this flows, I would say, to the
>(P)PMC.
>
>This distinction I would submit means that the full analytics are not
>available to any specific employer of someone volunteering their time to
>the communal effort within AOO.
>
>However, another way to look at that would be that the analytics are
>available to all PPMC members. Of course as Rob points out, with Google
>this requires access to a specific account, so it would make sense that
>individual PPMC would need to request full access. 
>
>I just want to emphasize that whomever is maintaining the Google account
>is doing so as a steward for the entire Apache OpenOffice (P)PMC, at
>least this is how I see it.
>
>Otherwise, it would make sense with regards to public access to not look
>much beyond what basic charting was available in the past, but to at
>least shot for building a system to deliver that.
>
>So, it seems everyone is ok with this and I certainly don't want to
>deter it anylonger - it's a +1 from me now.
>
>@Rob - if I can help with generating reports, let me know.
>
>//drew
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message