incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Ramm <m...@geek.net>
Subject Re: Feedback Requested: Proposed SourceForce Mirror of AOO 3.4
Date Sun, 25 Mar 2012 13:20:46 GMT
>>   - SourceForge.net would be the “recommended default download” on the website.
>
> What would that look like?  On what page do we make this branch?   In
> most of our communications we will point the public to this URL:
>
> http://download.openoffice.org
>
> (That then redirects to http://www.openoffice.org/download/)
>
> The download link then provided to the user is matched to their
> platform and language, based on their request headers.

My thoughts would be that we split based on user preference at this
page, by showing two links.  One for the sf.net download, and another
for the apache mirror network based download.

> Some subset (and we don't know what % since we're not running Google
> Analytics here) don't want the default and click through to the full
> matrix of downloads available:
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/download/other.html

We can handle that however you want.   We can create a sf.net page
matching that matrix, put sf.net links in the matrix along with normal
mirror network links, or just leave it as is. We are open to whatever
helps the project the most.

> I'm assuming that we want to avoid duplicating effort maintaining the
> logic for automatically matching users to the right download, as well
> as avoid SF needing to tracking in detail a large matrix of downloads,
> availability of new translations, etc.  You just want to mirror our
> dist/incubator/ooo directory.

Sourceforge.net already had user agent string + file name heuristics
to figure out the right platform for the user and the "best match"
download, which should work automatically.   We also allow projects to
manually choose the "best" release for any given platform.  So, I
think a simple link to
sourceforge.net/projects/AOO/files/download/latest (for example) would
be enough.

So it should be easy enough for that page to display both the sf.net
link and one going to the Apache mirror network, and those can be
displayed in whatever way makes the most sense for marketing the
release and managing download traffic.

Mirroring more files is not a problem for us at all as long as we can
use rsync or some other automated mechanism to keep the files up to
date as there are changes.

Maintaining an alternative version/platform matrix page would take a
little bit more work, but if it's helpful we could certianly create
something that matches that experience on the sf.net side.

> Ideally (and this is my opinion.  others may have better opinions), we
> would check the user's request header, get the language and platform
> from that, determine the recommended download, and pass that request
> onto either of the mirror networks, along with the IP address for
> locating the nearest mirror. The branch between Apache and SF mirrors
> could be done randomly, based on a tune-able parameter.  if
> rand()<0.25 doApache() else doSF() would send 25% of the download
> requests to Apache, and the remaining 75% to SF.

We can certainly do this as well.  Either approach is fine, but the
approach outlined above has the advantage of requiring almost no
integration work on either side -- so it would be my preference.
That said, the approach you describe here could be implemented on the
sf.net side in a day or two, so if it's your preference we're more
than happy to accomodate that.

> The nice thing about this approach is it allows each mirror network to
> do their own geographic optimization, while allowing the OpenOffice
> project to control how users are recommended a particular version of
> AOO. It allows us to maintain the matrix of downloads in one place.
> And it does not introduce any new mouse clicks for the user.

I agree that we should try to maintain the current number of clicks.
I also agree that we should give the OO project control of how the
options are presented, and I like this idea.

But the downside is that people might randomly get sf.net sometimes
and apache mirrors the next, and have an inconsistent user experience.
 And I also think users should have some control over what download
experience they get.

So, overall I think Joe's suggestion of a recommended download link
that states that it's going to sourceforge.net, and a second
"alternate" link that goes the the Apache mirrors would probably
provide a better user experience.

> Is it technically feasible?

Absolutely.  I think I speak for Roberto and the rest of the sf.net
team when I say we are open to whatever solution works best for the
AOO project, and are more than willing to be guided by the PPMC's
opinion on this.

--
Mark Ramm
Director of Engineering,
SourceForge Developer Experience
email: mark@geek.net
====
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
View raw message