incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From drew <d...@baseanswers.com>
Subject Re: Ditching our mirror system for an inferior solution?
Date Fri, 13 Apr 2012 03:04:22 GMT
On Thu, 2012-04-12 at 19:39 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> Hi Drew;
> 
> --- Gio 12/4/12, drew <drew@baseanswers.com> ha scritto:
> > On Thu, 2012-04-12 at 21:09 -0500,
> > Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> > > Peter;
> > > 
> > > it's really amazing to see level of support and general
> > > service that mirrorbrain has provided historically for
> > > OpenOffice.
> > > We haven't said no to mirrorbrain but you do understand
> > > that we just couldn't
> > > turn down the extra support offered by sourceforge. 
> > 
> > Why not?
> > 
> 
> Because we just have no basis for rejecting mirrors.

Sure we do, groups; particularly non-profits turn down offers from
commercial operators all the time. Lets be clear the SF offer is not all
about contributing to the project it is also to some degree about their
commercial concerns - it is their business model.

Personally, I'm not totally ad adverse, but there really needs to be a
good reason for doing so IMO and I certainly am not eager about dishing
up ads to try a free subscription to MSO 365 while waiting for your AOO
download to finish - if it can be reasonably avoided.

> Infra did ask us to contact previous mirrors so we
> need them, and the more, the better.

Yes, they did.

> 
> I think you misunderstood: we really haven't voted at
> all concerning mirrorbrain. and there was never any
> notion of sourceforge's offer being exclusive. We will
> accept all the mirrors that offer to carry us.

But SF really isn't an offer of mirror servers, it is asking us to
divert our traffic to their site for inclusion in their business
operations.

> 
> I do recall infra had issues concerning how to make
> mirrorbrain work with the Apache mirrors but that is
> a completely different issue outside the scope of the
> PPMC or decisions that are taken here.

Right - and that discussion presumed that there was a need to bring the
mirrorbrain servers into the Apache mirror network, the question is how
did that decision come about. My understanding is that this comes from a
standing policy decision at Apache, that Apache releases go out on
Apache mirrors - I guess that's correct?

Well, if that is the case then how do you reconcile SF - in the case of
extensions/templates it was easy, they are not official Apache
releases. 

In the case of the binary releases I guess it is the same thing then,
certainly there is plenty of reason to believe that a good portion of
Apache does not consider any binary release as official - just a
convenience, which is fine - but then we are back to the question of why
not use the system already in place - mirrorbrain?

//drew

> 
> Pedro.
> 
> 



Mime
View raw message