incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kay Schenk <>
Subject Re: [RELEASE] new DL test...needs review and comments, and probably correction
Date Fri, 27 Apr 2012 22:22:25 GMT

On 04/27/2012 01:46 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Andrea Pescetti<>  wrote:
>> Kay Schenk wrote:
>>> Please take a look at and give feedback on a test page for the new
>>> /download/index.html page at:
>>> Yes, it's a bit strange with lots of nonsense at the top that I wanted
>>> you to see, but will of course go away in production.
>> The page is nice, but it's the concept that leaves me dubious.
>> We have another thread
>> where there seems to be consensus towards a solution that:
>> 1) Uses SF (and possibly Apache) for the web-based downloads
>> 2) Does not phase out MirrorBrain, and uses it for the updates (i.e.,
>> downloads initiated by OpenOffice with the "Look for updates" function)
> That's what I understand as well.

oh -- OK. I thought we were going to use MirrorBrain for 3.3 DLs as well 
-- i.e. what Marcus will be working on. I know right now, we're using 
SourceForge for that though.

>> The "possibly Apache" in 1) is due to the fact that I haven't understood yet
>> what technology Apache will be using and if Apache will distribute only
>> sources or binaries too (it's obvious that we as a project will release
>> sources and binaries, but I'm not 100% sure that Apache wants to put
>> binaries on its mirrors too: I think so).

Well it's not all that complicated actually. Take a look at the security 
patch info page...

and you can see what the link looks like.

Actual source/binaries are, for us, put in:

This said, you could be right in having issues tracking down problems. 
Right now, the SF setup is more "user friendly" in my opinion. I thought 
we were *required* to use Apache for downloads, but maybe we've gotten a 
dispensation for this release. Though I didn't think is was 100% 
someplace else. I admit I haven't kept up as much as I should have though.

The other issue is how will it LOOK to users -- one moment they may be 
one place; if they happen to do a shift-reload, they may go someplace 
else with an entirely different look and feel.

>> Fact is, we should avoid the random selection as much as possible, mainly to
>> be able to quickly identify problems, and you will see details in that
>> thread. The cleaner separation we can get, the better.
> So how about something very simple:
> 1) AOO 3.4 downloads use SourceForge by default from the
> /download/index.html page.  Just like they are doing today.

This WOULD make things a lot simpler.
> But we also have a links there that point to Apache mirrors for:
> a) Hashes and detached signatures
> b) source distribution
> c) a link to the full release tree

Well, SF will need to implement in their sidebar or the main page for they have, right?

Anyway, good conversation.
> In other words, no rolling the dice, noting fancy.  100% of normal
> users will download from SF.
> 2) When we enable the automated updates, in a week or two, then we
> decide what we want to do.  Maybe we do it via SF.  Maybe MirrorBrain.
>   Maybe a mix,
>> On the other side, release time is approaching and I can only hope that
>> talks between Peter Poeml (MirrorBrain author) and Apache Infra, that had
>> started on this list, are progressing now.
> I think it is too late for any of those talks to influence how we deal
> with AOO 3.4 initial downloads.  But maybe the update downloads in a
> couple of weeks.
> -Rob
>> Regards,
>>   Andrea.


"Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you
  And life has a funny way of helping you out
  Helping you out."
                             -- "Ironic", Alanis Morissette

View raw message