incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Høydahl <jan....@cominvent.com>
Subject Re: Incorrect Information About AOO 3.4
Date Sun, 27 May 2012 23:45:26 GMT
In the Apache Solr project, we have put up a Wiki page where companies/persons offering support/training/consulting/addons
may add themselves. Very low cost, and it works. http://wiki.apache.org/solr/Support And if
someone checks all the links in that list say every year, then dead entries may be pruned...

--
Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
Cominvent AS - www.facebook.com/Cominvent
Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com

On 27. mai 2012, at 18:19, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 11:54 AM, drew <drew@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 2012-05-27 at 10:22 -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>> Bah.. Drew got ahead of me :-P.
>>> 
>>> Guy, perhaps you can help us clean this old database?
>>> 
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/fr/Marketing/entreprises.html#france
>>> 
>>> just let me know what to drop, I feel like grinding my axe today ;).
>> 
>> Cool - I love a sharp axe, brings out the Norsk in me.
>> 
>> I believe it would be best then to simply remove the page.
>> 
>> 1 - better then trying to pick winners and losers, friend and foe, in
>> the commercial world.
>> 
>> 2 - ASF projects, from what I gather, do not do end user marketing or
>> business development, just code. It is the apache way IMO and feel
>> strongly now that this project should be no different.
>> 
> 
> There is a difference between the project doing business development
> and the project helping users find relevant resources to help them be
> more productive with OpenOffice.
> 
> In other words, the opposite of "picking winners and losers, friend
> and foe, in the commercial world" is not necessarily to pretend the
> commercial world does not exist.  The opposite is to acknowledge that
> it exists, that it can be useful, but to have proper disclaimers that
> the user is informed that these are 3rd parties, not endorsed by the
> project.
> 
> That said, I look at this old consultant lists, and think of them
> similar to the old CD distribution site.  They are outdated and likely
> to confuse users more than help them.  Better to take them down now,
> but continue the conversation on whether and how we might have such a
> list in the future. My mind is not made up on that yet.  But I'm
> tending to think that any consultant who actually has a business
> related to OpenOffice should be easy to find via Google using obvious
> keywords.
> 
>> Same for the other NL sites, yes I've looked at a bunch...There is a lot
>> to remove from the education pages also, lots of links to outside
>> organizations, dead email list links and the like.
>> 
>> Shall we start the culling then - and let the chips fall where they may?
>> 
> 
> I did this a while ago, but I can repeat.  It is easy enough to scan
> the ooo-site directory for openoffice.org email addresses.  Since
> these are all dead now, this would give a list of occurrences of dead
> email addresses.
> 
> There are "dead link" checkers we can run on the entire website, if we
> want, that will also report on dead internal links and will spider
> across ooo-site, wiki, forums, issues, everything in openoffice.org
> domain.
> 
> Also, and this is less resource intensive:  I can provide a list of
> links that Google reports as dead on the website, based on their
> scanning.  They don't check email addresses, however, but only
> http/https URL's.
> 
> -Rob
> 
>>> 
>>> Pedro.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 05/27/12 06:23, Guy Waterval wrote:
>>>> Hi Dave,
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> 2012/5/27 Dave Barton<bmcs@apache.org>
>>>> 
>>>>> FileHippo.com is a very popular download site for free software and for
>>>>> many years they have been offering OOo binaries for download. They are
>>>>> now offering
>>>>> Apache_OpenOffice_incubating_3.4.0_Win_x86_install_en-US.exe from this
>>>>> page: http://www.filehippo.com/download_openoffice/
>>>>> 
>>>>> While this is good for user awareness of our first release, some of the
>>>>> information on that download page is incorrect and in one part totally
>>>>> misleading:
>>>>> 
>>>>   There are other problems of this type, for instance, the fr webpage of
the
>>>> AOO project :
>>>> 
>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/fr/
>>>> 
>>>> You will see a link "Boutique OpenOffice.org", pointing to the fr OOo.org
>>>> former store, now in the hands of LibO : http://enventelibre.org/la-mouette.
>>>> You can buy there old articles about OOo.org (remaining stocks) gently
>>>> mixed with the new ones (LibO). They sell also articles for some other
>>>> linked associations :
>>>> 
>>>>     -
>>>> 
>>>>     April : TDF Supporters : http://www.documentfoundation.org/supporters/
>>>>     -
>>>> 
>>>>     Framasoft, which writes great articles about OO.org :
>>>>     http://www.framasoft.net/article472.html
>>>> 
>>>> In this case, the issue is not these associations themselves, which have
>>>> the right to have their own opinion. The issue is, for me, the AOO project
>>>> itself, which not controlls seriously its external communication.
>>>> 
>>>> After several (public and private) requests inviting to be careful with
>>>> some links present on the fr website, nothing has changed up to now. For
>>>> me, these things are not to be minimized. I have nothing against a certain
>>>> communication with the concurrent project, but if we will avoid some battle
>>>> in the future, the best way is perhaps to be more careful with our external
>>>> communication.
>>>> 
>>>> Of course, this represents only my personal opinion, and has not to be
>>>> interpreted as a direct attack or any perverse insinuation against the
>>>> person who has in the hands the keys of the fr website.
>>>> 
>>>> A+
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 


Mime
View raw message