incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <>
Subject Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] dynamic approach [was: Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] activation of update service for OOo 3.1 and OOo 3.1.1]
Date Tue, 14 Aug 2012 18:24:36 GMT

On Aug 5, 2012, at 11:13 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

> On 03/08/2012 Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 6:13 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
>> wrote:
>>> I am planning to give a talk on ApacheCon EU about
>>> the update function in AOO and the Update Service. In this talk I will give
>>> a deep insight in its purpose and functionality which should be enough input
>>> for a corresponding volunteer to create a "real" web service for our Update
>>> Service. ...
>> The question is:  how dynamic does it need to be?  It is not like the
>> upgrade options change minute by minute.  These change slowly, at the
>> pace of our release cycle, so every few months.
> Yes, and traffic is a key factor here. With potentially hundreds of millions of clients
hitting the servers, the biggest problem is not re-implementing the update service as a web
service, but serving it efficiently. And indeed I agree that staticizing the results somehow
would be good to do, since we have a relatively low number of possible answers with respect
to the number of requests.

Oliver requested removal of update32 from DNS on INFRA-5112 and now Infra is requesting PPMC

Is now a time to discuss cleaning up all of the staroffice urls here:               CNAME             CNAME             CNAME             CNAME             CNAME             CNAME             CNAME             CNAME             CNAME             CNAME             CNAME

update32 is the proposed change in the JIRA issue.

update33 is the added removal.

What about update, update23, update24, update30, update31?

Should we do anything now as well?


View raw message