On Wed, 31 Jul 2013, janI wrote:
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 13:33:50 +0200
From: janI <j...@apache.org>
To: dev <dev@openoffice.apache.org>
Cc: janI <j...@apache.org>, Henk P. Penning <penn...@uu.nl>,
"priv...@openoffice.apache.org" <priv...@openoffice.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Release 3.4.1 storage and incubator removal.
Moving conversation to dev@
On 31 July 2013 13:28, Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 7/31/13 1:07 PM, janI wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Based on a discussion today on IRC, I would like to draw your
attention
> to the following challenge. henkp is cc because he is the
infra person
> doing the rsync magic.
>
> ASF has a policy that incubator/xxx should be removed when the
project
> graduates. We still have our 3.4.1 (and 3.3.0) release stored
under
> incubator.
>
> As part of cleaning rsync, infra want to enforce the policy,
but of
> course respect and understand our need to have 3.4.1 available
to users
> (especially because 3.4.1 contains languages not released in
4.0).
>
> I see the following possibilities:
>
> 1) remove openoffice from incubator, but leave version 3.3.0
and 3.4.1
> (with language packs) on the SF mirror. This is preferred by
infra.
+1 to keep it on SF
This getting confused very quickly. As far as I'm concerned
(or infra) nothing changes on SF, until the next AOO release.
The only concern now is dist/incubator/ooo ;
-- incubator/ooo now only has 3.4.1
-- it is on the mirrors
-- for 3.4.1 (and older versions)
http://openoffice.apache.org/downloads.html
does NOT point to incubator/ooo anymore ;
it points to archive.apache.org/dist/incubator/ooo/
for stuff that once was in dist/incubator/ooo.
-- if there are no other download pages pointing to
www.apache.org/dist/incubator/ooo
then dist/incubator/ooo can be safely removed.
Agree? Or are there other issues I forget?
If there ever comes a 3.4.2, we'll then consider the options.
> 3) persuade infra to keep incubator for 3.4.1, but limit the footprint
> as much as possible, remove 3.3.0 and put a timelimit up.
>
I believe we can manage to move it out of the incubator in some
way.
> We are also adviced, that if/when we change our layout infra
need to be
> adviced well in advance. In my opinion we should consider not
using
> externaldist, but have the total release in one folder with
subfolders.
Well externaldist was not our idea and I copied the files in this
structure of advice from infra. We should first clarify what's
preferred
here. "externaldist" caused some confusion and extra work on our side
as well.
... I'm not happy with "externaldist" also. But it is another matter.
The plan now is (if AOO agrees) :
-- to exclude dist/openoffice/4.0.0/binaries for the mirrors
-- to copy 4.0.0/binaries into dist/openoffice/4.0.0/binaries
-- to create a new module for SF (and communicate this with SF) ;
this would NOT change the 4.0.0 files on SF ; it would just
change (a little) the way SF gets the binaries.
The third issue is "putting 4.0.0 binaries on the mirrors" ;
there was some demand on mirrors.a.o.
Can we, for now limit the discussion on 'incubator/ooo' ?
Maybe Jurgen and I can discuss 'externaldist' off-line ; if
Jurgen is comfortable with that ; if necessary we can discuss
a proposal here later.
Regards,
Henk Penning
------------------------------------------------------------ _
Henk P. Penning, ICT-beta R Uithof BBL-761 _/ \_
Faculty of Science, Utrecht University T +31 30 253 4106 / \_/ \
Princetonplein 5, 3584CC Utrecht, NL F +31 30 253 4553 \_/ \_/
http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~penni101/ M penn...@uu.nl \_/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
