On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 4:56 AM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 4:40 AM, Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On 10/9/13 8:45 AM, Herbert Duerr wrote:
> >> On 08.10.2013 22:33, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> >>> janI wrote:
> >>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/mac/ ...
> >>>> So my first question is
> >>>> - what does a MAC page have to do here. MAC is a supported platform,
> not
> >>>> third party ?
> >>>> - why does the porting page not have a link to the mac page ?
> >>>
> >>> The Mac version used to be a port (you can still find outdated
> >>> information around, with the name "Aqua Port"), but it has been a fully
> >>> supported version since 3.0.0 or around.
> >>
> >> Yes, OOo 3.0 was our first version with Mac as fully supported platform.
> >>
> >>> So the porting page does not link to it since it's not a port. And the
> >>> URL is... well, historical, but I wouldn't oppose to move it outside
> >>> porting/ if we can setup redirects that won't break search engines.
> >>
> >> +1 for just redirecting to our download page.
> >
> > a redirect will work but who will miss the page? We should be more open
> > to delete outdated content and simply drop it. We have too many outdated
> > pages that help nobody and are more confusing than useful.
> >
>
> The point is when a user queries Google for terms like "OpenOffice for
> Mac" that is the #1 page on the results list. Users do this and visit
> that page around 4000 times per day.
>
> If we merely deleted that page then these 4000 people would get a 404
> error. After a period of time, probably a few weeks, Google would
> update their index and another page would be the #1 search result and
> get that traffic. The #2 link is a CNet page, so the traffic would
> probably go there and not to our website.
>
> If we redirect to a generic page, like our home page, then we get no
> 404 error. But as Google updates its index it would see that the
> redirected page is not really relevant to the query "OpenOffice for
> Mac" and would reorder its results so the traffic would still point to
> CNet.
>
> The only way to preserve this traffic is to have a relevant page about
> OpenOffice for Mac. It doesn't need to be complicated. But it needs
> to have enough discussion about using OpenOffice on the Mac to look
> relevant to Google and Bing.
>
> I suggested such a page in the past, even outlined it, but no Mac
> volunteers ever completed it:
>
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/product/mac.mdtext
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
I don't recall anything about this particular topic in the past but it
seems your "new" information could be just popped into the /porting/mac
index page with a nice little top note that says something like ...
"Macintosh is now part of the standard Apache OpenOffice product and not a
separate port"
or words to that effect, subsititute your new content for the porting
page, and direct folks to the "download" page.
Would that work?
> > Juergen
> >
> >>
> >> Herbert
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> >>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged
to stick to possibilities. Truth isn't."
-- "Following the Equator", Mark Twain
