Re: [Website] Files missing
On 3/15/14 5:11 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > Andrea Pescetti wrote: http://www.openoffice.org/fr/Mac/ >> Maybe someone who can access the >> server has more information. > > Update: http://www.openoffice.org/fr/Mac/ exists on the server (thanks > to joes for investigating this on the server) but it is a leftover from > this commit from two years ago: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1309012 > that moved "Mac" into "archives/". > > Now, was that commit wanted? Do we still have pages linking to the "Mac" > dir? > > If we make a clean website build now, http://www.openoffice.org/fr/Mac/ > will disappear. So it's good if someone who is more familiar with the FR > site can tell if we should move that dir back (to allow the files to be > updated) or if it's safe to remove http://www.openoffice.org/fr/Mac/ > altogether. > as I always I recommend no special handling on localized main entry pages. Just a translation of the English page and potentially a sub page with regional information. Of course no special handling of Mac downloads necessary, we should keep it simple. Juergen > Regards, > Andrea. > > - > 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
Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads and feedback and a proposed way to the final
Dave Fisher wrote: No links to snapshots from the website. It is ASF policy. It is not ASF policy. It is the way we have interpreted it so far. Policy is here http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what but as already discussed with the Board the key is that visitors pass through a page that makes it clear the dev builds are for our developers (meaning "anyone contributing toward the development of our product"). So the policy issue seems mostly solved to me. Feel free to ask me in private for discussion links. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads and feedback and a proposed way to the final
On 3/17/14 1:16 AM, Dave Fisher wrote: > No links to snapshots from the website. It is ASF policy. it is a somewhat strange policy where the automated generated page is public available as well, isn't it? > > No advertising of snapshots, but we can let developers know on this list. where exactly is the difference to link to it from here the list , the wiki or point on the public available auto generated overview page? But in general I am no friend of linking to many builds and where we get even more confusion which build is used by whom. As long as we produce the official snapshots manually I would prefer to link to them only and keep the build bots builds. When we have linux build bots with the correct baseline, a windows bots equal to the release build machine and a working Mac bot we can for sure move over to the build bots for general usage. People who are interested in these are normally following this list as well. And for all others where we are interested in feedback we do a blog post and promote the builds like the Beta where we have 138,000 downloads since last Monday. Juergen > > Regards, > Dave > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Mar 16, 2014, at 4:07 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: >> >> Marcus (OOo) wrote: >>> 1. >>> The disclaimer should be above of "Target public" and more detailed - >>> maybe also in bold, red-colored, etc. >> >> See http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html now (still not linked >> to from other pages). I kept the CSS local to the page since I didn't want >> to mess with the side-wide CSS. >> >>> 2. >>> The wording should kept more general. Otherwise you have to change the >>> page again and again depending on time, release mode, purpose, etc. >> >> As I wrote at the beginning of the thread, so far it would be enough for me >> to have these builds visible during the beta-to-final phase. Then, if we >> find out it's useful, we can discuss it further, but focus now should be in >> having builds more visible in this phase. >> >> Regards, >> Andrea. >> >> - >> 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
Re: svn commit: r1578175 - /openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/download/devbuilds.html
Dave Fisher wrote: -1 on these changes. Please revert / delete this page. Sorry. We cannot advertise dev builds from buildbots. I've now added a huge "DO NOT LINK TO THIS PAGE - THIS IS A DRAFT CURRENTLY BEING DISCUSSED" warning to the page. As discussed elsewhere, my opinion after several discussions is that we can advertise dev builds, provided we do it properly. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Meet-up Calender and Map (Was: Re: Document Freedom Day 2014 @Taiwan)
Thanks Andrea, On 2014/03/16 19:40, Andrea Pescetti said: > On 14/03/2014 imacat wrote: >> We are holding the Document Freedom Day 2014 at Taiwan, on >> 2014/3/26(Wed). > > Thanks for sharing. Indeed, there will be multiple events and campaigns > linked to the Document Freedom Day http://documentfreedom.org so it > would make sense to put on our homepage a special logo for that week (at > least 26-29 March). Do we have one? You mean like this? Sorry I'm not good at graphing. You are welcome to improve from mine. https://people.apache.org/~imacat/dfd2014/dfd2014-aoo.png https://people.apache.org/~imacat/dfd2014/dfd2014.png I'm also thinking that, if we have a event calendar (and an event map), we could share our local events on the calendar so that everyone can join the local meet-up whenever she travel to somewhere. This idea came from the Python community, where they have a meet-up event calendar so that http://python.meetup.com/ I shall forward this to marketing@. -- Best regards, imacat ^_*' PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc <> News: http://www.wov.idv.tw/ Tavern IMACAT's http://www.imacat.idv.tw/ Woman in FOSS in Taiwan http://wofoss.blogspot.com/ OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/ EducOO/OOo4Kids Taiwan http://www.educoo.tw/ Greenfoot Taiwan http://greenfoot.westart.tw/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Introduction to Contributing to Apache OpenOffice Module
Hi Shane Am 16.03.2014 um 14:50 schrieb S Sheridan: > Who are you, where > are you from, what are you interested in? > Hi, > > My name is Shane Sheridan and I am a computer science student in Dublin, > Ireland. Welcome at Apache OpenOffice. > > I am interested in open source for personal computing as well as more > advanced high performance computing > applications. So, I want to volunteer my time to contribute in any way > possible. This is a great method of using and > developing my computer science knowledge. At http://openoffice.apache.org/orientation/index.html you can find our orientation module. After you read this, the first task for a new developer, is to build Apache OpenOffice. You will find more or less all information on the internet. If you have questions, you can always ask the list. Have a nice day, and a good start at our project. Raphael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Meet-up Calender and Map (Was: Re: Document Freedom Day 2014 @Taiwan)
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 6:30 AM, imacat wrote: > Thanks Andrea, > > On 2014/03/16 19:40, Andrea Pescetti said: >> On 14/03/2014 imacat wrote: >>> We are holding the Document Freedom Day 2014 at Taiwan, on >>> 2014/3/26(Wed). >> >> Thanks for sharing. Indeed, there will be multiple events and campaigns >> linked to the Document Freedom Day http://documentfreedom.org so it >> would make sense to put on our homepage a special logo for that week (at >> least 26-29 March). Do we have one? > >You mean like this? Sorry I'm not good at graphing. You are welcome > to improve from mine. > > https://people.apache.org/~imacat/dfd2014/dfd2014-aoo.png > https://people.apache.org/~imacat/dfd2014/dfd2014.png > > I'm also thinking that, if we have a event calendar (and an event > map), we could share our local events on the calendar so that everyone > can join the local meet-up whenever she travel to somewhere. This idea > came from the Python community, where they have a meet-up event calendar > so that > We have an events page here: http://openoffice.apache.org/events.html -Rob > http://python.meetup.com/ > > I shall forward this to marketing@. > > -- > Best regards, > imacat ^_*' > PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc > > <> News: http://www.wov.idv.tw/ > Tavern IMACAT's http://www.imacat.idv.tw/ > Woman in FOSS in Taiwan http://wofoss.blogspot.com/ > OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/ > EducOO/OOo4Kids Taiwan http://www.educoo.tw/ > Greenfoot Taiwan http://greenfoot.westart.tw/ > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Beta Survey
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Rob Weir wrote: > The purpose of having a beta release of 4.1 is to gather feedback from > users. Reports to Bugzilla or the mailing list is one source of > feedback. But that doesn't give us a good sense of coverage. If > there were no beta testers of the Bulgarian translation (for example) > then we'd probably want to take a closer look, at that specific > package. > > I'm putting together a beta survey that we can have beta testers fill > out, to record their testing experience. I'm thinking of questions > like: > My question was not very clear. Sorry. This note was not a survey. It was asking for feedback on what questions we should ask on a survey. The questions I have here were proposed questions. If we can reach consensus on this I can code the survey into our LimeSurvey instance and we can collect this information from users of the public beta. Regards, -Rob > 1) What platform they ran with > > 2) What language they used > > 3) How many hours they have used AOO beta > > 4) Which apps did they use > > 5) What file formats did they read/write > > 6) Link to a list of P1 bugs reported on beta: Did they encounter > any of these bugs? > > 7) Did they encounter any other bugs? (Nudge them to enter a BZ report) > > 8) Did they try any of the new features in AOO 4.1 (list them) > > 9) Any other comments (free text response) > > Does anyone have any other suggested questions? > > The plan would be to send out the survey early next week, before the > beta period is done, so we can react to any feedback. > > -Rob - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads and feedback and a proposed way to the final
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 3:52 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > Dave Fisher wrote: >> >> No links to snapshots from the website. It is ASF policy. > > > It is not ASF policy. It is the way we have interpreted it so far. > > Policy is here http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what but as already > discussed with the Board the key is that visitors pass through a page that > makes it clear the dev builds are for our developers (meaning "anyone > contributing toward the development of our product"). So the policy issue > seems mostly solved to me. Feel free to ask me in private for discussion > links. > The problem is we cannot control what 3rd parties do. They can easily deep-link to our dev build page directly, bypassing any "warning" page that they might have. Of course, they could do that today, to ci.apache.org, if they knew about it. When 3rd parties promote unofficial builds, we can run into the following problems: 1) Users get a lower-quality product and this hurts our brand reputation 2) The developer builds may not meet all ASF release requirements, e.g, checks on NOTICE and LICENSE files, so errors in this area can hurt the ASF's brand reputation. 3) We do not offer upgrade notifications for developer builds. So users can become "stuck" on an unmaintained product and be susceptible to security issues, etc. This harms the user and our reputation. So we have a strong incentive to ensure that developer releases are not widely available to the public. I'm not sure what problem we're solving that would recommend putting a link (direct or indirect) to developer releases on our main download page, which gets *a million visits per week*. We should be very careful about that. Was there something that did not work with sharing the ci.apache.org address on the dev and qa lists? Other solutions: 1) Share the developer build link on the QA page, not the public download page that gets 1 million visits per week. If the goal is to have only project members download, then put it on a page that only project members read ;-) 2) Add some authentication on the actual developer build download page. Ideally, tie it having a BZ account. 3) Put a date-based expiration into developer builds, to discourage long-term use. Regards, -Rob > > Regards, > Andrea. > > - > 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
4.1.0_release_blocker requested: [Bug 124442] Mac and Java Oracle 1.7.0_51
j...@apache.org has asked for 4.1.0_release_blocker: Bug 124442: Mac and Java Oracle 1.7.0_51 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124442 --- Additional Comments from j...@apache.org the selection is stored correct in the users java settings but it is not reflected in the option dialog. I found a simple fix for MacOS only that solve this issue. I would like to request the showstopper flag for this. The fix is not critical, macos only but it increase the user experience a lot. Current behaviour is very confusing for users. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Document Freedom Day 2014 @Taiwan
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > On 14/03/2014 imacat wrote: >> >> We are holding the Document Freedom Day 2014 at Taiwan, on >> 2014/3/26(Wed). > > > Thanks for sharing. Indeed, there will be multiple events and campaigns > linked to the Document Freedom Day http://documentfreedom.org so it would > make sense to put on our homepage a special logo for that week (at least > 26-29 March). Do we have one? > We used this one last year: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/images/AOO_logos/dfd-site-log.jpg It is still nice, but would be better if we could use the new "flat" version of our logo. -Rob > Regards, > Andrea. > > - > 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
4.1.0_release_blocker requested: [Bug 124427] multi-line text control fields doesn't write into database
Oliver-Rainer Wittmann has asked for 4.1.0_release_blocker: Bug 124427: multi-line text control fields doesn't write into database https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124427 --- Additional Comments from Oliver-Rainer Wittmann I agreed with Steve to rollback the changes which cause this defect. Steve will take care of the follow-up issue to assure that the related accessibility still works as expected. --> fix available Requesting show-stopper-status as this regression causes data lose in Forms (or other database related documents) which uses MultiLineEdit-Textfields for certain database fields. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
review requested: [Bug 124442] Mac and Java Oracle 1.7.0_51 : [Attachment 82885] proposed simple fix
j...@apache.org has asked h...@apache.org for review: Bug 124442: Mac and Java Oracle 1.7.0_51 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124442 Attachment 82885: proposed simple fix https://issues.apache.org/ooo/attachment.cgi?id=82885&action=edit --- Additional Comments from j...@apache.org simple fix to show the selected Java in the options dialog. It's a MacOS only fix. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
4.1.0_release_blocker granted: [Bug 124427] multi-line text control fields doesn't write into database
j...@apache.org has granted Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 's request for 4.1.0_release_blocker: Bug 124427: multi-line text control fields doesn't write into database https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124427 --- Additional Comments from j...@apache.org grant showstopper flag, it's a regression and fix available - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
review granted: [Bug 124442] Mac and Java Oracle 1.7.0_51 : [Attachment 82885] proposed simple fix
h...@apache.org has granted j...@apache.org's request for review: Bug 124442: Mac and Java Oracle 1.7.0_51 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124442 Attachment 82885: proposed simple fix https://issues.apache.org/ooo/attachment.cgi?id=82885&action=edit --- Additional Comments from h...@apache.org +1: a nice fix for AOO410 final to solve the problem introduced by the magic done in jvmfwk/source/elements.cxx for the nRequirements setting on MACOSX. Both locations should should be cleaned up after the release. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Complete removal of the register assistent
Hi at all. I found some plesure in "destructive" work, and I found more gode to remove. In openoffice.lst are still some reminder of the register assistant. It was removed from Apache OpenOffice right at the beginning of the project. I would like to prepare a patch to remove the rest of this assistant. Have a nice day Raphael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
4.1.0_release_blocker granted: [Bug 124442] Mac and Java Oracle 1.7.0_51
j...@apache.org has granted j...@apache.org's request for 4.1.0_release_blocker: Bug 124442: Mac and Java Oracle 1.7.0_51 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124442 --- Additional Comments from j...@apache.org grant showstopper flag after review - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads and feedback and a proposed way to the final
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Rob Weir wrote: > On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 3:52 AM, Andrea Pescetti > wrote: > > Dave Fisher wrote: > >> > >> No links to snapshots from the website. It is ASF policy. > > > > > > It is not ASF policy. It is the way we have interpreted it so far. > > > > Policy is here http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what but as > already > > discussed with the Board the key is that visitors pass through a page > that > > makes it clear the dev builds are for our developers (meaning "anyone > > contributing toward the development of our product"). So the policy issue > > seems mostly solved to me. Feel free to ask me in private for discussion > > links. > > > > The problem is we cannot control what 3rd parties do. They can easily > deep-link to our dev build page directly, bypassing any "warning" page > that they might have. > > Of course, they could do that today, to ci.apache.org, if they knew about > it. > > When 3rd parties promote unofficial builds, we can run into the > following problems: > > 1) Users get a lower-quality product and this hurts our brand reputation > > 2) The developer builds may not meet all ASF release requirements, > e.g, checks on NOTICE and LICENSE files, so errors in this area can > hurt the ASF's brand reputation. > > 3) We do not offer upgrade notifications for developer builds. So > users can become "stuck" on an unmaintained product and be susceptible > to security issues, etc. This harms the user and our reputation. > > So we have a strong incentive to ensure that developer releases are > not widely available to the public. I'm not sure what problem we're > solving that would recommend putting a link (direct or indirect) to > developer releases on our main download page, which gets *a million > visits per week*. We should be very careful about that. > > Was there something that did not work with sharing the ci.apache.org > address on the dev and qa lists? > > Other solutions: > > 1) Share the developer build link on the QA page, not the public > download page that gets 1 million visits per week. If the goal is to > have only project members download, then put it on a page that only > project members read ;-) > > 2) Add some authentication on the actual developer build download > page. Ideally, tie it having a BZ account. > > 3) Put a date-based expiration into developer builds, to discourage > long-term use. > > Regards, > > -Rob > I agree that we should not link the buildbot builds from the main download page despite that this is where they were in the legacy OOo site. We can do more to help the development community find them however. We already have a link to the buildbot page from the project source page (navigation Development -> Source Code) -- http://openoffice.apache.org/source.html but it isn't highlighted much. I think some wording changes on this page might help. > > > > Regards, > > Andrea. > > > > - > > 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 "Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect." -- James Mason
Re: New committer: Aivaras Stepukonis (astepukonis)
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 1:45 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache OpenOffice has asked > Aivaras Stepukonis to become a committer and we are pleased to announce > that he has accepted and taken the ID "astepukonis". > > A warm welcome to Aivaras ! > > Regards, > > Andrea, on behalf of the Apache OpenOffice PMC > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > Welcome Aivaras. -- - MzK "Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect." -- James Mason
Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads and feedback and a proposed way to the final
Am 03/17/2014 06:31 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Rob Weir wrote: On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 3:52 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Dave Fisher wrote: No links to snapshots from the website. It is ASF policy. It is not ASF policy. It is the way we have interpreted it so far. Policy is here http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what but as already discussed with the Board the key is that visitors pass through a page that makes it clear the dev builds are for our developers (meaning "anyone contributing toward the development of our product"). So the policy issue seems mostly solved to me. Feel free to ask me in private for discussion links. The problem is we cannot control what 3rd parties do. They can easily deep-link to our dev build page directly, bypassing any "warning" page that they might have. Of course, they could do that today, to ci.apache.org, if they knew about it. When 3rd parties promote unofficial builds, we can run into the following problems: 1) Users get a lower-quality product and this hurts our brand reputation 2) The developer builds may not meet all ASF release requirements, e.g, checks on NOTICE and LICENSE files, so errors in this area can hurt the ASF's brand reputation. 3) We do not offer upgrade notifications for developer builds. So users can become "stuck" on an unmaintained product and be susceptible to security issues, etc. This harms the user and our reputation. So we have a strong incentive to ensure that developer releases are not widely available to the public. I'm not sure what problem we're solving that would recommend putting a link (direct or indirect) to developer releases on our main download page, which gets *a million visits per week*. We should be very careful about that. Was there something that did not work with sharing the ci.apache.org address on the dev and qa lists? Other solutions: 1) Share the developer build link on the QA page, not the public download page that gets 1 million visits per week. If the goal is to have only project members download, then put it on a page that only project members read ;-) 2) Add some authentication on the actual developer build download page. Ideally, tie it having a BZ account. 3) Put a date-based expiration into developer builds, to discourage long-term use. Regards, -Rob I agree that we should not link the buildbot builds from the main download page despite that this is where they were in the legacy OOo site. We can do more to help the development community find them however. There is and will no linking from the main download webpage. So, this seems to be save. We already have a link to the buildbot page from the project source page (navigation Development -> Source Code) -- http://openoffice.apache.org/source.html but it isn't highlighted much. A bit more pimping the section is OK. But it should stay a bit "invisible" as it is at the moment. I think some wording changes on this page might help. Right. However, the main question is IMHO following: Do we want to present the dev builds in a bit more structured way in order to allow to point asking people to the CWIKI resp. CI webpage? Regarding Andrea's first post inside this thread it seems to be already approved (kind of) that we can link to these dev builds. Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads and feedback and a proposed way to the final
Am 03/17/2014 12:07 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti: Marcus (OOo) wrote: 1. The disclaimer should be above of "Target public" and more detailed - maybe also in bold, red-colored, etc. See http://www.openoffice.org/download/devbuilds.html now (still not linked to from other pages). I kept the CSS local to the page since I didn't want to mess with the side-wide CSS. Yes, better now. 2. The wording should kept more general. Otherwise you have to change the page again and again depending on time, release mode, purpose, etc. As I wrote at the beginning of the thread, so far it would be enough for me to have these builds visible during the beta-to-final phase. Then, if we find out it's useful, we can discuss it further, but focus now should be in having builds more visible in this phase. I think I now where this is likely to lead to, but OK. ;-) Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [RELEASE]: Beta downloads and feedback and a proposed way to the final
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: > Am 03/17/2014 06:31 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: > > On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Rob Weir wrote: >> >> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 3:52 AM, Andrea Pescetti >>> wrote: >>> Dave Fisher wrote: > > No links to snapshots from the website. It is ASF policy. > It is not ASF policy. It is the way we have interpreted it so far. Policy is here http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what but as >>> already >>> discussed with the Board the key is that visitors pass through a page >>> that >>> makes it clear the dev builds are for our developers (meaning "anyone contributing toward the development of our product"). So the policy issue seems mostly solved to me. Feel free to ask me in private for discussion links. >>> The problem is we cannot control what 3rd parties do. They can easily >>> deep-link to our dev build page directly, bypassing any "warning" page >>> that they might have. >>> >>> Of course, they could do that today, to ci.apache.org, if they knew >>> about >>> it. >>> >>> When 3rd parties promote unofficial builds, we can run into the >>> following problems: >>> >>> 1) Users get a lower-quality product and this hurts our brand reputation >>> >>> 2) The developer builds may not meet all ASF release requirements, >>> e.g, checks on NOTICE and LICENSE files, so errors in this area can >>> hurt the ASF's brand reputation. >>> >>> 3) We do not offer upgrade notifications for developer builds. So >>> users can become "stuck" on an unmaintained product and be susceptible >>> to security issues, etc. This harms the user and our reputation. >>> >>> So we have a strong incentive to ensure that developer releases are >>> not widely available to the public. I'm not sure what problem we're >>> solving that would recommend putting a link (direct or indirect) to >>> developer releases on our main download page, which gets *a million >>> visits per week*. We should be very careful about that. >>> >>> Was there something that did not work with sharing the ci.apache.org >>> address on the dev and qa lists? >>> >>> Other solutions: >>> >>> 1) Share the developer build link on the QA page, not the public >>> download page that gets 1 million visits per week. If the goal is to >>> have only project members download, then put it on a page that only >>> project members read ;-) >>> >>> 2) Add some authentication on the actual developer build download >>> page. Ideally, tie it having a BZ account. >>> >>> 3) Put a date-based expiration into developer builds, to discourage >>> long-term use. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> -Rob >>> >>> >> I agree that we should not link the buildbot builds from the main download >> page despite that this is where they were in the legacy OOo site. We can >> do >> more to help the development community find them however. >> > > There is and will no linking from the main download webpage. So, this > seems to be save. > > > We already have a link to the buildbot page from the project source page >> (navigation Development -> Source Code) -- >> http://openoffice.apache.org/source.html >> >> but it isn't highlighted much. >> > > A bit more pimping the section is OK. But it should stay a bit "invisible" > as it is at the moment. > > > I think some wording changes on this page might help. >> > > Right. > > However, the main question is IMHO following: > > Do we want to present the dev builds in a bit more structured way in order > to allow to point asking people to the CWIKI resp. CI webpage? > > Regarding Andrea's first post inside this thread it seems to be already > approved (kind of) that we can link to these dev builds. > > Marcus Well I decided to brave the waters and updated the project site Developer FAQ (in staging): http://openoffice.staging.apache.org/developer-faqs.html#where_can_i_download_developer_builds If too much, as this is still a *public* web site, I'll be happy to revert (or someone else can). Not committed to production yet. No changes on the Source page yet. We should probably just edit that and link to the Developer FAQ. We already had some info on both the developer snapshots and the buildbot here before but not explained, etc. > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > -- - MzK "Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect." -- James Mason
