On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 7:33 AM, janI <j...@apache.org> wrote: > 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 >> >> > >> > 2) remove 3.3.0 since its a legacy version, and move 3.4.1 parallel to >> > 4.0. This is however an expensive operation for all mirror, and should >> > only be done if we anticipate patches for 3.4.1 >> > >> >> Removing 3.3 is ok to me but I see demand for keeping 3.4.1. Having it >> besides 4.0 would be natural but needs some work in the download scripts >> ... > > > Just for me, do you prefer 1) or 2) ... I personally dont see a big need to > keep 3.4.1 on our servers. >
INHO it is fine to keep 3.4.1 and early on archive.apache.org and SF only, provided Infra is OK with us pointing our website links for the hashes and signatures of 3.4.1 and earlier to archive and not to the dist. I don't think the bandwidth will be significant for these. -Rob > rgds > jan I. > >> 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. >> >> > >> > We can move the discussion to dev@ is nobody objects. >> >> yes let's move to dev >> >> Juergen >> >> > >> > rgds >> > jan I. >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
