Am 05/27/2014 05:46 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 8:00 AM, Herbert Duerr<h...@apache.org> wrote:
I just noticed that many people seem to download AOO directly from
sourceforge and that the directory structure obviously misleads them to
download obsolete binaries. Here is the top-level layout and its weekly
download count:
4.1.0: 843,483 weekly downloads
localized: 25,891 weekly downloads
4.0.1: 24,410 weekly downloads
4.0.0: 3,731 weekly downloads
stable 1,800 weekly downloads
extended 558 weekly downloads
contrib 41 weekly downloads
milestones: 31 weekly downloads
packages 6 weekly downloads
The "localized" and "stable" folders only provide the old 3.2.x, 3.3.0 and
3.4.x releases, so getting more than 28000 weekly downloads there is an
alarming signal.
The "packages" folder contains old OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 releases for
SolarisX86, SolarisSparc, MacPPC and for languages that are not yet
supported by AOO such as Maithili or Konkani.
The "extended" folder contains ISO-images with several builds of OOo321
and OOo330.
The "contrib" folder contains old dictionaries. They are not directly
usable and the newest one is from 2009.
So the current layout is apparently confusing and misleads a lot of people
to download stuff they wouldn't use if they knew that better alternatives
are available. I don't want to spend much time one this but I'd like to
clean up the "localized", "stable", "extended", "contrib" and "packages"
top-level directories by either
- removing them altogether
- recreate a 3.4.1 folder and remove the others
- recreate a 3.4.1 and an old-OOo folder and remove the others
Herbert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
I wonder if some of this is due to "auto" processes that are still using
the old structure.
even if this would be the case. Do we want to support this for longer? I
don't think so.
> We still allow for downloads of "legacy" OOo, so it
would probably be better to move the older versions to something like our
current structure -- your second option above?
+1
And, should the older
"packages", if it applies only to 3.3, also have its own area? Maybe
someone still wants/needs these.
Then they should look for them in the ASF archive. This should be the
only location for very old release builds.
Marcus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
