On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 10:56, Marcus (OOo) <marcus.m...@wtnet.de> wrote: > Am 07/03/2011 07:43 AM, schrieb C: >> >> On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 06:29, Graham Lauder<yori...@openoffice.org> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, 2011-07-02 at 12:57 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote: >>>> >>>> Some projects are huge and others small. I downloaded several: >>>> >>>> wave@minotaur:~/ooo-test$ ls -1 >>>> development >>>> documentation >>>> download >>>> projects >>>> www >>>> >>>> The size is 2.7GB. >>>> >>>> It would be good to come up with a scripted way to convert existing >>>> webcontent to either mdtext, an altered html, or specialized javascript and >>>> css. It is likely we can adapt the content and use the Apache CMS to wrap a >>>> standard skeleton. >>>> >>>> Regards, Dave >>>> >>> >>> >>> Much of what is on there is legacy material that could be seriously >>> pruned. For instance all the old Marketing material that is V2.0 and >>> earlier could be deleted. >>> >>> Argument could be made for the marketing material to start from scratch. >>> Personally I'd like to see a whole new branding and get shot of the old >>> stuff, make the first Apache release: V4.0 (Historically, significant >>> global change has meant a whole number change in the version: V2 new >>> codebase, V3 Apple compatibility. I think this is significant enough: >>> pre V4 = LGPL license, V4 and later = ALV2) From a marketing POV it >>> gives us a handle to hang a campaign on. >> >> The majority of the documentation project content is not really stored >> in the stuff that was downloaded in this test. What you find in the >> web-content side is pretty much just pointers to the Wiki plus a few >> files here and there that are not in the Wiki. >> >> I would much more prefer that when the time comes to migrate content >> of the documentation directory, that I simply tag which files are to >> be transferred and the rest are pruned. I have spent time cleaning up >> what's there, but there are still 10 years of legacy things still >> laying about, not used anymore.... stuff that should not be copied >> over. > > I know that many things are simply outdated and could be deleted easily > without loosing value. However, when we grab the content from the Oracle > server, look into the content, and then decide if to take over and publish > or modify or delete, then we we have much to do and a longer time no real > content on our websites. > > So, I would prefer to take over all content and make it public *) . Then we > can go through the content and add/modify/delete/whatever part-by-part. > > *) After the license problems are solved. > > My 2 ct > > Marcus
I'm only speaking for the Doc Project web content. As long as the MediaWiki content is still around (and I hope it stays around), the Doc project web content "move" could probably be stripped down to just one HTML page and a few ZIP and PDF files that should be archived somewhere. All other usable content has been moved to the OOoWiki. It would work to move all the old Doc Project debris over, but it really adds no value. I'd rather say "move this file and these other files and the rest can be ignored" than to see it all moved over once again... or even better... to not move anything and simply create a new Doc Project page from scratch. If everything is simply copied over, it'll be like the Colabnet to Kenai move... everything is copied and the legacy cruft tags along, never to be weeded out. C. -- Clayton Cornell ccorn...@openoffice.org OpenOffice.org Documentation Project co-lead
