On Tue, 2011-08-16 at 13:27 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote: > On Aug 16, 2011, at 1:14 PM, drew wrote: > > > On Tue, 2011-08-16 at 16:02 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: > >> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Joe Schaefer <joe_schae...@yahoo.com> > >> wrote: > >>> It just needs to be cleared by legal/board. > >>> While hosting non-OSS plugins is probably out, > >>> I don't see why we can't host OSS ones here > >>> especially if we don't change the dns from > >>> openoffice.org to apache.org. > >>> > >>> We already host modules.apache.org which provides > >>> a similar service for httpd modules. One essential > >>> implementation difference is that the downloads aren't > >>> served by us, we just point users at the offsite > >>> sources and only host metadata. Technically that's > >>> probably what I'd like to see happen to the ooo > >>> extensions site as well before bringing it in house. > >>> > >> > >> We had talked on another thread about a longer-term approach where we > >> would host a registry of externally-hosted extensions. That kind of > >> solutions has a lot of attractive qualities. > >> > >> Do you know anything about the http modules registry, e.g., where the > >> code is? That might be something we could use to jump-start an > >> extensions registry. It has the basics. > > > > > > Alright - If I may just ask a couple of question. > > > > There is a current site, not on ASF or Oracle hardware, that site needs > > work, now then: > > > > Is there some reason why the current OSUOSL site can not be used going > > forward? > > It is undersized, saturated and that is why it is sporadic and then goes away. > > It is so bad they (OSUOSL) turned off Nagios. Now whether or not it can be > made to work better is a detail that supp...@osuosl.org will need to answer. > > We need them to let you in to the box.
OK - well, didn't send any emails yet, glad I didn't. Did however catch up on the emails here and on the proper OO.o mailing list. So - I'm way, way behind the curve here - the Drupal 5 to 6 update already happened. It helped some, but not enough - One person thinks a move from 6 to 7, bringing a change in caching architecture would maybe do the trick, but back in May they thought it was too soon to do yet another upgrade. There are inks to usage reports that show what is happening with the Apache servers running the service, etc. So again, I think it makes sense to, and I will, pop to the Apache infra ML and ask for help - I'm not asking for any Apache infrastructure allocation, just asking if there is any individual there, that knows this stuff in and out, and willing to offer a hand..I'll report back. //drew > > Regards, > Dave > > > > > > I just have not heard that states as such. > > > > //drew > > > >
