On 10/17/2011 10:32 AM, Alexandro Colorado wrote:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Shane Curcuru<[email protected]> wrote:
On 10/14/2011 7:56 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
I've been pondering what it takes to choreograph migration of the live
OpenOffice.org properties into Apache custodianship.
...snip...
Great starts all.
Where is the noodling and proposed list of what domains we want to keep
(i.e. host as *.oo.o to keep links, or host at ooo.a.o/* because it's
project oriented information) and what ones we're not going to keep?
I would preffer an *.oo.o is easier to manage and recognized, create shorter
URLs and also reinforce branding.
I would prefer an ooo.a.o, since that reinforces the Apache branding.
Note that the primary homepage for the project - at least in terms of
anyone interested in participating in the project (i.e. any potential
contributors) - will be the ooo.a.o page.
oo.o can be used as an overall informational portal, to maintain some
end-user facing services that have high visibility/links, and as a way
to drive people to the relevant ooo.a.o pages. Plain end users could
get all of their basic work done on the oo.o pages, but we need to
ensure that they're also aware that this is a new, Apache project (which
is continuing much of the old OOo project they probably know).
In particular, other than keeping some of the highly linked informational
domains from oo.o, I would expect that there would be significantly fewer
major domain names being used in the future project. But maybe that's just
me.
Surely many projects are not mantained anymore or their existance could be
reincorporated into larger projects like development.openoffice.org as you
could see on the traffic of the mailing list some components experience a
low volume of traffic that could be re-incorporated into a larger project.
Example the CD-ROM project back into distribution.
Here's where it will be helpful to have a shared understanding of
terminology. For example, for me, there is a single project: Apache
OpenOffice. There are no other projects (at least, not at Apache).
That's OK, and I understand what you mean. But I'm also urging the PPMC
to push as hard as possible to get to a much flatter structure than the
legacy OOo project had.
In particular, I strongly urge the PPMC to start with fewer mailing
lists - on the order of 10-15 *total*, presuming the forums migrate over
to serve as a major end-user support service. If, in the future, some
of the mailing lists are truly overloaded, then consider - carefully -
adding more mailing lists. Given the amount of community building it
feels is needed for the Apache OOo project, it's better to have fewer
lists rather than more.
- Shane
