On 02/11/2012 jan iversen wrote:
I lean it was all wrong and basically I should never have
tampered with that site. ...
simply drop my pages and let l10n live as it is, then someone with more
knowledge than me will hopefully clean it up sometime.
This is not correct. Decisions are taken by consensus, and this often
entails that what we get is different from what you originally thought,
or what Alexandro originally thought, or what I may think. And, when it
works, it ensures that the result is better than what you, Alexandro or
me had in mind.
For sure there's no reason to drop the current
http://www.openoffice.org/l10n-new/ ;
it seems it only misses links from
http://www.openoffice.org/l10n/
which could be put in a "Resources" page. The rest, especially if it has
many incoming links/visits according to Rob's report, would simply be
shadowed (i.e., existing but not linked).
Even if, as Ariel says, portions will have to be copied and pasted, it
doesn't seem too much work to replicate the current links (the still
applicable ones) from l10n to l10n-new and "archive" l10n except for the
pages that are getting significant traffic.
Regards,
Andrea.
