To summarize, the opininos were (whether we should switch to try.freemarker.apache.org): - Daniel Dekany: We better not risk not doing this - Jacopo Cappellato: Agrees with me (above) in this - Jacques Le Roux: No opinion was expressed, but it's technically fine - Ralph Goers: It's certainly not necessary to do
So, unless someone has more to add, I will ask this from Infra in the coming days... just to be on the safe side. Wednesday, November 29, 2017, 6:38:05 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > The difference is that try.freemarker.org > <http://try.freemarker.org/> is a companion site. So long as the > main site is freemarker.apache.org I don’t think anyone will complain about a > companion site. > > Ralph > >> On Nov 29, 2017, at 8:33 AM, Jacques Le Roux <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Ralph, >> >> IIRW openoffice.org is an exception. There are others, when the domain was >> well established before entering the incubator, subversion.org comes to mind. >> >> IMO freemarker.org was well established before entering the incubator but >> not try.freemarker.apache.org which is quite recent. Hence maybe some >> caution needed... >> >> My 2 cts >> >> Jacques >> >> >> Le 29/11/2017 à 14:55, Ralph Goers a écrit : >>> Personally, I don’t see why there should be a problem as long as >>> try.freemarker.org <http://try.freemarker.org/> is an Apache controlled >>> domain. You aren’t the only project that has a vanity domain. See >>> www.openoffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org/> as an example. >>> >>> Ralph >>> >>>> On Nov 29, 2017, at 1:51 AM, Daniel Dekany <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Just as a reminder, I'm planning to request try.freemarker.apache.org, >>>> from Infra and then redirect try.freemarker.org to it, because I'm >>>> worried that the IPMC will dislike that we use try.freemarker.org as >>>> the canonical address of the online template tester. It will also use >>>> https and a LetsEncrypt certificate (we can't use the *.apache.org >>>> cert on a VM). >>>> >>>> BTW, using a sub-sub domains is a bit extreme. I'm not aware of any >>>> gotchas in out case, but if anyone is aware some, like LetsEncrypt >>>> doesn't support them or something, please stop me! (Also, as this way >>>> we will receive the cookies of freemarker.apache.org, but certainly we >>>> will able to cope with that, if it ever causes a problem.) >>>> >>>> Any comments? And do you (especially PPMC members) agree? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Thanks, >>>> Daniel Dekany >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> > -- Thanks, Daniel Dekany
