On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: > > Details are here: > > > > https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/call_for_comments_apache_openoffice > > > > It has been over a month since we put out this call for comments. You > can see some of them in this thread, as well as with the blog post: > > > https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/call_for_comments_apache_openoffice#comments > > The response was generally positive. However, the volume of responses > was rather low. So I do wonder whether there is a large unmet need > for this. For example, we have not (to my knowledge) received > requests for a CD on the mailing list in months now. > > Another data point: the webpage that is #1 in Google search results > for the query "openoffice cd" is: > > http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/cdrom/ > > It receives around 7 visits per day. Any proposal we came up with > would be findable to user mainly through that same mechanism -- > searching Google. Is it worth setting something up for 7 users per > day? > > Note: if we removed our web pages that discuss OpenOffice CD's, the > top link would be a vendor on Amazon.com selling an OpenOffice CD. So > in a sense, if we just "get out of the way", it would tend to work. > The risk would be if we see vendors starting to scam users. > > Next steps? If anyone really wants to have a CD distributor listing, > I can help. But it is not sufficiently high on my priority list to > carry this by myself. Someone else would need to take the lead. > > Regards, > > -Rob > If you want to take a "get out of the way" approach, would you nevertheless want to put up signature files for official releases, such that anything one does buy can at least be verified before it's installed? Might be too late at that point to get one's money back, but it could save the buyer some grief with his machine. And give the buyer grounds to out a fraudulent purveyor. Don
