2015-11-21 19:28 GMT+01:00 Dennis E. Hamilton <orc...@apache.org>: > [not cross-posting] > > SourceForge is valuable to the project for providing the mirror capacity > that AOO requires. The penalty is in regard to user distrust and these > awful situations that the list and Forum folks have to contend with. As > far as our users are concerned, it is the AOO project that is unreliable > and has them need to be so cautious. > > Of course SourceForge relies on advertising revenue to offset their > costs. That is to be expected. The problem is the confusion, not the > advertising. We must work with SourceForge to avoid the confusion with > regard to ad placement and prominence. >
With my SourceForge hat on, there are two ways we can jointly work on: 1. Report misleading ads here, following our instructions, see https://goo.gl/LQFHmE 2. Supporting the Clean Software Alliance guidelines (misleading ads) https://goo.gl/69XhqW For #1 I do actively monitor our mailing-list and I make sure SourceForge removes promptly misleading or unwanted ads. #2 would actually help to push the whole advertising industry to agree on more strict guidelines. It would probably help to contribute feedback to those guidelines, since those are in a commentary period till the end of the year. Having been involved in the CSA works I'd be happy to draft a comment if we intend to do so. Roberto > > Andrea has pointed out separately that the alternative mirror system may > not be workable if even available for the demands that AOO downloads > represent. > > - Dennis > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dave Barton [mailto:d...@tasit.net] > > Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2015 07:09 > > To: Apache OpenOffice Users <us...@openoffice.apache.org> > > Cc: Apache OpenOffice Developer <dev@openoffice.apache.org> > > Subject: SOURCEFORGE [Was: téléchargement version 4.1.2] > [ ... ] > > > > Is it not time to _*SERIOUSLY*_ review the distribution of our binaries > > via SourceForge? > > > > Rory O'Farrell and others dutifully expend their valuable time advising > > "unaware" users NOT to click on download links and buttons after they > > are redirected to the SourceForge mirror page. While commendable, this > > is a "shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted" approach. > > > > No matter what efforts SourceForge make to "weed out" fraudulent and > > malware links, our mailing lists and forums continue to receive a steady > > stream of download problem messages from "unaware" users. > > > > There is no way to prove this discourages individuals and organizations > > from using AOO software, but continuously published reports of AOO > > distributing "unwanted" and/or "malware" programs reflects badly on us > > and by association the ASF. > > > > I have no personal "gripe" against SourceForge and Roberto Galoppini's > > support in this area is invaluable. However, I do not understand, or > > find any reasonable explanation, why our download page does not redirect > > to the ASF's own mirror network: > > https://www.apache.org/mirrors/ > > where our binaries are already being served by 200+ mirrors around the > > world. > > > > Dave > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > >
