Daniel Sahlberg wrote on Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 23:14:20 +0200: > Den sön 27 juni 2021 kl 20:34 skrev Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name>: > Daniel Sahlberg wrote on Sat, 26 Jun 2021 21:12 +00:00: > > https://www.elegosoft.com/en_US/page/nachlese-subversion-hackathon-berlin-2013, > > however that page is only in german now. I'm considering linking to > > archive.org, however there are some recorded talks and interviews that I > > can't find anymore. Does anyone have the original > > > > Do you mean these? — > >
[One level of >-quoting is missing here.] > > SVN_Hackathon_Berlin_2013-01-What_is_New_in_Subversion_1-8_with_Stefan_Sperling.mp4 > > SVN_Hackathon_Berlin_2013-02-Interview_with_C_Michael_Pilato.mp4 > > > > SVN_Hackathon_Berlin_2013-03-Automatic_Mergin_in_Subversion_1-8_with_Julian_Foad.mp4 > > > > SVN_Hackathon_Berlin_2013-04-On_the_Way_to_Fast_and_Scalable_Repositories_with_Stefan_Fuhrmann.mp4 > > SVN_Hackathon_Berlin_2013-05-Interview_with_Johan_Corveleyn.mp4 > > SVN_Hackathon_Berlin_2013-06-Interview_with_Bert_Huijben.mp4 > > > > SVN_Hackathon_Berlin_2013-07-Why_Git_Merges_Better_than_Subversion_with_Neels_J_Hofmeyr.mp4 > > SVN_Hackathon_Berlin_2013-08-Interview_with_Ben_Reser.mp4 > > SVN_Hackathon_Berlin_2013-09-Interview_with_Branko_Cibej.mp4 > > > > I have a copy of them. > > > > These are the ones, yes. I see four different options with this link: Note there are *two* links to that page: one in news.html, one in HACKING. > - Modify the link to point to elego's current site. Pro: Least work, also > linking to a current site. Con: In german, only and doesn't contain the > links to the interviews. How do you get the German version? Here I get only a 404. > - Modify the link to point to elego's old site via archive.org. Pro: "As it > was supposed to be" Con: That page ( > https://web.archive.org/web/20171206002300/https://www.elegosoft.com/en_US/page/nachlese-subversion-hackathon-berlin-2013) > contains links to the interviews, but those links are 404. > - Keep the link, but mark it as obsolete. Pro: No re-writing of history. > Con: We loose some part of history. > - Copy the contents from archive.org and host it including the interviews > on the site or in WIKI. Pro: Preserve history. Con: Copyright issue needs > to be resolved with elego (and whoever took the photos). Fifth option: - Link to elego's page in archive.org, and mirror the interviews (with permission, if one is needed) Also, regardless of what we do, it's probably a good idea that someone other than me should have a copy of the interviews, if nothing else then for future archaeologists. > > > > and could we add them to our own site? > > > > If elego doesn't mind, I guess? > > > > I should rephrase: Do we want to? Are there still relevant information in > these interviews? > I guess they have value, if only historical. > > > * There are a lot of links in /docs/ concerning older versions. Should > > > we keep them frozen as a historic document or try to update them? For > > > future versions, I will try to fix the obvious in the code (but that's > > > another project). > > > > Not sure what you have in mind here. Example? > > > > Links to java.sun.com in the javahl docs. This is probably from docstrings > in the source. > Links to www.doxygen.org in the api docs. These are "generated by". > > I'm leaning towards leaving old docs as-is (especially the "generated by"), > but change the docstrings in the source for a future release. > Sure. And FWIW, there's nothing stopping us from updating the links in the HEAD revision of old minor branches, including unsupported ones. That doesn't even require STATUS voting [1]. [1] https://subversion.apache.org/docs/community-guide/releasing.html#release-stabilization-backportable-changes > > > * Same thing with older release notes. Should we keep them frozen as a > > > historic document or try to update them? > > > > Older release notes are part of the current release's documentation, so > > I vote to update them. > > > > r1891094. Thanks. Daniel
