On Monday, 13 June 2011, Rob Weir wrote, > As I understood it, Oracle was going to give the domain name, as well > as the trademark, to Apache. But this was not part of the SGA. > > As for what happens to it, the proposal, which was just approved, > suggested taking the contents of the current, Oracle-hosted website > and dividing it into two chunks: > > 1) The pieces that are project-oriented, i.e., the parts that are used > to coordinate the development of the releases, would be mapped to > their equivalents in the Apache project infrastructure. Since these > tend to be accessed only by those who are working on the code, a > relatively small number of people (<500), we don't have the issue of > breaking large numbers of external URLs. > > 2) The pieces that are directly user-facing, e.g., the user support > formulas, the releases, the tutorials, the FAQ's, etc., would be > preserved, at the URL level, if possible (via redirects as needed), on > a new OpenOffice.org website. Since the user facing content has many > thousands of third party links to it, it is important that this be > preserved, if at all possible. > > In other words, I think the developers on this project, we can take > some disruption as things move around and find new homes. But we can > not assume the same of the users, and especially the fragility of the > network of links incoming to OpenOffice.org. If we can transition the > user-facing services on the website without a hiccup, that would be > perfect.
I totally agree, and I think maintaining the user-facing services with little or no disruption is essential. Some of those services seriously need to be improved, updated, rationalised, and so on, but that's a separate exercise and can be done later. Planning now is good (see separate note). The documentation area in particular is in need of improvement, and I'll have a lot to say about that later. --Jean
