On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 6:03 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <[email protected]> wrote: > So where should finer details be? In the AOOo BZ? >
I think so. The "www" product in our BZ instance is described as: "Covers website infrastructure and mail list functionality, such as IssueTracker, bad links, dysfunctional mail lists." With Apache, some of this is owned by the project, other parts require Infra assistance. But from end-user perspective, it makes sense to give them a clear entry point to report such issues. > The problem on OO.o is there is about three levels of intermediate pages that > end up dumping people on the old bz. This might not be repaired until the > static pages are ours, but how are these to be kept in our attention. > I'd recommend BZ. If you think something needs more attention, or is urgent, then maybe a post to ooo-dev with a link to the BZ issue. > The problems with the new instance is errors in who things are auto-assigned > to, other little things that have to be fixed so someone can take ownership > of a bug, etc. For example, the list of places to tie the bug to is also > inappropriate. Those I noticed just creating one issue myself. > Would it make sense to just wipe out all of the auto-assignments and ask for volunteers? Having an auto-assignment that goes to someone who is no longer involved in the project is not going to help us. -Rob > -----Original Message----- > From: Rob Weir [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 14:47 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Migration Status Page > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 5:45 PM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: >> Maybe it would be good to think of three progressions: >> >> 1) Migration - moved to ASF or retired. >> 2) Administration - with sysadmins / moderation in place. >> 3) Integration - with proper links, navigation and urls. Also branding and >> legal stuff. >> >> BZ may still need 2) and 3) >> > > BZ was done enough for Dennis to send out an announcement to the users > list on Sept 3rd. We're using it now. Could it be prettier? Sure. > But it has been migrated and the new instance is being used and the > old one is not. Something doesn't become unmigrated just because it > could use more help pages. > > So for a high level status I think this is fine. It points users in > the right direction. If we fill it up with buts and caveats and > exceptions, then it will not serve its purpose as a high level > overview. > > -Rob > > >> Regards, >> Dave >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Oct 24, 2011, at 2:30 PM, "Dennis E. Hamilton" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Um, I think there is a lot of how to submit a bug, how to find bugzilla >>> information on OO.o that will need to be cleaned up still. >>> >>> - Dennis >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Marcus (OOo) [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 13:54 >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: Migration Status Page >>> >>> Am 10/24/2011 10:42 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: >>>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Marcus (OOo)<[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> Am 10/24/2011 07:39 PM, schrieb Dave Fisher: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I think that we should update URL column with changed URLs when >>>>>> appropriate. >>>>>> >>>>>> The new URL could be placed two rows below the old URL. It some cases >>>>>> this >>>>>> will be an interim URL. One example is: >>>>> >>>>> Good idea. I've changed it in this way. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I like it. >>>> >>>> I also added Bugzilla and SVN. Although these have already been >>>> migrated, weeks ago, it is good to give the visitor this information. >>> >>> And for us to see that at least something is green and done. ;-) >>> >>> Marcus >>> >>> >>> >>>>>> On Oct 24, 2011, at 10:16 AM, drew wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, 2011-10-24 at 12:55 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Rory O'Farrell<[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 12:34:27 -0400 >>>>>>>>> Rob Weir<[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Btw, as I had imagined it, the columns would be used like this: >>>>>>>>>> <snip> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Unknown (which is the same as abandon)? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I suggest unknown should mean "not yet decided"; admittedly, if >>>>>>>>> it is difficult to decide, "abandon" is probably a very strong >>>>>>>>> option. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> My point is that abandonment does not require an explicit decision by >>>>>>>> this project. It is what will happen by default if there is no >>>>>>>> proactive effort for a given service. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Good point >>>>>> >>>>>> I've been told that backups of everything exist and can be accessed by >>>>>> contacting Andrew Rist. >>>>>> >>>>>> I've updated the website, extensions and templates rows. >>>>>> >>>>>> I reported the current outage with extension and templates. There is a >>>>>> link on the migration page. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Installed OO.o (the last 3.4 binary from OO.o) to a fresh machine and >>>>>>> three things that perhaps should be on the migration page >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Asked me to register >>>>>>> - Asked if I wanted to check for updates >>>>>>> - Asked on second start if I wanted opt in to usage information tracking >>>>>>> >>>>>>> so should those go onto that page, [likely I missed the discussion, so >>>>>>> sorry if this has been covered already] if so I can add them. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sure, what are the service urls? What is the consequence to a user if >>>>>> these are not accessible? >>>>>> >>>>>> (I've already seen plenty of reports on the users MLs that update >>>>>> checking >>>>>> has been known to fail for quite awhile.) >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Dave >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> //drew >>> >> > >
