Am 04/23/2012 12:24 AM, schrieb Juergen Schmidt:
On Monday, 23. April 2012 at 05:49, drew wrote:
On Sun, 2012-04-22 at 17:22 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
The vast majority of our downloads come from one of three pages:
1) www.openoffice.org/
2) download.openoffice.org/
3) www.openoffice.org/download/other.html
These three pages currently forward download requests to SourceForge.
There are other places on the website that do other things. For
example, the Dutch and Norwegian pages point directly to MirrorBrain
downloads:
http://www.openoffice.org/da/
http://www.openoffice.org/no/
http://www.openoffice.org/es/
(There may be others as well, but I noticed those three)
Other ML pages do other things. For example, the German page just
points to download.openoffice.org, where the user is given the English
install instructions:
http://www.openoffice.org/de/
The French page manages its own download page that directs to
download.services.openoffice.org, which uses MirrorBrain:
http://www.openoffice.org/fr/Telecharger/
To put it kindly, the logic here is sub-optimally factored.
Is there anything we can do to improve on this?
For example, imagine if we had either a Javascript function or REST
API that allowed things like this:
download(product,language, platform, version)
Like:
download("aoo","en_us","win32","3.4.0")
or
download("sdk","","","latest") (We could allow "latest" as a
psedu-version number so most NL pages can code their download logic
once and not need to update it when a new release comes out. We
centralize the logic of what is the "latest" version for a particular
language in one place)
As a REST API the same could look like this:
http://www.openoffice.org/download?product=aoo&locale=en_us&platform=win32&version=-3.4.0
Does this make sense to anyone? It all about avoiding have the
website make too many assumptions about release file names, mirror
infrastructure and other implementation details of the download
delivery process. Instead we should have a centralized place where
that logic lives, so it can be maintained in one place, debugged in
one place, and when we have a new release, updated in one place.
Hi Rob
Yes - it's not hard links to the mirrorbrain, other sub-domains I looked
at over the last few days use external repositories, one having not been
updated with releases from 3.2.1.
If I may ask a question to the group in general:
This page:
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Languages
The list of email addresses, has anyone sent an email directly to each
entry asking them specifically if they have any interest in the page, or
any comment about what to do with it... maybe it is a waste of time, but
if not and no one objects I'd waste the time to do so.
please do so I would not expect that anybody has reached out them until now
Otherwise, many of those sub-domains IMO need to be replaced with a
generic page pointing to a general how to get involved page. We need to
decide how to handle references to legacy releases also, particularly
those external links, do we keep a reference somewhere (the wiki maybe)
and for how long?
I think I have mentioned this several times. I would prefer if we would have
only general pages that get translated but all with consistent content.
And every lang project can maintain either a subpage or from my pov better a
wiki page
Less pages with a cleaner structure, better and consistent content, translated
and easier to maintain.
In the past every NL team has done their own thing. Of course this means
maximum of freedom what and how to do it. But on the other hand it's a
hugh effort to keep it up-to-date.
So, a clear +1 to keep this more general.
Marcus
Just a quick thought from reading your email,
//drew
