You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com> on 2012/05/16 13:24:23 UTC
[UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Hi,
as our release AOO 3.4 is out now for more than a week I think it would make
sense to reactivate a simple update service for installed OOo 3.3 versions.
I have already seen a post on the users mailing list that the update
functionality is not working in OOo 3.3. I assume that corresponding posts also
exist in the forum.
From my point of view it is time to let our OOo 3.3 users know via the update
functionality that we have released AOO 3.4.
The update URL for OOo 3.3 is:
http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update (plus
a query part ?pkgfmt=<pkgformat> for non-Windows platforms)
As this URL resolves to nothing, the user currently gets the following response
from the update functionality in OOo 3.3:
Status: Checking for an update failed.
Description: Error reading data from the network.
Server error message: Could not read status line: An existing connection was
forcibly closed by the remote host.
There are two solutions:
(A) "static" solution:
Provide an XML document similar to the one which is attached when an HTTP GET
request to the above given URL is made.
The attached XML document contains an atom feed according to [1]
Currently, it only contains entries for:
- German, Windows
- German, MacOS X
- German, Linux, 32bit
- German, Linux, 64bit
- English-US, Windows
I hope I got the inst:os and inst:arch content right for all the platforms.
For Windows and MacOS we could directly provide download links. Thus, the update
functionality can download it and install it on corresponding user demand.
For Linux we can not distinguish the different needed package formats in this
"static" solution - as far as I know. Thus, a landing page can be given here.
The update functionality can open it in the user's default browser on
corresponding user demand. In the attached XML document I included our AOO 3.4
release announcement page as this landing page - this is only a proposal.
The final XML document needs to be extended by entries for all possible
combinations. This would mean 4 entries (Windows, MacOS X, Linux 32bit, Linux
64bit) for each language which we had released for AOO 3.4.
It would be also be possible to include more combinations for which we have no
package. We could create a special landing page for these which state that AOO
3.4 is out and that the user might want to have a look, if one of the provided
packages would fit her/his needs.
For this solution we need to provide the XML document at the above given URL.
(B) "dynamic" solution:
As the HTTP GET request contains all the information needed to identify the
installed version performing the HTTP GET request - see [2], with some
server-side logic an XML document could be dynamically created which servers the
identified version.
E.g.:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<inst:description xmlns:inst="http://installation.openoffice.org/description">
<inst:version>- Apache OpenOffice 3.4</inst:version>
<inst:buildid>9590</inst:buildid>
<inst:os>Linux</inst:os>
<inst:arch>x86</inst:arch>
<inst:update type="application/octet-stream"
src="http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/stable/3.4.0/Apache_OpenOffice_incubating_3.4.0_Linux_x86_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz/download"
/>
</inst:description>
which would serve a OOo 3.3, en-US, Linux 32bit, packgage format deb
If there is no AOO 3.4 for the identified OOo 3.3 the script should create the
following XML document:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<inst:description xmlns:inst="http://installation.openoffice.org/description">
</inst:description>
For this solution we need some server-side based script reacting on the above
given URL, which can evaluate the provided information and can create XML
documents as given above.
[1] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Update_Notification_Protocol
[2]
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Update_Notification_Protocol#summary_information_about_request_to_.3CUpdateURL.3E
I would prefer the "static" solution as a short-term one which could be working
next week.
For the "dynamic" solution a script is needed. I have no experience in
programming such a script. Is there a volunteer who would take over this task?
Any thoughts/comments/improvements/changes/...?
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 20.05.2012 12:39, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
>> On 18/05/2012 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>
>>> Thus, please let me in more detail describe what I am observing:
>>> For the "static" solution we would have a corresponding HTTP resource
>>> (our XML document) at URL X. I see that the HTTP GET requests made by
>>> the update functionality in AOO 3.4 and OOo 3.3 to URL X?pkgformat=deb
>>> are answered by the HTTP server. The response from the HTTP server
>>> contains the requested HTTP resource - in our case the XML document.
>>>
>>
>> OK, so if I understand properly:
>> - We can serve the same XML file to all OpenOffice.org 3.3 installations
>> - Each OpenOffice.org 3.3 installation will parse the file and find out
>> whether
>> updates are available or not
>> - inst_id as in http://people.apache.org/~orw/**testupdateservice/33<http://people.apache.org/%7Eorw/testupdateservice/33>contains the
>> language, so this can be exploited too
>> - Updates can be served as download files or web pages
>>
>>
> Yes.
> We can try out several options in advance.
> I will work on the XML document to get it more or less complete.
> Than volunteers can change the Update URL in their installation and see
> what happens.
>
>
> This is very good since it would allow to:
>> - Properly cache the XML file to avoid excessive traffic
>> - Languages not covered by OpenOffice 3.4 can be set not to display
>> updates for
>> the time being (e.g., the "fi" version won't report that updates are
>> available
>> until 3.4.1, which will include "fi", is released)
>> - We can take advantage of redirecting to a (possibly localized, since we
>> can
>> take advantage of it) URL and we can delegate information provision and
>> download
>> logic to it
>>
>>
> I hope so.
>
>
> If, I understand your observations correct, you need to remove the query
>>> part from the update URL in order to assure that the update
>>> functionality recieves the XML document. Is this correct?
>>>
>>
>> This is basically the same problem as handling the
>> http://www.openoffce.org/?**lang=it <http://www.openoffce.org/?lang=it>requests. I made some test yesterday, maybe
>> https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/INFRA-4624<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4624>can be useful (mod_rewrite
>> handles the query fragment in a special way).
>>
>>
> ASF infrastructure team just told me that they can establish difference
> redirects on different query parts.
This is good news! I wasn't sure about the "granularity" of something like
this...
So, if they can deal with re-routing the "pkgfmt" business, we would be
good for a direct to page. Great!
>
> I would definitely suggest to use a separate machine to serve that
>> traffic,
>> unless we are really sure that the www.openoffice.org web server won't
>> suffer
>> from it.
>>
>
> For the re-established AOO 3.4 update service - see other thread - the ASF
> infrastructure team told me that the server would handle the amount of HTTP
> GET requests.
>
>
>
>> The HTTP GET request contains information about the installed version
>>> making the request. The needed package format is currently "coded" as
>>> the URL query part. But, it could be also "coded" in the HTTP
>>> "User-Agent" field.
>>>
>>
>> OK, but we can completely ignore/reset it right? I.e., the problem could
>> be
>> solved by providing a generic XML file and delegating to OpenOffice.org
>> 3.3 all
>> handling.
>>
>
> Yes, I think for former versions - like OOo 3.3 - we can just ignore it.
> But, we could not provide direct download link for Linux installations as
> we can not figure out which package format is needed.
> Thus, I put an URL of a webpage in the XML document for Linux installations
>
>
>
>> Yes, we should wait for at least one week to establish the update
>>> service for OOo 3.3. And then only for OOo 3.3
>>>
>>
>> OK, and here comes the issue of serving them through MirrorBrain or not
>> (when we
>> believed that the only way to distribute updates was unassisted
>> downloads, there
>> was some consensus on using MirrorBrain for updates). On one hand, as I
>> wrote, I
>> consider MirrorBrain an important community resource and I hope that they
>> are
>> available to help this project too, and that it is possible to identify a
>> role
>> for them in the current setup. On the other hand, SourceForge so far
>> worked
>> quite well... The good thing is that we can be completely granular, like
>> (just
>> inventing) using the nice capabilities of partial local mirroring offered
>> by
>> MirrorBrain to distribute non-English updates through its network and
>> English
>> updates through SourceForge.
>>
>>
> Here, I am able to support whatever is possible this the XML document.
> We can provide direct download links or special webpage URLs for each
> entry in the XML document. But, as stated above, we can not provide direct
> download links for Linux installation from my point of view.
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated."
-- Mark Twain
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 20.05.2012 12:39, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> On 18/05/2012 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>> Thus, please let me in more detail describe what I am observing:
>> For the "static" solution we would have a corresponding HTTP resource
>> (our XML document) at URL X. I see that the HTTP GET requests made by
>> the update functionality in AOO 3.4 and OOo 3.3 to URL X?pkgformat=deb
>> are answered by the HTTP server. The response from the HTTP server
>> contains the requested HTTP resource - in our case the XML document.
>
> OK, so if I understand properly:
> - We can serve the same XML file to all OpenOffice.org 3.3 installations
> - Each OpenOffice.org 3.3 installation will parse the file and find out whether
> updates are available or not
> - inst_id as in http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/33 contains the
> language, so this can be exploited too
> - Updates can be served as download files or web pages
>
Yes.
We can try out several options in advance.
I will work on the XML document to get it more or less complete.
Than volunteers can change the Update URL in their installation and see what
happens.
> This is very good since it would allow to:
> - Properly cache the XML file to avoid excessive traffic
> - Languages not covered by OpenOffice 3.4 can be set not to display updates for
> the time being (e.g., the "fi" version won't report that updates are available
> until 3.4.1, which will include "fi", is released)
> - We can take advantage of redirecting to a (possibly localized, since we can
> take advantage of it) URL and we can delegate information provision and download
> logic to it
>
I hope so.
>> If, I understand your observations correct, you need to remove the query
>> part from the update URL in order to assure that the update
>> functionality recieves the XML document. Is this correct?
>
> This is basically the same problem as handling the
> http://www.openoffce.org/?lang=it requests. I made some test yesterday, maybe
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4624 can be useful (mod_rewrite
> handles the query fragment in a special way).
>
ASF infrastructure team just told me that they can establish difference
redirects on different query parts.
> I would definitely suggest to use a separate machine to serve that traffic,
> unless we are really sure that the www.openoffice.org web server won't suffer
> from it.
For the re-established AOO 3.4 update service - see other thread - the ASF
infrastructure team told me that the server would handle the amount of HTTP GET
requests.
>
>> The HTTP GET request contains information about the installed version
>> making the request. The needed package format is currently "coded" as
>> the URL query part. But, it could be also "coded" in the HTTP
>> "User-Agent" field.
>
> OK, but we can completely ignore/reset it right? I.e., the problem could be
> solved by providing a generic XML file and delegating to OpenOffice.org 3.3 all
> handling.
Yes, I think for former versions - like OOo 3.3 - we can just ignore it.
But, we could not provide direct download link for Linux installations as we can
not figure out which package format is needed.
Thus, I put an URL of a webpage in the XML document for Linux installations
>
>> Yes, we should wait for at least one week to establish the update
>> service for OOo 3.3. And then only for OOo 3.3
>
> OK, and here comes the issue of serving them through MirrorBrain or not (when we
> believed that the only way to distribute updates was unassisted downloads, there
> was some consensus on using MirrorBrain for updates). On one hand, as I wrote, I
> consider MirrorBrain an important community resource and I hope that they are
> available to help this project too, and that it is possible to identify a role
> for them in the current setup. On the other hand, SourceForge so far worked
> quite well... The good thing is that we can be completely granular, like (just
> inventing) using the nice capabilities of partial local mirroring offered by
> MirrorBrain to distribute non-English updates through its network and English
> updates through SourceForge.
>
Here, I am able to support whatever is possible this the XML document.
We can provide direct download links or special webpage URLs for each entry in
the XML document. But, as stated above, we can not provide direct download links
for Linux installation from my point of view.
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 18/05/2012 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> Thus, please let me in more detail describe what I am observing:
> For the "static" solution we would have a corresponding HTTP resource
> (our XML document) at URL X. I see that the HTTP GET requests made by
> the update functionality in AOO 3.4 and OOo 3.3 to URL X?pkgformat=deb
> are answered by the HTTP server. The response from the HTTP server
> contains the requested HTTP resource - in our case the XML document.
OK, so if I understand properly:
- We can serve the same XML file to all OpenOffice.org 3.3 installations
- Each OpenOffice.org 3.3 installation will parse the file and find out
whether updates are available or not
- inst_id as in http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/33
contains the language, so this can be exploited too
- Updates can be served as download files or web pages
This is very good since it would allow to:
- Properly cache the XML file to avoid excessive traffic
- Languages not covered by OpenOffice 3.4 can be set not to display
updates for the time being (e.g., the "fi" version won't report that
updates are available until 3.4.1, which will include "fi", is released)
- We can take advantage of redirecting to a (possibly localized, since
we can take advantage of it) URL and we can delegate information
provision and download logic to it
> If, I understand your observations correct, you need to remove the query
> part from the update URL in order to assure that the update
> functionality recieves the XML document. Is this correct?
This is basically the same problem as handling the
http://www.openoffce.org/?lang=it requests. I made some test yesterday,
maybe https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4624 can be useful
(mod_rewrite handles the query fragment in a special way).
I would definitely suggest to use a separate machine to serve that
traffic, unless we are really sure that the www.openoffice.org web
server won't suffer from it.
> The HTTP GET request contains information about the installed version
> making the request. The needed package format is currently "coded" as
> the URL query part. But, it could be also "coded" in the HTTP
> "User-Agent" field.
OK, but we can completely ignore/reset it right? I.e., the problem could
be solved by providing a generic XML file and delegating to
OpenOffice.org 3.3 all handling.
> Yes, we should wait for at least one week to establish the update
> service for OOo 3.3. And then only for OOo 3.3
OK, and here comes the issue of serving them through MirrorBrain or not
(when we believed that the only way to distribute updates was unassisted
downloads, there was some consensus on using MirrorBrain for updates).
On one hand, as I wrote, I consider MirrorBrain an important community
resource and I hope that they are available to help this project too,
and that it is possible to identify a role for them in the current
setup. On the other hand, SourceForge so far worked quite well... The
good thing is that we can be completely granular, like (just inventing)
using the nice capabilities of partial local mirroring offered by
MirrorBrain to distribute non-English updates through its network and
English updates through SourceForge.
Regards,
Andrea.
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 18.05.2012 22:55, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 1:09 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann<
> orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>>>
>>> This may be possible, because this information could also "coded" into
>>>> the
>>>> "User-Agent" field of the HTTP GET request.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I don't get your meaning here. Sorry. ????
>>>
>>>
>> The HTTP GET request contains information about the installed version
>> making the request. The needed package format is currently "coded" as the
>> URL query part. But, it could be also "coded" in the HTTP "User-Agent"
>> field.
>
>
> How would we do that?
>
The string for the HTTP "User-Agent" field in the HTTP GET request is assembled
in the AOO source code.
Thus, we can change it to everything we want ;-)
>
>>
>> OK, the next step, which we should deal with very cautiously given my past
>>> experiment, is to get infra to redirect update36.services.openoffice.**
>>> org<http://update36.services.openoffice.org> to
>>> the web server IP address.
>>>
>>>
>> From my point of view we only should redirect the update URL of OOo 3.3 -
>> namely update36..... If it works fine, we can think of redirecting further
>> update URLs from former versions.
>>
>
> Right--and that was my thought as well. This is why I started out havign
> infor redirect update30, which, at it turns out, was a HUGE mistake because
> it didn't work the same as the future versions -- it did POST calls instead
> of GET.
>
Thus, I propose to first go for OOo 3.3.
If it is stable we can add OOo 3.2.1 and OOo 3.2 and ... - one after another.
>
>> My personal opionion is that such redirects are not needed - but this is
>> only my view.
>
>
> well, who knows. We could do it, and potentially, it would do no harm.
>
>
>>
>>
>> It would be better if we could just try this with a very limited set of
>>> updates for the time being...maybe just 32 bit Linux German, for example,
>>> and take out the others for a bit and see what happens.
>>>
>>> The other thing is since we're still in the midst of the traffic for the
>>> new release, it would be better to wait at least another week. I know
>>> you've been after this for a while, and I completely understand, but well,
>>> results were REALLY disastrous with the update30 re-route -- I kid you
>>> not.
>>> Within 2 hours it incapacitated the Apache web server with the bad "post"
>>> calls -- I mean ALL of it -- all sites, and the redirect had to be backed
>>> out. I know we use "get" now and not post, but who would know this?
>>>
>>>
>> Yes, we should wait for at least one week to establish the update service
>> for OOo 3.3. And then only for OOo 3.3
>
>
> I have a suggestion in the meantime, since I take it we would like some
> additional "in house" testing.
>
> You could post a new thread asking for testers who currently still have a
> 3.3. version (or maybe they have friends that do), tell them they'll need
> to do a local redirect -- via local /etc/hosts -- from
> update36.services.openoffice.org, to the web server IP, and then have them
> do the "Check Update" and see what happens.
>
> I actually tried to convince Windows friends to do this when I was working
> on this in early spring, but I just couldn't convince them they actually
> had an /etc/hosts and this would do no harm! :/
>
> Maybe you'll have better luck.
>
Yes, some further tests are needed.
I will make a call, when the current XML document covers more installed versions.
Best regards, Oliver.
>
>>
>> Maybe infra has like a different server we could use -- with a web server
>>> running on it, but not the main server. I'll try to find out tomorrow on
>>> #asinfra or you could get on there and find out.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> That is great that you are getting in contact with ASF infra regarding
>> this issue. Thx.
>>
>
> yes, I promise I will...but probably not until Monday.
>
>
>
>>
>> Best regards, Oliver.
>>
>
> OK, thanks for all this.
>
> ps. If you figure out a way to do a generic URL redirect for all platforms
> and variants, let us know. This could be VERY helpful.
>
>
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 1:09 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 17.05.2012 03:13, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann<
>> orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 16.05.2012 21:58, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> One of the problems we will run into, esp for Linux (I don't know
>>>>> about
>>>>>
>>>>>> other platforms) is that the user has a appended "pkgfmt" already on
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> update URL, so in my experimenting, the update call failed because an
>>>>>> acceptable package was not found.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> From my point of view this should not be a problem as it seems that
>>>>> the
>>>>> HTTP server neglects the URL query part in such a "static" case.
>>>>> I am not an expert here, please correct me if I am wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> well, I'll try it again...I have several versions to play with...I seem
>>>> to
>>>> recall I had to manually delete the pkgfmt business and then I got it to
>>>> work.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have recently tested on Ubuntu with an old developer snapshot of AOO
>>> 3.4.
>>> It just worked fine, even with an update URL having the query part.
>>>
>>>
>> OK...I recall I had to take this off and then it did work with getting me
>> a
>> URL page.
>>
>>
> I am not sure, if we both about the same.
> Thus, please let me in more detail describe what I am observing:
> For the "static" solution we would have a corresponding HTTP resource (our
> XML document) at URL X. I see that the HTTP GET requests made by the update
> functionality in AOO 3.4 and OOo 3.3 to URL X?pkgformat=deb are answered by
> the HTTP server. The response from the HTTP server contains the requested
> HTTP resource - in our case the XML document.
> Then the XML document is parsed by the update functionality in AOO 3.4
> resp. OOo 3.3. Two cases needs to be distinguish here:
> (1) XML document is in the simple form - only containing XML element
> <inst:description> with corresponding childs.
> (2) XML document is in the atom feed form
>
> In case (1) the update functionality checks the following three conditions:
> (a) <inst:os> content matches the one of the installed version
> (b) <inst:arch> content mathes the one of installed version
> (c) <inst:buildid> contant - BuildID of newer version - is greater than
> the BuildID of the installed version.
> Possible values for <inst:os> and <inst:arch> can be found in [1].
> If the conditions hold further information are read - <inst:version> and
> <inst:update> - and the user is presented the information that an update is
> available together with the update URL.
> If the conditions do not hold - e.g. empty <inst:description> element the
> user is presented the information that installed version is up to date.
>
> In case (2) the update functionality searches for entries which matches
> the condition that attribute term of element <category> matches the one of
> installed version. Then action as in case (1) are performed on each entry
> until an entry matches the above conditions.
>
> If, I understand your observations correct, you need to remove the query
> part from the update URL in order to assure that the update functionality
> recieves the XML document. Is this correct?
>
well this is what I remember...yes. After I did that, I did get the "go to
URL" approach to work. I was running 3.3, can't recall what the build
number was.
>
> [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/**asf/incubator/ooo/trunk/main/**
> sal/rtl/source/macro.hxx<https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/trunk/main/sal/rtl/source/macro.hxx>
>
>
>> When I browse to http://update36.services.**ope**noffice.org/**<http://openoffice.org/**>
>>> ProductUpdateService/check.****Update?pkgformat=deb<http://**
>>> update36.services.openoffice.**org/ProductUpdateService/**
>>> check.Update?pkgformat=deb<http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update?pkgformat=deb>
>>> >**using the FireFox it provides me the content of the XML document.
>>>
>>> BTW, I have already updated the XML document as you suggested. As I
>>> forgot
>>> to include an entry for Linux 32bit in my first try you may be hit my
>>> first
>>> XML document.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'll get back to you on this later today.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ok, thanks.
>>>
>>
>>
>> OK, well since I am at 3.4., I can't help much with this without editing
>> the XML doc yo have out there I'm afraid, so I will take your word for
>> what
>> you say works and just hope we can get on with things.
>>
>>
> Yes. When you are testing with a released AOO 3.4 you at least need to
> increase the value of <inst:buildid> in the XML document to get the
> information from the update functionality that an update is available.
>
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I think I will make a discussion thread to totally ditch the pkgfmt
>>>> business
>>>> from Linux update URLs. It would considerably simplify our lives.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Do you mean for future versions of AOO?
>>>
>>>
>> yes...this would be best I think. Installing on Linux automatically can be
>> tricky if you're not root anyway. No harm in just shuttling folks to a
>> page
>> to choose something and then do the install in my mind.
>>
>>
> I never tried the automatic installation on Linux. I will hae a look in my
> Ubuntu VM which has OOo 3.3 installed.
>
>
>
>>
>> This may be possible, because this information could also "coded" into
>>> the
>>> "User-Agent" field of the HTTP GET request.
>>>
>>>
>> I don't get your meaning here. Sorry. ????
>>
>>
> The HTTP GET request contains information about the installed version
> making the request. The needed package format is currently "coded" as the
> URL query part. But, it could be also "coded" in the HTTP "User-Agent"
> field.
How would we do that?
>
> OK, the next step, which we should deal with very cautiously given my past
>> experiment, is to get infra to redirect update36.services.openoffice.**
>> org <http://update36.services.openoffice.org> to
>> the web server IP address.
>>
>>
> From my point of view we only should redirect the update URL of OOo 3.3 -
> namely update36..... If it works fine, we can think of redirecting further
> update URLs from former versions.
>
Right--and that was my thought as well. This is why I started out havign
infor redirect update30, which, at it turns out, was a HUGE mistake because
it didn't work the same as the future versions -- it did POST calls instead
of GET.
> My personal opionion is that such redirects are not needed - but this is
> only my view.
well, who knows. We could do it, and potentially, it would do no harm.
>
>
> It would be better if we could just try this with a very limited set of
>> updates for the time being...maybe just 32 bit Linux German, for example,
>> and take out the others for a bit and see what happens.
>>
>> The other thing is since we're still in the midst of the traffic for the
>> new release, it would be better to wait at least another week. I know
>> you've been after this for a while, and I completely understand, but well,
>> results were REALLY disastrous with the update30 re-route -- I kid you
>> not.
>> Within 2 hours it incapacitated the Apache web server with the bad "post"
>> calls -- I mean ALL of it -- all sites, and the redirect had to be backed
>> out. I know we use "get" now and not post, but who would know this?
>>
>>
> Yes, we should wait for at least one week to establish the update service
> for OOo 3.3. And then only for OOo 3.3
I have a suggestion in the meantime, since I take it we would like some
additional "in house" testing.
You could post a new thread asking for testers who currently still have a
3.3. version (or maybe they have friends that do), tell them they'll need
to do a local redirect -- via local /etc/hosts -- from
update36.services.openoffice.org, to the web server IP, and then have them
do the "Check Update" and see what happens.
I actually tried to convince Windows friends to do this when I was working
on this in early spring, but I just couldn't convince them they actually
had an /etc/hosts and this would do no harm! :/
Maybe you'll have better luck.
>
> Maybe infra has like a different server we could use -- with a web server
>> running on it, but not the main server. I'll try to find out tomorrow on
>> #asinfra or you could get on there and find out.
>>
>>
>>
> That is great that you are getting in contact with ASF infra regarding
> this issue. Thx.
>
yes, I promise I will...but probably not until Monday.
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
OK, thanks for all this.
ps. If you figure out a way to do a generic URL redirect for all platforms
and variants, let us know. This could be VERY helpful.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated."
-- Mark Twain
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 17.05.2012 03:13, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann<
> orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 16.05.2012 21:58, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> One of the problems we will run into, esp for Linux (I don't know about
>>>>> other platforms) is that the user has a appended "pkgfmt" already on the
>>>>> update URL, so in my experimenting, the update call failed because an
>>>>> acceptable package was not found.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From my point of view this should not be a problem as it seems that the
>>>> HTTP server neglects the URL query part in such a "static" case.
>>>> I am not an expert here, please correct me if I am wrong.
>>>>
>>>
>>> well, I'll try it again...I have several versions to play with...I seem to
>>> recall I had to manually delete the pkgfmt business and then I got it to
>>> work.
>>>
>>>
>> I have recently tested on Ubuntu with an old developer snapshot of AOO 3.4.
>> It just worked fine, even with an update URL having the query part.
>>
>
> OK...I recall I had to take this off and then it did work with getting me a
> URL page.
>
I am not sure, if we both about the same.
Thus, please let me in more detail describe what I am observing:
For the "static" solution we would have a corresponding HTTP resource (our XML
document) at URL X. I see that the HTTP GET requests made by the update
functionality in AOO 3.4 and OOo 3.3 to URL X?pkgformat=deb are answered by the
HTTP server. The response from the HTTP server contains the requested HTTP
resource - in our case the XML document.
Then the XML document is parsed by the update functionality in AOO 3.4 resp. OOo
3.3. Two cases needs to be distinguish here:
(1) XML document is in the simple form - only containing XML element
<inst:description> with corresponding childs.
(2) XML document is in the atom feed form
In case (1) the update functionality checks the following three conditions:
(a) <inst:os> content matches the one of the installed version
(b) <inst:arch> content mathes the one of installed version
(c) <inst:buildid> contant - BuildID of newer version - is greater than the
BuildID of the installed version.
Possible values for <inst:os> and <inst:arch> can be found in [1].
If the conditions hold further information are read - <inst:version> and
<inst:update> - and the user is presented the information that an update is
available together with the update URL.
If the conditions do not hold - e.g. empty <inst:description> element the user
is presented the information that installed version is up to date.
In case (2) the update functionality searches for entries which matches the
condition that attribute term of element <category> matches the one of installed
version. Then action as in case (1) are performed on each entry until an entry
matches the above conditions.
If, I understand your observations correct, you need to remove the query part
from the update URL in order to assure that the update functionality recieves
the XML document. Is this correct?
[1]
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/trunk/main/sal/rtl/source/macro.hxx
>
>> When I browse to http://update36.services.**openoffice.org/**
>> ProductUpdateService/check.**Update?pkgformat=deb<http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update?pkgformat=deb>using the FireFox it provides me the content of the XML document.
>> BTW, I have already updated the XML document as you suggested. As I forgot
>> to include an entry for Linux 32bit in my first try you may be hit my first
>> XML document.
>>
>>
>> I'll get back to you on this later today.
>>>
>>>
>> Ok, thanks.
>
>
> OK, well since I am at 3.4., I can't help much with this without editing
> the XML doc yo have out there I'm afraid, so I will take your word for what
> you say works and just hope we can get on with things.
>
Yes. When you are testing with a released AOO 3.4 you at least need to increase
the value of <inst:buildid> in the XML document to get the information from the
update functionality that an update is available.
>
>>
>>
>>
>>> I think I will make a discussion thread to totally ditch the pkgfmt
>>> business
>>> from Linux update URLs. It would considerably simplify our lives.
>>>
>>>
>> Do you mean for future versions of AOO?
>>
>
> yes...this would be best I think. Installing on Linux automatically can be
> tricky if you're not root anyway. No harm in just shuttling folks to a page
> to choose something and then do the install in my mind.
>
I never tried the automatic installation on Linux. I will hae a look in my
Ubuntu VM which has OOo 3.3 installed.
>
>
>> This may be possible, because this information could also "coded" into the
>> "User-Agent" field of the HTTP GET request.
>>
>
> I don't get your meaning here. Sorry. ????
>
The HTTP GET request contains information about the installed version making the
request. The needed package format is currently "coded" as the URL query part.
But, it could be also "coded" in the HTTP "User-Agent" field.
> OK, the next step, which we should deal with very cautiously given my past
> experiment, is to get infra to redirect update36.services.openoffice.org to
> the web server IP address.
>
From my point of view we only should redirect the update URL of OOo 3.3 -
namely update36..... If it works fine, we can think of redirecting further
update URLs from former versions.
My personal opionion is that such redirects are not needed - but this is only my
view.
> It would be better if we could just try this with a very limited set of
> updates for the time being...maybe just 32 bit Linux German, for example,
> and take out the others for a bit and see what happens.
>
> The other thing is since we're still in the midst of the traffic for the
> new release, it would be better to wait at least another week. I know
> you've been after this for a while, and I completely understand, but well,
> results were REALLY disastrous with the update30 re-route -- I kid you not.
> Within 2 hours it incapacitated the Apache web server with the bad "post"
> calls -- I mean ALL of it -- all sites, and the redirect had to be backed
> out. I know we use "get" now and not post, but who would know this?
>
Yes, we should wait for at least one week to establish the update service for
OOo 3.3. And then only for OOo 3.3
> Maybe infra has like a different server we could use -- with a web server
> running on it, but not the main server. I'll try to find out tomorrow on
> #asinfra or you could get on there and find out.
>
>
That is great that you are getting in contact with ASF infra regarding this
issue. Thx.
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 16.05.2012 21:58, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>
>>> One of the problems we will run into, esp for Linux (I don't know about
>>>> other platforms) is that the user has a appended "pkgfmt" already on the
>>>> update URL, so in my experimenting, the update call failed because an
>>>> acceptable package was not found.
>>>>
>>>
>>> From my point of view this should not be a problem as it seems that the
>>> HTTP server neglects the URL query part in such a "static" case.
>>> I am not an expert here, please correct me if I am wrong.
>>>
>>
>> well, I'll try it again...I have several versions to play with...I seem to
>> recall I had to manually delete the pkgfmt business and then I got it to
>> work.
>>
>>
> I have recently tested on Ubuntu with an old developer snapshot of AOO 3.4.
> It just worked fine, even with an update URL having the query part.
>
OK...I recall I had to take this off and then it did work with getting me a
URL page.
> When I browse to http://update36.services.**openoffice.org/**
> ProductUpdateService/check.**Update?pkgformat=deb<http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update?pkgformat=deb>using the FireFox it provides me the content of the XML document.
> BTW, I have already updated the XML document as you suggested. As I forgot
> to include an entry for Linux 32bit in my first try you may be hit my first
> XML document.
>
>
> I'll get back to you on this later today.
>>
>>
> Ok, thanks.
OK, well since I am at 3.4., I can't help much with this without editing
the XML doc yo have out there I'm afraid, so I will take your word for what
you say works and just hope we can get on with things.
>
>
>
>> I think I will make a discussion thread to totally ditch the pkgfmt
>> business
>> from Linux update URLs. It would considerably simplify our lives.
>>
>>
> Do you mean for future versions of AOO?
>
yes...this would be best I think. Installing on Linux automatically can be
tricky if you're not root anyway. No harm in just shuttling folks to a page
to choose something and then do the install in my mind.
> This may be possible, because this information could also "coded" into the
> "User-Agent" field of the HTTP GET request.
>
I don't get your meaning here. Sorry. ????
OK, the next step, which we should deal with very cautiously given my past
experiment, is to get infra to redirect update36.services.openoffice.org to
the web server IP address.
It would be better if we could just try this with a very limited set of
updates for the time being...maybe just 32 bit Linux German, for example,
and take out the others for a bit and see what happens.
The other thing is since we're still in the midst of the traffic for the
new release, it would be better to wait at least another week. I know
you've been after this for a while, and I completely understand, but well,
results were REALLY disastrous with the update30 re-route -- I kid you not.
Within 2 hours it incapacitated the Apache web server with the bad "post"
calls -- I mean ALL of it -- all sites, and the redirect had to be backed
out. I know we use "get" now and not post, but who would know this?
Maybe infra has like a different server we could use -- with a web server
running on it, but not the main server. I'll try to find out tomorrow on
#asinfra or you could get on there and find out.
>
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
you too...
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you
And life has a funny way of helping you out
Helping you out."
-- "Ironic", Alanis Morissette
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 16.05.2012 21:58, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> One of the problems we will run into, esp for Linux (I don't know about
>>> other platforms) is that the user has a appended "pkgfmt" already on the
>>> update URL, so in my experimenting, the update call failed because an
>>> acceptable package was not found.
>>
>> From my point of view this should not be a problem as it seems that the
>> HTTP server neglects the URL query part in such a "static" case.
>> I am not an expert here, please correct me if I am wrong.
>
> well, I'll try it again...I have several versions to play with...I seem to
> recall I had to manually delete the pkgfmt business and then I got it to work.
>
I have recently tested on Ubuntu with an old developer snapshot of AOO 3.4.
It just worked fine, even with an update URL having the query part.
When I browse to
http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update?pkgformat=deb
using the FireFox it provides me the content of the XML document.
BTW, I have already updated the XML document as you suggested. As I forgot to
include an entry for Linux 32bit in my first try you may be hit my first XML
document.
> I'll get back to you on this later today.
>
Ok, thanks.
>
> I think I will make a discussion thread to totally ditch the pkgfmt business
> from Linux update URLs. It would considerably simplify our lives.
>
Do you mean for future versions of AOO?
This may be possible, because this information could also "coded" into the
"User-Agent" field of the HTTP GET request.
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 05/16/2012 12:48 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 16.05.2012 19:27, Kay Schenk wrote:
>> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 4:24 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann<
>> orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> as our release AOO 3.4 is out now for more than a week I think it would
>>> make sense to reactivate a simple update service for installed OOo 3.3
>>> versions.
>>> I have already seen a post on the users mailing list that the update
>>> functionality is not working in OOo 3.3. I assume that corresponding
>>> posts
>>> also exist in the forum.
>>> From my point of view it is time to let our OOo 3.3 users know via the
>>> update functionality that we have released AOO 3.4.
>>>
>>> The update URL for OOo 3.3 is:
>>> http://update36.services.**openoffice.org/**ProductUpdateService/check.**
>>>
>>> Update<http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update>(plus
>>> a query part ?pkgfmt=<pkgformat> for non-Windows platforms)
>>>
>>> As this URL resolves to nothing, the user currently gets the following
>>> response from the update functionality in OOo 3.3:
>>> Status: Checking for an update failed.
>>> Description: Error reading data from the network.
>>> Server error message: Could not read status line: An existing connection
>>> was forcibly closed by the remote host.
>>>
>>> There are two solutions:
>>>
>>> (A) "static" solution:
>>> Provide an XML document similar to the one which is attached when an
>>> HTTP
>>> GET request to the above given URL is made.
>>> The attached XML document contains an atom feed according to [1]
>>> Currently, it only contains entries for:
>>> - German, Windows
>>> - German, MacOS X
>>> - German, Linux, 32bit
>>> - German, Linux, 64bit
>>> - English-US, Windows
>>> I hope I got the inst:os and inst:arch content right for all the
>>> platforms.
>>> For Windows and MacOS we could directly provide download links. Thus,
>>> the
>>> update functionality can download it and install it on corresponding
>>> user
>>> demand.
>>> For Linux we can not distinguish the different needed package formats in
>>> this "static" solution - as far as I know. Thus, a landing page can be
>>> given here. The update functionality can open it in the user's default
>>> browser on corresponding user demand. In the attached XML document I
>>> included our AOO 3.4 release announcement page as this landing page -
>>> this
>>> is only a proposal.
>>> The final XML document needs to be extended by entries for all possible
>>> combinations. This would mean 4 entries (Windows, MacOS X, Linux 32bit,
>>> Linux 64bit) for each language which we had released for AOO 3.4.
>>> It would be also be possible to include more combinations for which we
>>> have no package. We could create a special landing page for these which
>>> state that AOO 3.4 is out and that the user might want to have a
>>> look, if
>>> one of the provided packages would fit her/his needs.
>>>
>>> For this solution we need to provide the XML document at the above given
>>> URL.
>>>
>>
>> Oliver--
>>
>> Hi. OK, a dumb question...have you ascertained that this doc actually
>> works? That is, have you tested it with some sort of URL redirect?
>
> I am testing with my test XML documents on
> http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/
> I am not using redirects. Instead I am adjusting my version.ini resp.
> versionrc files.
>
>>
>> Right now, we have an area on the web server that could house this...in
>>
>> /projects/update36/ProductUpdateService
>>
>> If you overwrite check.Update with this file, and do a local host setup,
>> your own /etc/hosts, and redirect update36.services.openoffice.org to
>>
>> 140.211.11.131
>>
>> you could test it out
>>
>
> I will test it.
>
>> One of the problems we will run into, esp for Linux (I don't know about
>> other platforms) is that the user has a appended "pkgfmt" already on the
>> update URL, so in my experimenting, the update call failed because an
>> acceptable package was not found.
>
> From my point of view this should not be a problem as it seems that the
> HTTP server neglects the URL query part in such a "static" case.
> I am not an expert here, please correct me if I am wrong.
well, I'll try it again...I have several versions to play with...I seem
to recall I had to manually delete the pkgfmt business and then I got it
to work.
I'll get back to you on this later today.
I think I will make a discussion thread to totally ditch the pkgfmt
business from Linux update URLs. It would considerably simplify our lives.
>
>>
>> Your analysis about just leading linux folks to the url of a page for an
>> update is great, but what to do about the existing information?
>>
>
> Sorry, but I do not know what you mean by "what to do about the existing
> information?"
>
>> Anyway, copy your doc over to the web server, setup the redirect, and let
>> us know how things go.
>>
>
> Yes, I will.
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you
And life has a funny way of helping you out
Helping you out."
-- "Ironic", Alanis Morissette
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 16.05.2012 19:27, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 4:24 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann<
> orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> as our release AOO 3.4 is out now for more than a week I think it would
>> make sense to reactivate a simple update service for installed OOo 3.3
>> versions.
>> I have already seen a post on the users mailing list that the update
>> functionality is not working in OOo 3.3. I assume that corresponding posts
>> also exist in the forum.
>> From my point of view it is time to let our OOo 3.3 users know via the
>> update functionality that we have released AOO 3.4.
>>
>> The update URL for OOo 3.3 is:
>> http://update36.services.**openoffice.org/**ProductUpdateService/check.**
>> Update<http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update>(plus a query part ?pkgfmt=<pkgformat> for non-Windows platforms)
>>
>> As this URL resolves to nothing, the user currently gets the following
>> response from the update functionality in OOo 3.3:
>> Status: Checking for an update failed.
>> Description: Error reading data from the network.
>> Server error message: Could not read status line: An existing connection
>> was forcibly closed by the remote host.
>>
>> There are two solutions:
>>
>> (A) "static" solution:
>> Provide an XML document similar to the one which is attached when an HTTP
>> GET request to the above given URL is made.
>> The attached XML document contains an atom feed according to [1]
>> Currently, it only contains entries for:
>> - German, Windows
>> - German, MacOS X
>> - German, Linux, 32bit
>> - German, Linux, 64bit
>> - English-US, Windows
>> I hope I got the inst:os and inst:arch content right for all the platforms.
>> For Windows and MacOS we could directly provide download links. Thus, the
>> update functionality can download it and install it on corresponding user
>> demand.
>> For Linux we can not distinguish the different needed package formats in
>> this "static" solution - as far as I know. Thus, a landing page can be
>> given here. The update functionality can open it in the user's default
>> browser on corresponding user demand. In the attached XML document I
>> included our AOO 3.4 release announcement page as this landing page - this
>> is only a proposal.
>> The final XML document needs to be extended by entries for all possible
>> combinations. This would mean 4 entries (Windows, MacOS X, Linux 32bit,
>> Linux 64bit) for each language which we had released for AOO 3.4.
>> It would be also be possible to include more combinations for which we
>> have no package. We could create a special landing page for these which
>> state that AOO 3.4 is out and that the user might want to have a look, if
>> one of the provided packages would fit her/his needs.
>>
>> For this solution we need to provide the XML document at the above given
>> URL.
>>
>
> Oliver--
>
> Hi. OK, a dumb question...have you ascertained that this doc actually
> works? That is, have you tested it with some sort of URL redirect?
I am testing with my test XML documents on
http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/
I am not using redirects. Instead I am adjusting my version.ini resp. versionrc
files.
>
> Right now, we have an area on the web server that could house this...in
>
> /projects/update36/ProductUpdateService
>
> If you overwrite check.Update with this file, and do a local host setup,
> your own /etc/hosts, and redirect update36.services.openoffice.org to
>
> 140.211.11.131
>
> you could test it out
>
I will test it.
> One of the problems we will run into, esp for Linux (I don't know about
> other platforms) is that the user has a appended "pkgfmt" already on the
> update URL, so in my experimenting, the update call failed because an
> acceptable package was not found.
From my point of view this should not be a problem as it seems that the HTTP
server neglects the URL query part in such a "static" case.
I am not an expert here, please correct me if I am wrong.
>
> Your analysis about just leading linux folks to the url of a page for an
> update is great, but what to do about the existing information?
>
Sorry, but I do not know what you mean by "what to do about the existing
information?"
> Anyway, copy your doc over to the web server, setup the redirect, and let
> us know how things go.
>
Yes, I will.
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 16.05.2012 19:27, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 4:24 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann<
> orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> as our release AOO 3.4 is out now for more than a week I think it would
>> make sense to reactivate a simple update service for installed OOo 3.3
>> versions.
>> I have already seen a post on the users mailing list that the update
>> functionality is not working in OOo 3.3. I assume that corresponding posts
>> also exist in the forum.
>> From my point of view it is time to let our OOo 3.3 users know via the
>> update functionality that we have released AOO 3.4.
>>
>> The update URL for OOo 3.3 is:
>> http://update36.services.**openoffice.org/**ProductUpdateService/check.**
>> Update<http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update>(plus a query part ?pkgfmt=<pkgformat> for non-Windows platforms)
>>
>> As this URL resolves to nothing, the user currently gets the following
>> response from the update functionality in OOo 3.3:
>> Status: Checking for an update failed.
>> Description: Error reading data from the network.
>> Server error message: Could not read status line: An existing connection
>> was forcibly closed by the remote host.
>>
>> There are two solutions:
>>
>> (A) "static" solution:
>> Provide an XML document similar to the one which is attached when an HTTP
>> GET request to the above given URL is made.
>> The attached XML document contains an atom feed according to [1]
>> Currently, it only contains entries for:
>> - German, Windows
>> - German, MacOS X
>> - German, Linux, 32bit
>> - German, Linux, 64bit
>> - English-US, Windows
>> I hope I got the inst:os and inst:arch content right for all the platforms.
>> For Windows and MacOS we could directly provide download links. Thus, the
>> update functionality can download it and install it on corresponding user
>> demand.
>> For Linux we can not distinguish the different needed package formats in
>> this "static" solution - as far as I know. Thus, a landing page can be
>> given here. The update functionality can open it in the user's default
>> browser on corresponding user demand. In the attached XML document I
>> included our AOO 3.4 release announcement page as this landing page - this
>> is only a proposal.
>> The final XML document needs to be extended by entries for all possible
>> combinations. This would mean 4 entries (Windows, MacOS X, Linux 32bit,
>> Linux 64bit) for each language which we had released for AOO 3.4.
>> It would be also be possible to include more combinations for which we
>> have no package. We could create a special landing page for these which
>> state that AOO 3.4 is out and that the user might want to have a look, if
>> one of the provided packages would fit her/his needs.
>>
>> For this solution we need to provide the XML document at the above given
>> URL.
>>
>
> Oliver--
>
> Hi. OK, a dumb question...have you ascertained that this doc actually
> works? That is, have you tested it with some sort of URL redirect?
>
> Right now, we have an area on the web server that could house this...in
>
> /projects/update36/ProductUpdateService
>
> If you overwrite check.Update with this file, and do a local host setup,
> your own /etc/hosts, and redirect update36.services.openoffice.org to
>
> 140.211.11.131
>
> you could test it out
>
> One of the problems we will run into, esp for Linux (I don't know about
> other platforms) is that the user has a appended "pkgfmt" already on the
> update URL, so in my experimenting, the update call failed because an
> acceptable package was not found.
>
> Your analysis about just leading linux folks to the url of a page for an
> update is great, but what to do about the existing information?
>
> Anyway, copy your doc over to the web server, setup the redirect, and let
> us know how things go.
>
I have updated the XML document on /projects/update36/ProductUpdateService.
I have tested on an Ubuntu 11.10 in a VM with an fresh installed OOo 3.3 en-US
and with the redirect in /etc/hosts as you had suggested.
The result of my test is that the update functionality in OOo 3.3 informs me
about an available update. I could browse via the corresponding button in the
update functionality to the given URL which is
http://www.openoffice.org/news/aoo34.html - see the updated XML document.
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 4:24 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as our release AOO 3.4 is out now for more than a week I think it would
> make sense to reactivate a simple update service for installed OOo 3.3
> versions.
> I have already seen a post on the users mailing list that the update
> functionality is not working in OOo 3.3. I assume that corresponding posts
> also exist in the forum.
> From my point of view it is time to let our OOo 3.3 users know via the
> update functionality that we have released AOO 3.4.
>
> The update URL for OOo 3.3 is:
> http://update36.services.**openoffice.org/**ProductUpdateService/check.**
> Update<http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update>(plus a query part ?pkgfmt=<pkgformat> for non-Windows platforms)
>
> As this URL resolves to nothing, the user currently gets the following
> response from the update functionality in OOo 3.3:
> Status: Checking for an update failed.
> Description: Error reading data from the network.
> Server error message: Could not read status line: An existing connection
> was forcibly closed by the remote host.
>
> There are two solutions:
>
> (A) "static" solution:
> Provide an XML document similar to the one which is attached when an HTTP
> GET request to the above given URL is made.
> The attached XML document contains an atom feed according to [1]
> Currently, it only contains entries for:
> - German, Windows
> - German, MacOS X
> - German, Linux, 32bit
> - German, Linux, 64bit
> - English-US, Windows
> I hope I got the inst:os and inst:arch content right for all the platforms.
> For Windows and MacOS we could directly provide download links. Thus, the
> update functionality can download it and install it on corresponding user
> demand.
> For Linux we can not distinguish the different needed package formats in
> this "static" solution - as far as I know. Thus, a landing page can be
> given here. The update functionality can open it in the user's default
> browser on corresponding user demand. In the attached XML document I
> included our AOO 3.4 release announcement page as this landing page - this
> is only a proposal.
> The final XML document needs to be extended by entries for all possible
> combinations. This would mean 4 entries (Windows, MacOS X, Linux 32bit,
> Linux 64bit) for each language which we had released for AOO 3.4.
> It would be also be possible to include more combinations for which we
> have no package. We could create a special landing page for these which
> state that AOO 3.4 is out and that the user might want to have a look, if
> one of the provided packages would fit her/his needs.
>
> For this solution we need to provide the XML document at the above given
> URL.
>
Oliver--
Hi. OK, a dumb question...have you ascertained that this doc actually
works? That is, have you tested it with some sort of URL redirect?
Right now, we have an area on the web server that could house this...in
/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService
If you overwrite check.Update with this file, and do a local host setup,
your own /etc/hosts, and redirect update36.services.openoffice.org to
140.211.11.131
you could test it out
One of the problems we will run into, esp for Linux (I don't know about
other platforms) is that the user has a appended "pkgfmt" already on the
update URL, so in my experimenting, the update call failed because an
acceptable package was not found.
Your analysis about just leading linux folks to the url of a page for an
update is great, but what to do about the existing information?
Anyway, copy your doc over to the web server, setup the redirect, and let
us know how things go.
>
> (B) "dynamic" solution:
> As the HTTP GET request contains all the information needed to identify
> the installed version performing the HTTP GET request - see [2], with some
> server-side logic an XML document could be dynamically created which
> servers the identified version.
> E.g.:
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <inst:description xmlns:inst="http://**installation.openoffice.org/**
> description <http://installation.openoffice.org/description>">
> <inst:version>- Apache OpenOffice 3.4</inst:version>
> <inst:buildid>9590</inst:**buildid>
> <inst:os>Linux</inst:os>
> <inst:arch>x86</inst:arch>
> <inst:update type="application/octet-**stream" src="
> http://sourceforge.net/**projects/openofficeorg.mirror/**
> files/stable/3.4.0/Apache_**OpenOffice_incubating_3.4.0_**
> Linux_x86_install-deb_en-US.**tar.gz/download<http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/stable/3.4.0/Apache_OpenOffice_incubating_3.4.0_Linux_x86_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz/download>"
> />
> </inst:description>
> which would serve a OOo 3.3, en-US, Linux 32bit, packgage format deb
> If there is no AOO 3.4 for the identified OOo 3.3 the script should create
> the following XML document:
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <inst:description xmlns:inst="http://**installation.openoffice.org/**
> description <http://installation.openoffice.org/description>">
> </inst:description>
>
> For this solution we need some server-side based script reacting on the
> above given URL, which can evaluate the provided information and can create
> XML documents as given above.
>
> [1] http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/Update_**
> Notification_Protocol<http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Update_Notification_Protocol>
> [2] http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/Update_**
> Notification_Protocol#summary_**information_about_request_to_.**
> 3CUpdateURL.3E<http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Update_Notification_Protocol#summary_information_about_request_to_.3CUpdateURL.3E>
>
> I would prefer the "static" solution as a short-term one which could be
> working next week.
> For the "dynamic" solution a script is needed. I have no experience in
> programming such a script. Is there a volunteer who would take over this
> task?
>
>
> Any thoughts/comments/**improvements/changes/...?
>
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you
And life has a funny way of helping you out
Helping you out."
-- "Ironic", Alanis Morissette
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by tj <tj...@apache.org>.
On 5/23/2012 05:16, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
[snip]
>
>>
>>> Thus, I will do the following:
>>> - Creation of a complete XML document
>>> - Include entries for at least one languages for which we have currently
>>> no AOO 3.4 installation package.
>>> - Providing the XML document and possible variants on [3] for testing
>>> and
>>> verification.
>>> - Call for volunteers to test the XML document at [3].
>>> - Integrate feedback, if we want to have direct download links or
>>> links to
>>> a certain existing web page for manual download.
>>>
Answering your call for Windows volunteers:
On my WV system, I'm running 3.3 (installed), 3.4 Beta (ooo-dev), and
AOO 3.4 RC1 (parallel install).
Playing with "hosts" should affect all of them. Thanks to playing with
the wiki at an early stage, I already have a shortcut to my "hosts"
file; for the nervous, there's a nice writeup at:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts_%28file%29>
Let me know if I can help.
/tj/
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 05/23/2012 02:16 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 22.05.2012 18:21, Kay Schenk wrote:
>> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann<
>> orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would prefer the "static" solution as a short-term one which could be
>>>> working
>>>> next week.
>>>> For the "dynamic" solution a script is needed. I have no experience in
>>>> programming such a script. Is there a volunteer who would take over
>>>> this
>>>> task?
>>>>
>>>
>> I don't have any ideas at all in what would be included in such a
>> script...so no help from me. And, I wonder if something like that was
>> ever
>> in operation. With no knowledge, I can't say.
>>
>
> I assume that there were some server-side logic, but I am not sure.
> This logic would had investigated the HTTP GET request header fields
> "User-Agent" and "Accept-Language" to identify the OOo installation,
> e.g. German OOo 3.1 running on MacOS X.
hmmmm...well I assumed all this was taken care by OOo itself in terms of
identification combined with the XML feed in check.Update. So, I was not
under the impression there was server-side involved.
> Then, I assume, it looked into its database for the newest OOo version
> for such an OOo installation. If it founds a newer version, e.g. German
> OOo 3.3 for MacOS X it assembles a corresponding XML document containing
> the data about this newer version. This XML document was then delivered
> as the HTTP GET response.
>
>>>>
>>>> Any thoughts/comments/**improvements/changes/...?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It looks like we can go with the "static" solution as a short-term
>>> solution.
>>>
>>
>> Sounds good. this is reasonable and should work assuming infra can deal
>> with handling the "pkgfmt" bits for Linux, for example.
>>
>
> If we want to provide a direct download link for OOo 3.3 installation on
> Linux, this special handling will be needed.
> If we only want to provide a web page link from which the user have to
> manually download the needed package, this special handling won't be
> needed.
OK, I'll trust what you say here. I guess we'll see what happens for
others. We should just plan on directing Linux folks to a web page.
>
>>
>>> Thus, I will do the following:
>>> - Creation of a complete XML document
>>> - Include entries for at least one languages for which we have currently
>>> no AOO 3.4 installation package.
>>> - Providing the XML document and possible variants on [3] for testing
>>> and
>>> verification.
>>> - Call for volunteers to test the XML document at [3].
>>> - Integrate feedback, if we want to have direct download links or
>>> links to
>>> a certain existing web page for manual download.
>>>
>>
>> I don't understand this one. Initiate update vs letting user choose and
>> then do installation on their own?
>>
>
> The XML document will contain element <inst:update>. Its attribute "src"
> will contain an URL. Its attribute "type" will determine, if the update
> function in OOo 3.3 will interpret the URL as an direct download link or
> as a link to a web page. Depending on the type the update function
> provides the user the function to trigger the download or to open the
> URL in the default browser.
>
> Rob and Roberto - as far as I have understand - were in favor of
> providing a link to a web page. I am completely open here. Thus, I think
> I will provide different variants of the XML document for testing.
>
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated."
-- Mark Twain
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 22.05.2012 18:21, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann<
> orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> [snip]
>>
>>>
>>> I would prefer the "static" solution as a short-term one which could be
>>> working
>>> next week.
>>> For the "dynamic" solution a script is needed. I have no experience in
>>> programming such a script. Is there a volunteer who would take over this
>>> task?
>>>
>>
> I don't have any ideas at all in what would be included in such a
> script...so no help from me. And, I wonder if something like that was ever
> in operation. With no knowledge, I can't say.
>
I assume that there were some server-side logic, but I am not sure.
This logic would had investigated the HTTP GET request header fields
"User-Agent" and "Accept-Language" to identify the OOo installation, e.g. German
OOo 3.1 running on MacOS X.
Then, I assume, it looked into its database for the newest OOo version for such
an OOo installation. If it founds a newer version, e.g. German OOo 3.3 for MacOS
X it assembles a corresponding XML document containing the data about this newer
version. This XML document was then delivered as the HTTP GET response.
>>>
>>> Any thoughts/comments/**improvements/changes/...?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> It looks like we can go with the "static" solution as a short-term
>> solution.
>>
>
> Sounds good. this is reasonable and should work assuming infra can deal
> with handling the "pkgfmt" bits for Linux, for example.
>
If we want to provide a direct download link for OOo 3.3 installation on Linux,
this special handling will be needed.
If we only want to provide a web page link from which the user have to manually
download the needed package, this special handling won't be needed.
>
>> Thus, I will do the following:
>> - Creation of a complete XML document
>> - Include entries for at least one languages for which we have currently
>> no AOO 3.4 installation package.
>> - Providing the XML document and possible variants on [3] for testing and
>> verification.
>> - Call for volunteers to test the XML document at [3].
>> - Integrate feedback, if we want to have direct download links or links to
>> a certain existing web page for manual download.
>>
>
> I don't understand this one. Initiate update vs letting user choose and
> then do installation on their own?
>
The XML document will contain element <inst:update>. Its attribute "src" will
contain an URL. Its attribute "type" will determine, if the update function in
OOo 3.3 will interpret the URL as an direct download link or as a link to a web
page. Depending on the type the update function provides the user the function
to trigger the download or to open the URL in the default browser.
Rob and Roberto - as far as I have understand - were in favor of providing a
link to a web page. I am completely open here. Thus, I think I will provide
different variants of the XML document for testing.
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 16.05.2012 13:24, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> as our release AOO 3.4 is out now for more than a week I think it would
>> make
>> sense to reactivate a simple update service for installed OOo 3.3
>> versions.
>> I have already seen a post on the users mailing list that the update
>> functionality is not working in OOo 3.3. I assume that corresponding
>> posts also
>> exist in the forum.
>> From my point of view it is time to let our OOo 3.3 users know via the
>> update
>> functionality that we have released AOO 3.4.
>>
>> The update URL for OOo 3.3 is:
>> http://update36.services.**openoffice.org/**ProductUpdateService/check.**
>> Update<http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update>(plus
>> a query part ?pkgfmt=<pkgformat> for non-Windows platforms)
>>
>> As this URL resolves to nothing, the user currently gets the following
>> response
>> from the update functionality in OOo 3.3:
>> Status: Checking for an update failed.
>> Description: Error reading data from the network.
>> Server error message: Could not read status line: An existing connection
>> was
>> forcibly closed by the remote host.
>>
>> There are two solutions:
>>
>> (A) "static" solution:
>> Provide an XML document similar to the one which is attached when an HTTP
>> GET
>> request to the above given URL is made.
>> The attached XML document contains an atom feed according to [1]
>> Currently, it only contains entries for:
>> - German, Windows
>> - German, MacOS X
>> - German, Linux, 32bit
>> - German, Linux, 64bit
>> - English-US, Windows
>> I hope I got the inst:os and inst:arch content right for all the
>> platforms.
>> For Windows and MacOS we could directly provide download links. Thus, the
>> update
>> functionality can download it and install it on corresponding user demand.
>> For Linux we can not distinguish the different needed package formats in
>> this
>> "static" solution - as far as I know. Thus, a landing page can be given
>> here.
>> The update functionality can open it in the user's default browser on
>> corresponding user demand. In the attached XML document I included our
>> AOO 3.4
>> release announcement page as this landing page - this is only a proposal.
>> The final XML document needs to be extended by entries for all possible
>> combinations. This would mean 4 entries (Windows, MacOS X, Linux 32bit,
>> Linux
>> 64bit) for each language which we had released for AOO 3.4.
>> It would be also be possible to include more combinations for which we
>> have no
>> package. We could create a special landing page for these which state
>> that AOO
>> 3.4 is out and that the user might want to have a look, if one of the
>> provided
>> packages would fit her/his needs.
>>
>> For this solution we need to provide the XML document at the above given
>> URL.
>>
>> (B) "dynamic" solution:
>> As the HTTP GET request contains all the information needed to identify
>> the
>> installed version performing the HTTP GET request - see [2], with some
>> server-side logic an XML document could be dynamically created which
>> servers the
>> identified version.
>> E.g.:
>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>> <inst:description xmlns:inst="http://**installation.openoffice.org/**
>> description <http://installation.openoffice.org/description>">
>> <inst:version>- Apache OpenOffice 3.4</inst:version>
>> <inst:buildid>9590</inst:**buildid>
>> <inst:os>Linux</inst:os>
>> <inst:arch>x86</inst:arch>
>> <inst:update type="application/octet-**stream"
>> src="http://sourceforge.net/**projects/openofficeorg.mirror/**
>> files/stable/3.4.0/Apache_**OpenOffice_incubating_3.4.0_**
>> Linux_x86_install-deb_en-US.**tar.gz/download<http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/stable/3.4.0/Apache_OpenOffice_incubating_3.4.0_Linux_x86_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz/download>
>> "
>> />
>> </inst:description>
>> which would serve a OOo 3.3, en-US, Linux 32bit, packgage format deb
>> If there is no AOO 3.4 for the identified OOo 3.3 the script should
>> create the
>> following XML document:
>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>> <inst:description xmlns:inst="http://**installation.openoffice.org/**
>> description <http://installation.openoffice.org/description>">
>> </inst:description>
>>
>> For this solution we need some server-side based script reacting on the
>> above
>> given URL, which can evaluate the provided information and can create XML
>> documents as given above.
>>
>> [1] http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/Update_**
>> Notification_Protocol<http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Update_Notification_Protocol>
>> [2]
>> http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/Update_**
>> Notification_Protocol#summary_**information_about_request_to_.**
>> 3CUpdateURL.3E<http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Update_Notification_Protocol#summary_information_about_request_to_.3CUpdateURL.3E>
>>
>>
>> I would prefer the "static" solution as a short-term one which could be
>> working
>> next week.
>> For the "dynamic" solution a script is needed. I have no experience in
>> programming such a script. Is there a volunteer who would take over this
>> task?
>>
>
I don't have any ideas at all in what would be included in such a
script...so no help from me. And, I wonder if something like that was ever
in operation. With no knowledge, I can't say.
>
>>
>> Any thoughts/comments/**improvements/changes/...?
>>
>>
>>
> It looks like we can go with the "static" solution as a short-term
> solution.
>
Sounds good. this is reasonable and should work assuming infra can deal
with handling the "pkgfmt" bits for Linux, for example.
> Thus, I will do the following:
> - Creation of a complete XML document
> - Include entries for at least one languages for which we have currently
> no AOO 3.4 installation package.
> - Providing the XML document and possible variants on [3] for testing and
> verification.
> - Call for volunteers to test the XML document at [3].
> - Integrate feedback, if we want to have direct download links or links to
> a certain existing web page for manual download.
>
I don't understand this one. Initiate update vs letting user choose and
then do installation on their own?
> - Activate the update service
> -- move the final XML document to [4].
> -- ask ASF infrastructure team to redirect OOo 3.3 Update URL [5] to [4].
>
> My goal is to have the update service for OOo 3.3 running at the end of
> next week.
>
> Any objections?
>
> Any volunteers in advance which want to test?
> If yes, please provide information about your OOo 3.3 installation
> (operating system and language) and the test cases (direct download link,
> link to download page, ...) you want to test.
>
> [3] http://people.apache.org/~orw/**testupdateservice/<http://people.apache.org/%7Eorw/testupdateservice/>
> [4] http://www.openoffice.org/**projects/update36/**
> ProductUpdateService/check.**Update<http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/check.Update>
> [5] http://update36.services.**openoffice.org/**
> ProductUpdateService/check.**Update<http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update>
>
>
> Thanks in advance, Oliver.
>
All sounds good Oliver. I cant' help with further testing, but I do hope
all goes well.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated."
-- Mark Twain
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Roberto Galoppini <rg...@geek.net>.
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
<or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 16.05.2012 13:24, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> as our release AOO 3.4 is out now for more than a week I think it would
>> make
>> sense to reactivate a simple update service for installed OOo 3.3
>> versions.
>> I have already seen a post on the users mailing list that the update
>> functionality is not working in OOo 3.3. I assume that corresponding posts
>> also
>> exist in the forum.
>> From my point of view it is time to let our OOo 3.3 users know via the
>> update
>> functionality that we have released AOO 3.4.
>>
>> The update URL for OOo 3.3 is:
>> http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>> (plus
>> a query part ?pkgfmt=<pkgformat> for non-Windows platforms)
>>
>> As this URL resolves to nothing, the user currently gets the following
>> response
>> from the update functionality in OOo 3.3:
>> Status: Checking for an update failed.
>> Description: Error reading data from the network.
>> Server error message: Could not read status line: An existing connection
>> was
>> forcibly closed by the remote host.
>>
>> There are two solutions:
>>
>> (A) "static" solution:
>> Provide an XML document similar to the one which is attached when an HTTP
>> GET
>> request to the above given URL is made.
>> The attached XML document contains an atom feed according to [1]
>> Currently, it only contains entries for:
>> - German, Windows
>> - German, MacOS X
>> - German, Linux, 32bit
>> - German, Linux, 64bit
>> - English-US, Windows
>> I hope I got the inst:os and inst:arch content right for all the
>> platforms.
>> For Windows and MacOS we could directly provide download links. Thus, the
>> update
>> functionality can download it and install it on corresponding user demand.
>> For Linux we can not distinguish the different needed package formats in
>> this
>> "static" solution - as far as I know. Thus, a landing page can be given
>> here.
>> The update functionality can open it in the user's default browser on
>> corresponding user demand. In the attached XML document I included our AOO
>> 3.4
>> release announcement page as this landing page - this is only a proposal.
>> The final XML document needs to be extended by entries for all possible
>> combinations. This would mean 4 entries (Windows, MacOS X, Linux 32bit,
>> Linux
>> 64bit) for each language which we had released for AOO 3.4.
>> It would be also be possible to include more combinations for which we
>> have no
>> package. We could create a special landing page for these which state that
>> AOO
>> 3.4 is out and that the user might want to have a look, if one of the
>> provided
>> packages would fit her/his needs.
>>
>> For this solution we need to provide the XML document at the above given
>> URL.
>>
>> (B) "dynamic" solution:
>> As the HTTP GET request contains all the information needed to identify
>> the
>> installed version performing the HTTP GET request - see [2], with some
>> server-side logic an XML document could be dynamically created which
>> servers the
>> identified version.
>> E.g.:
>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>> <inst:description
>> xmlns:inst="http://installation.openoffice.org/description">
>> <inst:version>- Apache OpenOffice 3.4</inst:version>
>> <inst:buildid>9590</inst:buildid>
>> <inst:os>Linux</inst:os>
>> <inst:arch>x86</inst:arch>
>> <inst:update type="application/octet-stream"
>>
>> src="http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/stable/3.4.0/Apache_OpenOffice_incubating_3.4.0_Linux_x86_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz/download"
>> />
>> </inst:description>
>> which would serve a OOo 3.3, en-US, Linux 32bit, packgage format deb
>> If there is no AOO 3.4 for the identified OOo 3.3 the script should create
>> the
>> following XML document:
>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>> <inst:description
>> xmlns:inst="http://installation.openoffice.org/description">
>> </inst:description>
>>
>> For this solution we need some server-side based script reacting on the
>> above
>> given URL, which can evaluate the provided information and can create XML
>> documents as given above.
>>
>> [1] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Update_Notification_Protocol
>> [2]
>>
>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Update_Notification_Protocol#summary_information_about_request_to_.3CUpdateURL.3E
>>
>>
>> I would prefer the "static" solution as a short-term one which could be
>> working
>> next week.
>> For the "dynamic" solution a script is needed. I have no experience in
>> programming such a script. Is there a volunteer who would take over this
>> task?
>>
>>
>> Any thoughts/comments/improvements/changes/...?
>>
>>
>
> It looks like we can go with the "static" solution as a short-term solution.
>
> Thus, I will do the following:
> - Creation of a complete XML document
> - Include entries for at least one languages for which we have currently no
> AOO 3.4 installation package.
> - Providing the XML document and possible variants on [3] for testing and
> verification.
> - Call for volunteers to test the XML document at [3].
> - Integrate feedback, if we want to have direct download links or links to a
> certain existing web page for manual download.
> - Activate the update service
> -- move the final XML document to [4].
> -- ask ASF infrastructure team to redirect OOo 3.3 Update URL [5] to [4].
>
> My goal is to have the update service for OOo 3.3 running at the end of next
> week.
>
> Any objections?
>
> Any volunteers in advance which want to test?
> If yes, please provide information about your OOo 3.3 installation
> (operating system and language) and the test cases (direct download link,
> link to download page, ...) you want to test.
I'd go for a link to the download page or another page as suggested by
Weir in the AOO 3.4 update thread. Doing so we can inform end users
that openoffice has a new home, as well as engaging them with the
ecosystem. In such case we could help with testing and eventually
serving updates downloads (something we couldn't do for direct
downloads).
The infrastructure SourceForge put in place for serving AOO 3.4
downloads could serve updates downloads too.
Roberto
> [3] http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/
> [4]
> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
> [5]
> http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>
>
> Thanks in advance, Oliver.
--
====
This e- mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. It
may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the
intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail and any attachment(s) is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately
notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any
attachment(s) from your system. Thank you.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 30.05.2012 12:43, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 22.05.2012 15:21, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> It looks like we can go with the "static" solution as a short-term solution.
>>
>> Thus, I will do the following:
>> - Creation of a complete XML document
>> - Include entries for at least one languages for which we have currently no AOO
>> 3.4 installation package.
>> - Providing the XML document and possible variants on [3] for testing and
>> verification.
>> - Call for volunteers to test the XML document at [3].
>> - Integrate feedback, if we want to have direct download links or links to a
>> certain existing web page for manual download.
>> - Activate the update service
>> -- move the final XML document to [4].
>> -- ask ASF infrastructure team to redirect OOo 3.3 Update URL [5] to [4].
>>
>> My goal is to have the update service for OOo 3.3 running at the end of next
>> week.
>>
>> Any objections?
>>
>> Any volunteers in advance which want to test?
>> If yes, please provide information about your OOo 3.3 installation (operating
>> system and language) and the test cases (direct download link, link to download
>> page, ...) you want to test.
>>
>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/
>> [4] http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>> [5] http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>>
>>
>
> I have finished the creation of an XML document. It contains a feed with entries
> for all platform and language combinations for which we have an AOO 3.4
> installation package.
> Each entry provides a link to web page [6]. This web page is a currently empty
> landing page for our OOo 3.3 users. On this page we can provide information
> about our new home at the Apache Software Foundation and our AOO 3.4 release.
> From here we can direct our OOo 3.3 to our download page [7].
> The reasons why I choose to provide a link to web page instead of providing
> direct download links are the following:
> - for platform Linux the "static" solution can not decide which package format
> is requested.
> - Rob and myself are in favor of such a landing page.
> From the OOo 3.3 update functionality the user can directly open this web page
> in the default browser.
> The XML document can be found at [4]. I also put it at [3] as file "check.Update".
>
> Please start your testing.
> To test please perform the following steps:
> (step 1) stop your running OOo 3.3 instance inclusive quickstarter.
> (step 2) find in your OOo 3.3 installation the file "version.ini" (Windows)
> respectively the file "versionrc" (other platforms).
> (step 3) in this file replace in field "UpdateURL" the string
> [5] by [4] or by "http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/check.Update".
> Please keep an existing query part, e.g. "?pkgformat=rpm".
> (step 4) start your OOo 3.3
> (step 5a) check for an update manually via Menu Help - Check for Updates
> (step 5b) wait for the automatic update check configured via Menu Tools -
> Options - OpenOffice.org - Online Update. An available update should be notified
> on the right of your menu bar.
>
> Thanks in advance for your test efforts.
>
> Currently, I have no variants of the XML document ready. But, I am prepared to
> create the one or the other corresponding to your feedback.
>
> [6] http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/index.html
> [7] http://www.openoffice.org/download
>
>
Andre and myself have tested the following use cases:
- Ubuntu Linux, 64bit, language nl
- Windows 7, language it
- Windows 7, language en-us
- MacOS X, language nl
- MacOS X, language bn
All worked as expected.
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 01.06.2012 11:05, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
> <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On 31.05.2012 18:46, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ok.
>>>> Roberto, Rob and Kay are in favor to activate the update service only for
>>>> a
>>>> part of the possible OOo 3.3 instances in order to check, if the traffic
>>>> can
>>>> be handled. No objections from my side.
>>>>
>>>> One important remark which I had not given yet:
>>>> When we had the redirect from [5] to [4] established by the ASF
>>>> infrastructure team, all (yes, all) installed OOo 3.3 instances in which
>>>> the
>>>> check of updates is initiated will get the XML document. Whose which find
>>>> an
>>>> entry with their data (language, platform, architecture) will state that
>>>> an
>>>> update is available. All the others will state that the OOo 3.3
>>>> installation
>>>> is up to date.
>>>
>>>
>>> Clear.
>>>
>>>> To start this first phase the following tasks need to be finished:
>>>> (1) Choose the OOo 3.3 candidates for the first phase.
>>>> -- orw's proposal: italian on all four platforms
>>>
>>>
>>> agree
>>>
>>>> (2) Get in contact with the ASF infrastructure team to get the redirect
>>>> established at a certain day.
>>>> -- orw is volunteering for this task
>>>> (3) Fill the landing page [6] with content and links and activate
>>>> tracking
>>>> for this page.
>>>> -- at least one volunteer is needed here.
>>>
>>>
>>> I can volunteer for this, do we have a draft text for that?
>>
>>
>> No, there is no draft.
>> But Rob suggested in his reply to provide links to the corresponding NL
>> pages. Andrea second it and I am also in favor of it. It would save us some
>> resources.
>
> agree
>
>> The needed updates to the NL pages have to be done nevertheless in my
>> opinion.
>
> Andrea are you going to do that or do you want me to do so?
>
Rob already made a corresponding investigation and started a thread here [1].
As far as I can see from this thread the italian NL pages is in a good shape.
[1] http://ooo-dev.markmail.org/thread/7ydafrdrqxpctsy3
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Roberto Galoppini <rg...@geek.net>.
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
<or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 31.05.2012 18:46, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
>>>
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ok.
>>> Roberto, Rob and Kay are in favor to activate the update service only for
>>> a
>>> part of the possible OOo 3.3 instances in order to check, if the traffic
>>> can
>>> be handled. No objections from my side.
>>>
>>> One important remark which I had not given yet:
>>> When we had the redirect from [5] to [4] established by the ASF
>>> infrastructure team, all (yes, all) installed OOo 3.3 instances in which
>>> the
>>> check of updates is initiated will get the XML document. Whose which find
>>> an
>>> entry with their data (language, platform, architecture) will state that
>>> an
>>> update is available. All the others will state that the OOo 3.3
>>> installation
>>> is up to date.
>>
>>
>> Clear.
>>
>>> To start this first phase the following tasks need to be finished:
>>> (1) Choose the OOo 3.3 candidates for the first phase.
>>> -- orw's proposal: italian on all four platforms
>>
>>
>> agree
>>
>>> (2) Get in contact with the ASF infrastructure team to get the redirect
>>> established at a certain day.
>>> -- orw is volunteering for this task
>>> (3) Fill the landing page [6] with content and links and activate
>>> tracking
>>> for this page.
>>> -- at least one volunteer is needed here.
>>
>>
>> I can volunteer for this, do we have a draft text for that?
>
>
> No, there is no draft.
> But Rob suggested in his reply to provide links to the corresponding NL
> pages. Andrea second it and I am also in favor of it. It would save us some
> resources.
agree
> The needed updates to the NL pages have to be done nevertheless in my
> opinion.
Andrea are you going to do that or do you want me to do so?
Roberto
>
>>
>>> (4) Choose the time frame for the first phase.
>>> -- orw's proposal: 2012-07-05 until 2012-07-08 (if redirect can be
>>> established on Tuesday, 2012-07-05 and task (3) can be finished until
>>> Monday.)
>>
>>
>> SourceForge's side we are ok with this tentative schedule.
>>
>
> I meant 2012-06-05 until 2012-06-08, as it has been already recognized.
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> BTW, as we have for each language own entries in the XML document we can
>>> provide translated landing pages if somebody is willing to translate the
>>> "master" landing page.
>>>
>>> [6]
>>>
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/index.html
>>>
>
--
====
This e- mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. It
may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the
intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail and any attachment(s) is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately
notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any
attachment(s) from your system. Thank you.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 31.05.2012 18:46, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>
>> Ok.
>> Roberto, Rob and Kay are in favor to activate the update service only for a
>> part of the possible OOo 3.3 instances in order to check, if the traffic can
>> be handled. No objections from my side.
>>
>> One important remark which I had not given yet:
>> When we had the redirect from [5] to [4] established by the ASF
>> infrastructure team, all (yes, all) installed OOo 3.3 instances in which the
>> check of updates is initiated will get the XML document. Whose which find an
>> entry with their data (language, platform, architecture) will state that an
>> update is available. All the others will state that the OOo 3.3 installation
>> is up to date.
>
> Clear.
>
>> To start this first phase the following tasks need to be finished:
>> (1) Choose the OOo 3.3 candidates for the first phase.
>> -- orw's proposal: italian on all four platforms
>
> agree
>
>> (2) Get in contact with the ASF infrastructure team to get the redirect
>> established at a certain day.
>> -- orw is volunteering for this task
>> (3) Fill the landing page [6] with content and links and activate tracking
>> for this page.
>> -- at least one volunteer is needed here.
>
> I can volunteer for this, do we have a draft text for that?
No, there is no draft.
But Rob suggested in his reply to provide links to the corresponding NL pages.
Andrea second it and I am also in favor of it. It would save us some resources.
The needed updates to the NL pages have to be done nevertheless in my opinion.
>
>> (4) Choose the time frame for the first phase.
>> -- orw's proposal: 2012-07-05 until 2012-07-08 (if redirect can be
>> established on Tuesday, 2012-07-05 and task (3) can be finished until
>> Monday.)
>
> SourceForge's side we are ok with this tentative schedule.
>
I meant 2012-06-05 until 2012-06-08, as it has been already recognized.
Best regards, Oliver.
>
>>
>>
>> BTW, as we have for each language own entries in the XML document we can
>> provide translated landing pages if somebody is willing to translate the
>> "master" landing page.
>>
>> [6]
>> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/index.html
>>
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Roberto Galoppini <rg...@geek.net>.
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
<or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 30.05.2012 22:09, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Roberto Galoppini<rg...@geek.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
>>> <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On 22.05.2012 15:21, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It looks like we can go with the "static" solution as a short-term
>>>>> solution.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thus, I will do the following:
>>>>> - Creation of a complete XML document
>>>>> - Include entries for at least one languages for which we have
>>>>> currently
>>>>> no AOO
>>>>> 3.4 installation package.
>>>>> - Providing the XML document and possible variants on [3] for testing
>>>>> and
>>>>> verification.
>>>>> - Call for volunteers to test the XML document at [3].
>>>>> - Integrate feedback, if we want to have direct download links or links
>>>>> to
>>>>> a
>>>>> certain existing web page for manual download.
>>>>> - Activate the update service
>>>>> -- move the final XML document to [4].
>>>>> -- ask ASF infrastructure team to redirect OOo 3.3 Update URL [5] to
>>>>> [4].
>>>>>
>>>>> My goal is to have the update service for OOo 3.3 running at the end of
>>>>> next week.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any objections?
>>>>>
>>>>> Any volunteers in advance which want to test?
>>>>> If yes, please provide information about your OOo 3.3 installation
>>>>> (operating
>>>>> system and language) and the test cases (direct download link, link to
>>>>> download
>>>>> page, ...) you want to test.
>>>>>
>>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/
>>>>> [4]
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>>>>> [5]
>>>>>
>>>>> http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have finished the creation of an XML document. It contains a feed with
>>>> entries for all platform and language combinations for which we have an
>>>> AOO
>>>> 3.4 installation package.
>>>> Each entry provides a link to web page [6]. This web page is a currently
>>>> empty landing page for our OOo 3.3 users. On this page we can provide
>>>> information about our new home at the Apache Software Foundation and our
>>>> AOO
>>>> 3.4 release. From here we can direct our OOo 3.3 to our download page
>>>> [7].
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Oliver,
>>>
>>> could we eventually jointly work on a test phase for a fraction of
>>> the user base? Maybe we could enable the auto-updates for a given
>>> language, or so. Actually this could help us to make some realistic
>>> assumptions on the total load, and if needed the necessary adjustments
>>> to ensure the optimal performance.
>>>
>>
>> So, if we know from existing AOO 3.4 downloads that language/platform
>> X is Y% of the total, then if we test the OOo 3.3 upgrade with only X,
>> we can project what the total upgrade volume would be. That sounds
>> reasonable.
>>
>>
>>> Ideally we'd like to start the test phase as soon as possible.
>>>
>
> Ok.
> Roberto, Rob and Kay are in favor to activate the update service only for a
> part of the possible OOo 3.3 instances in order to check, if the traffic can
> be handled. No objections from my side.
>
> One important remark which I had not given yet:
> When we had the redirect from [5] to [4] established by the ASF
> infrastructure team, all (yes, all) installed OOo 3.3 instances in which the
> check of updates is initiated will get the XML document. Whose which find an
> entry with their data (language, platform, architecture) will state that an
> update is available. All the others will state that the OOo 3.3 installation
> is up to date.
Clear.
> To start this first phase the following tasks need to be finished:
> (1) Choose the OOo 3.3 candidates for the first phase.
> -- orw's proposal: italian on all four platforms
agree
> (2) Get in contact with the ASF infrastructure team to get the redirect
> established at a certain day.
> -- orw is volunteering for this task
> (3) Fill the landing page [6] with content and links and activate tracking
> for this page.
> -- at least one volunteer is needed here.
I can volunteer for this, do we have a draft text for that?
> (4) Choose the time frame for the first phase.
> -- orw's proposal: 2012-07-05 until 2012-07-08 (if redirect can be
> established on Tuesday, 2012-07-05 and task (3) can be finished until
> Monday.)
SourceForge's side we are ok with this tentative schedule.
Roberto
>
>
> BTW, as we have for each language own entries in the XML document we can
> provide translated landing pages if somebody is willing to translate the
> "master" landing page.
>
> [6]
> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/index.html
>
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
--
====
This e- mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. It
may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the
intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail and any attachment(s) is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately
notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any
attachment(s) from your system. Thank you.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 01.06.2012 14:29, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> (2) Get in contact with the ASF infrastructure team to get the redirect
>>> established at a certain day.
>>> -- orw is volunteering for this task
>>
>> I will try to get in contact with ASF infrastructure team today.
I have submitted JIRA issue INFRA-4871, found at
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4871
I am currently trying to get in direct contact with the ASF infrastructure team
to discuss details and to clarify, if the request (INFRA-4871) can be fulfilled.
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
some status update - see below
On 01.06.2012 11:58, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> next and refined steps - see below.
>
> Please hold me back, if the schedule is too tough.
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
> On 31.05.2012 10:38, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>
>> Ok.
>> Roberto, Rob and Kay are in favor to activate the update service only for a part
>> of the possible OOo 3.3 instances in order to check, if the traffic can be
>> handled. No objections from my side.
>>
>> One important remark which I had not given yet:
>> When we had the redirect from [5] to [4] established by the ASF infrastructure
>> team, all (yes, all) installed OOo 3.3 instances in which the check of updates
>> is initiated will get the XML document. Whose which find an entry with their
>> data (language, platform, architecture) will state that an update is available.
>> All the others will state that the OOo 3.3 installation is up to date.
>>
>>
>> To start this first phase the following tasks need to be finished:
>> (1) Choose the OOo 3.3 candidates for the first phase.
>> -- orw's proposal: italian on all four platforms
>
> It looks like we will go for it.
> Thus, I will reduce the current XML document to the italian entries.
I have updated the current XML document [1]
The full version can be found at [2] or [3].
>
>> (2) Get in contact with the ASF infrastructure team to get the redirect
>> established at a certain day.
>> -- orw is volunteering for this task
>
> I will try to get in contact with ASF infrastructure team today.
>
>> (3) Fill the landing page [6] with content and links and activate tracking for
>> this page.
>> -- at least one volunteer is needed here.
>
> Instead of a new landing page it looks like that we will go for the
> corresponding NL pages.
> I will update the links in the XML document accordingly.
> Rob: Can you provide the URL parameters for the Google Analytics tracking?
> I will use "?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade" when I am
> updating the XML document. Please refine, if needed - Thx in advance.
>
The XML document (and the full version) now contain links to the NL pages
inclusive the Google Analytics tracking parameter.
>> (4) Choose the time frame for the first phase.
>> -- orw's proposal: 2012-07-05 until 2012-07-08 (if redirect can be established
>> on Tuesday, 2012-07-05 and task (3) can be finished until Monday.)
>>
>
> Needs to be read: 2012-06-05 until 2012-06-08
> As the italian NL page is in a good shape and no objections are raised so far I
> think we can go for it.
>
[1] http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
[2]
http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/check.Update.full
[3] http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/check.Update
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 01.06.2012 15:09, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
> <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>
>>> (3) Fill the landing page [6] with content and links and activate tracking
>>> for
>>> this page.
>>> -- at least one volunteer is needed here.
>>
>>
>> Instead of a new landing page it looks like that we will go for the
>> corresponding NL pages.
>> I will update the links in the XML document accordingly.
>> Rob: Can you provide the URL parameters for the Google Analytics tracking?
>> I will use "?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade" when
>> I am updating the XML document. Please refine, if needed - Thx in advance.
>>
>
> That is correct for upgrades from the 3.3 client. But we would
> change the "utm_source" parameter when we enable OOo 3.2. updates.
>
> Also, if we follow Andrea's proposal, we don't link to the NL home
> page, but to the NL's download page directly. (If I understand
> correctly).
>
> For example, Spanish upgrade URL would be:
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/es/descargar/index.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade
>
I have check some of the NL pages. Some are linking to localized download sites,
some to the English one.
For our first phase we only need the Italian one. This is already available [1].
I will fill the XML document check.Update.full with the localized download
pages. The languages which have no localized ones I will keep the NL home page.
We have then time until next Thursday to update these pages and the
corresponding links.
[1] http://www.openoffice.org/it/download/
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 02/06/2012 Roberto Galoppini wrote:
> Andrea, that page looks actually like the localized version of
> http://www.openoffice.org/download/ right?
> Both seems a very good start, I think.
http://www.openoffice.org/it/download/ is now aligned with the
international and the Spanish page. It is slightly customized, including
some minor validity fixes.
> What about putting the "Please Contribute" content we have on
> SourceForge download pages?
Thanks, I included links from that block in the right hand side column,
while preserving the links we used to have there.
Regards,
Andrea.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Roberto Galoppini <rg...@geek.net>.
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 12:51 AM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 01/06/2012 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>
>> On 01.06.2012 15:09, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>
>>> Also, if we follow Andrea's proposal, we don't link to the NL home
>>> page, but to the NL's download page directly. (If I understand
>>> correctly).
>>
>> Ok, I will update it.
>
>
> Both http://www.openoffice.org/it/ and the current one
> http://www.openoffice.org/it/download would do; the latter is much uglier
> since CSS were not imported correctly with the relocation to Apache.
>
>
>>> For example, Spanish upgrade URL would be:
>>>
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/es/descargar/index.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade
>>
>> I will check for the Italian download page for our first phase next week.
>
>
> We can see if we manage to refresh http://www.openoffice.org/it/download in
> a way similar to the Spanish page in the meantime (no problem if it is not
> yet available as a template localizable via mdtext; we can likely just grab
> the HTML from the Spanish site for the time being).
Andrea, that page looks actually like the localized version of
http://www.openoffice.org/download/ right?
Both seems a very good start, I think.
> Thanks Roberto for offering to help with the landing pages; maybe we can
> discuss what to write/put in the right hand column, see the Spanish example
> at
> http://www.openoffice.org/es/descargar/index.html
> and the existing links at
> http://www.openoffice.org/it/download/3.4.0/download340.html
What about putting the "Please Contribute" content we have on
SourceForge download pages?
Roberto
> Regards,
> Andrea.
--
====
This e- mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. It
may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the
intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail and any attachment(s) is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately
notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any
attachment(s) from your system. Thank you.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 01/06/2012 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> On 01.06.2012 15:09, Rob Weir wrote:
>> Also, if we follow Andrea's proposal, we don't link to the NL home
>> page, but to the NL's download page directly. (If I understand
>> correctly).
> Ok, I will update it.
Both http://www.openoffice.org/it/ and the current one
http://www.openoffice.org/it/download would do; the latter is much
uglier since CSS were not imported correctly with the relocation to Apache.
>> For example, Spanish upgrade URL would be:
>> http://www.openoffice.org/es/descargar/index.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade
> I will check for the Italian download page for our first phase next week.
We can see if we manage to refresh http://www.openoffice.org/it/download
in a way similar to the Spanish page in the meantime (no problem if it
is not yet available as a template localizable via mdtext; we can likely
just grab the HTML from the Spanish site for the time being).
Thanks Roberto for offering to help with the landing pages; maybe we can
discuss what to write/put in the right hand column, see the Spanish
example at
http://www.openoffice.org/es/descargar/index.html
and the existing links at
http://www.openoffice.org/it/download/3.4.0/download340.html
Regards,
Andrea.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Roberto Galoppini <rg...@geek.net>.
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
<or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 01.06.2012 15:09, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
>> <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> next and refined steps - see below.
>>>
>>> Please hold me back, if the schedule is too tough.
>>>
>>> Best regards, Oliver.
>>>
>>> On 31.05.2012 10:38, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ok.
>>>> Roberto, Rob and Kay are in favor to activate the update service only
>>>> for
>>>> a part
>>>> of the possible OOo 3.3 instances in order to check, if the traffic can
>>>> be
>>>> handled. No objections from my side.
>>>>
>>>> One important remark which I had not given yet:
>>>> When we had the redirect from [5] to [4] established by the ASF
>>>> infrastructure
>>>> team, all (yes, all) installed OOo 3.3 instances in which the check of
>>>> updates
>>>> is initiated will get the XML document. Whose which find an entry with
>>>> their
>>>> data (language, platform, architecture) will state that an update is
>>>> available.
>>>> All the others will state that the OOo 3.3 installation is up to date.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To start this first phase the following tasks need to be finished:
>>>> (1) Choose the OOo 3.3 candidates for the first phase.
>>>> -- orw's proposal: italian on all four platforms
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It looks like we will go for it.
>>> Thus, I will reduce the current XML document to the italian entries.
>>>
>>>
>>>> (2) Get in contact with the ASF infrastructure team to get the redirect
>>>> established at a certain day.
>>>> -- orw is volunteering for this task
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I will try to get in contact with ASF infrastructure team today.
>>>
>>>
>>>> (3) Fill the landing page [6] with content and links and activate
>>>> tracking
>>>> for
>>>> this page.
>>>> -- at least one volunteer is needed here.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Instead of a new landing page it looks like that we will go for the
>>> corresponding NL pages.
>>> I will update the links in the XML document accordingly.
>>> Rob: Can you provide the URL parameters for the Google Analytics
>>> tracking?
>>> I will use "?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade"
>>> when
>>> I am updating the XML document. Please refine, if needed - Thx in
>>> advance.
>>>
>>
>> That is correct for upgrades from the 3.3 client. But we would
>> change the "utm_source" parameter when we enable OOo 3.2. updates.
>>
>
> Ok and yes, the parameter can be changed for the update service of other
> versions.
>
>
>> Also, if we follow Andrea's proposal, we don't link to the NL home
>> page, but to the NL's download page directly. (If I understand
>> correctly).
>>
>
> Ok, I will update it.
>
> Recently, I have removed the already reduced XML document, because the ASF
> infrastructure wants to establish the redirect before 2012-06-05.
> Thus, our first phase will start, when I (or somebody else) recreate it.
>
>
>> For example, Spanish upgrade URL would be:
>>
>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/es/descargar/index.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade
>>
>
> I will check for the Italian download page for our first phase next week.
Cool, so it seems we are in good shape to start this early next week.
Let me know when we need start monitoring the auto-update traffic for
the Italian releases.
Thanks,
Roberto
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
--
====
This e- mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. It
may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the
intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail and any attachment(s) is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately
notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any
attachment(s) from your system. Thank you.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 01.06.2012 15:09, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
> <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> next and refined steps - see below.
>>
>> Please hold me back, if the schedule is too tough.
>>
>> Best regards, Oliver.
>>
>> On 31.05.2012 10:38, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ok.
>>> Roberto, Rob and Kay are in favor to activate the update service only for
>>> a part
>>> of the possible OOo 3.3 instances in order to check, if the traffic can be
>>> handled. No objections from my side.
>>>
>>> One important remark which I had not given yet:
>>> When we had the redirect from [5] to [4] established by the ASF
>>> infrastructure
>>> team, all (yes, all) installed OOo 3.3 instances in which the check of
>>> updates
>>> is initiated will get the XML document. Whose which find an entry with
>>> their
>>> data (language, platform, architecture) will state that an update is
>>> available.
>>> All the others will state that the OOo 3.3 installation is up to date.
>>>
>>>
>>> To start this first phase the following tasks need to be finished:
>>> (1) Choose the OOo 3.3 candidates for the first phase.
>>> -- orw's proposal: italian on all four platforms
>>
>>
>> It looks like we will go for it.
>> Thus, I will reduce the current XML document to the italian entries.
>>
>>
>>> (2) Get in contact with the ASF infrastructure team to get the redirect
>>> established at a certain day.
>>> -- orw is volunteering for this task
>>
>>
>> I will try to get in contact with ASF infrastructure team today.
>>
>>
>>> (3) Fill the landing page [6] with content and links and activate tracking
>>> for
>>> this page.
>>> -- at least one volunteer is needed here.
>>
>>
>> Instead of a new landing page it looks like that we will go for the
>> corresponding NL pages.
>> I will update the links in the XML document accordingly.
>> Rob: Can you provide the URL parameters for the Google Analytics tracking?
>> I will use "?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade" when
>> I am updating the XML document. Please refine, if needed - Thx in advance.
>>
>
> That is correct for upgrades from the 3.3 client. But we would
> change the "utm_source" parameter when we enable OOo 3.2. updates.
>
Ok and yes, the parameter can be changed for the update service of other versions.
> Also, if we follow Andrea's proposal, we don't link to the NL home
> page, but to the NL's download page directly. (If I understand
> correctly).
>
Ok, I will update it.
Recently, I have removed the already reduced XML document, because the ASF
infrastructure wants to establish the redirect before 2012-06-05.
Thus, our first phase will start, when I (or somebody else) recreate it.
> For example, Spanish upgrade URL would be:
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/es/descargar/index.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade
>
I will check for the Italian download page for our first phase next week.
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
<or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> next and refined steps - see below.
>
> Please hold me back, if the schedule is too tough.
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
> On 31.05.2012 10:38, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>
>>
>> Ok.
>> Roberto, Rob and Kay are in favor to activate the update service only for
>> a part
>> of the possible OOo 3.3 instances in order to check, if the traffic can be
>> handled. No objections from my side.
>>
>> One important remark which I had not given yet:
>> When we had the redirect from [5] to [4] established by the ASF
>> infrastructure
>> team, all (yes, all) installed OOo 3.3 instances in which the check of
>> updates
>> is initiated will get the XML document. Whose which find an entry with
>> their
>> data (language, platform, architecture) will state that an update is
>> available.
>> All the others will state that the OOo 3.3 installation is up to date.
>>
>>
>> To start this first phase the following tasks need to be finished:
>> (1) Choose the OOo 3.3 candidates for the first phase.
>> -- orw's proposal: italian on all four platforms
>
>
> It looks like we will go for it.
> Thus, I will reduce the current XML document to the italian entries.
>
>
>> (2) Get in contact with the ASF infrastructure team to get the redirect
>> established at a certain day.
>> -- orw is volunteering for this task
>
>
> I will try to get in contact with ASF infrastructure team today.
>
>
>> (3) Fill the landing page [6] with content and links and activate tracking
>> for
>> this page.
>> -- at least one volunteer is needed here.
>
>
> Instead of a new landing page it looks like that we will go for the
> corresponding NL pages.
> I will update the links in the XML document accordingly.
> Rob: Can you provide the URL parameters for the Google Analytics tracking?
> I will use "?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade" when
> I am updating the XML document. Please refine, if needed - Thx in advance.
>
That is correct for upgrades from the 3.3 client. But we would
change the "utm_source" parameter when we enable OOo 3.2. updates.
Also, if we follow Andrea's proposal, we don't link to the NL home
page, but to the NL's download page directly. (If I understand
correctly).
For example, Spanish upgrade URL would be:
http://www.openoffice.org/es/descargar/index.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade
>
>> (4) Choose the time frame for the first phase.
>> -- orw's proposal: 2012-07-05 until 2012-07-08 (if redirect can be
>> established
>> on Tuesday, 2012-07-05 and task (3) can be finished until Monday.)
>>
>
> Needs to be read: 2012-06-05 until 2012-06-08
> As the italian NL page is in a good shape and no objections are raised so
> far I think we can go for it.
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
next and refined steps - see below.
Please hold me back, if the schedule is too tough.
Best regards, Oliver.
On 31.05.2012 10:38, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>
> Ok.
> Roberto, Rob and Kay are in favor to activate the update service only for a part
> of the possible OOo 3.3 instances in order to check, if the traffic can be
> handled. No objections from my side.
>
> One important remark which I had not given yet:
> When we had the redirect from [5] to [4] established by the ASF infrastructure
> team, all (yes, all) installed OOo 3.3 instances in which the check of updates
> is initiated will get the XML document. Whose which find an entry with their
> data (language, platform, architecture) will state that an update is available.
> All the others will state that the OOo 3.3 installation is up to date.
>
>
> To start this first phase the following tasks need to be finished:
> (1) Choose the OOo 3.3 candidates for the first phase.
> -- orw's proposal: italian on all four platforms
It looks like we will go for it.
Thus, I will reduce the current XML document to the italian entries.
> (2) Get in contact with the ASF infrastructure team to get the redirect
> established at a certain day.
> -- orw is volunteering for this task
I will try to get in contact with ASF infrastructure team today.
> (3) Fill the landing page [6] with content and links and activate tracking for
> this page.
> -- at least one volunteer is needed here.
Instead of a new landing page it looks like that we will go for the
corresponding NL pages.
I will update the links in the XML document accordingly.
Rob: Can you provide the URL parameters for the Google Analytics tracking?
I will use "?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade" when I am
updating the XML document. Please refine, if needed - Thx in advance.
> (4) Choose the time frame for the first phase.
> -- orw's proposal: 2012-07-05 until 2012-07-08 (if redirect can be established
> on Tuesday, 2012-07-05 and task (3) can be finished until Monday.)
>
Needs to be read: 2012-06-05 until 2012-06-08
As the italian NL page is in a good shape and no objections are raised so far I
think we can go for it.
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 31.05.2012 23:59, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>> (4) Choose the time frame for the first phase.
>> -- orw's proposal: 2012-07-05 until 2012-07-08 (if redirect can be
>> established on Tuesday, 2012-07-05 and task (3) can be finished until
>> Monday.)
>
> You actually mean June, right? I mean, tests will start as soon as next week. Or
> do you actually mean July? I see no reasons for such a long wait.
>
Yes, I mean June - sorry for the typo.
Please read my proposal: 2012-06-05 until 2012-06-08
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com>.
or onlist
On 5/31/2012 3:09 PM, Andrew Rist wrote:
> Thanks - I was about to point this out, too
> I think it is more typo than plan...
> ;-)
>
> A.
>
>
> On 5/31/2012 2:59 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>> Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>> (4) Choose the time frame for the first phase.
>>> -- orw's proposal: 2012-07-05 until 2012-07-08 (if redirect can be
>>> established on Tuesday, 2012-07-05 and task (3) can be finished until
>>> Monday.)
>>
>> You actually mean June, right? I mean, tests will start as soon as
>> next week. Or do you actually mean July? I see no reasons for such a
>> long wait.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andrea.
>
--
Andrew Rist | Interoperability Architect
OracleCorporate Architecture Group
Redwood Shores, CA | 650.506.9847
[offlist] Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3
update service
Posted by Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com>.
Thanks - I was about to point this out, too
I think it is more typo than plan...
;-)
A.
On 5/31/2012 2:59 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>> (4) Choose the time frame for the first phase.
>> -- orw's proposal: 2012-07-05 until 2012-07-08 (if redirect can be
>> established on Tuesday, 2012-07-05 and task (3) can be finished until
>> Monday.)
>
> You actually mean June, right? I mean, tests will start as soon as
> next week. Or do you actually mean July? I see no reasons for such a
> long wait.
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> (4) Choose the time frame for the first phase.
> -- orw's proposal: 2012-07-05 until 2012-07-08 (if redirect can be
> established on Tuesday, 2012-07-05 and task (3) can be finished until
> Monday.)
You actually mean June, right? I mean, tests will start as soon as next
week. Or do you actually mean July? I see no reasons for such a long wait.
Regards,
Andrea.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Roberto Galoppini <rg...@geek.net>.
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> One approach might be to have the landing page be the NL home page,
>> e.g., http://de.openoffice.org. These already exist, and either have
>> the download links on that page, or have text that explains how to
>> download.
>
>
> Sure, this makes a lot of sense. Testing with the Italian version is
> reasonable because it's approximately 10% of traffic, so a perfect sample;
> the only issue I see is that 80%-90% of the downloads of the Italian version
> come from Italy, so this wouldn't be a test for the global mirror network.
It's not a stress-test, but a practical way to guess how many
auto-updates we'll be serving.
>> One other question: does this take care of OOo 3.2 upgrades as well?
>
>
> No, every version uses a separate hostname: update36.services.openoffice.org
> will only be accessed by version 3.3.
>
>> Do we think there are many out there?
>
>
> Enough to crash the openoffice.org web server: if I recall correctly, we had
> big troubles when all updateXY hostnames were redirected to openoffice.org
> (and the reason was determined to be very old, maybe even 2.x, versions,
> sending POST requests in an uncontrolled way). But as Oliver wrote we can
> progressively extend to 3.2 and possibly to earlier releases too.
The fact that the web server crashed doesn't say much, though. The
test phase will put us in the position to make educated guess about
the expected global traffic, and we'll get prepared to serve them all.
I like the idea of moving progressively to 3.2 and beyond.
Roberto
> Regards,
> Andrea.
--
====
This e- mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. It
may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the
intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail and any attachment(s) is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately
notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any
attachment(s) from your system. Thank you.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Rob Weir wrote:
> One approach might be to have the landing page be the NL home page,
> e.g., http://de.openoffice.org. These already exist, and either have
> the download links on that page, or have text that explains how to
> download.
Sure, this makes a lot of sense. Testing with the Italian version is
reasonable because it's approximately 10% of traffic, so a perfect
sample; the only issue I see is that 80%-90% of the downloads of the
Italian version come from Italy, so this wouldn't be a test for the
global mirror network.
> One other question: does this take care of OOo 3.2 upgrades as well?
No, every version uses a separate hostname:
update36.services.openoffice.org will only be accessed by version 3.3.
> Do we think there are many out there?
Enough to crash the openoffice.org web server: if I recall correctly, we
had big troubles when all updateXY hostnames were redirected to
openoffice.org (and the reason was determined to be very old, maybe even
2.x, versions, sending POST requests in an uncontrolled way). But as
Oliver wrote we can progressively extend to 3.2 and possibly to earlier
releases too.
Regards,
Andrea.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 05/31/2012 07:56 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
> <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On 30.05.2012 22:09, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Roberto Galoppini<rg...@geek.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
>>>> <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 22.05.2012 15:21, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It looks like we can go with the "static" solution as a short-term
>>>>>> solution.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thus, I will do the following:
>>>>>> - Creation of a complete XML document
>>>>>> - Include entries for at least one languages for which we have
>>>>>> currently
>>>>>> no AOO
>>>>>> 3.4 installation package.
>>>>>> - Providing the XML document and possible variants on [3] for testing
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> verification.
>>>>>> - Call for volunteers to test the XML document at [3].
>>>>>> - Integrate feedback, if we want to have direct download links or links
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> certain existing web page for manual download.
>>>>>> - Activate the update service
>>>>>> -- move the final XML document to [4].
>>>>>> -- ask ASF infrastructure team to redirect OOo 3.3 Update URL [5] to
>>>>>> [4].
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My goal is to have the update service for OOo 3.3 running at the end of
>>>>>> next week.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any objections?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any volunteers in advance which want to test?
>>>>>> If yes, please provide information about your OOo 3.3 installation
>>>>>> (operating
>>>>>> system and language) and the test cases (direct download link, link to
>>>>>> download
>>>>>> page, ...) you want to test.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/
>>>>>> [4]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>>>>>> [5]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have finished the creation of an XML document. It contains a feed with
>>>>> entries for all platform and language combinations for which we have an
>>>>> AOO
>>>>> 3.4 installation package.
>>>>> Each entry provides a link to web page [6]. This web page is a currently
>>>>> empty landing page for our OOo 3.3 users. On this page we can provide
>>>>> information about our new home at the Apache Software Foundation and our
>>>>> AOO
>>>>> 3.4 release. From here we can direct our OOo 3.3 to our download page
>>>>> [7].
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Oliver,
>>>>
>>>> could we eventually jointly work on a test phase for a fraction of
>>>> the user base? Maybe we could enable the auto-updates for a given
>>>> language, or so. Actually this could help us to make some realistic
>>>> assumptions on the total load, and if needed the necessary adjustments
>>>> to ensure the optimal performance.
>>>>
>>>
>>> So, if we know from existing AOO 3.4 downloads that language/platform
>>> X is Y% of the total, then if we test the OOo 3.3 upgrade with only X,
>>> we can project what the total upgrade volume would be. That sounds
>>> reasonable.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Ideally we'd like to start the test phase as soon as possible.
>>>>
>>
>> Ok.
>> Roberto, Rob and Kay are in favor to activate the update service only for a
>> part of the possible OOo 3.3 instances in order to check, if the traffic can
>> be handled. No objections from my side.
>>
>> One important remark which I had not given yet:
>> When we had the redirect from [5] to [4] established by the ASF
>> infrastructure team, all (yes, all) installed OOo 3.3 instances in which the
>> check of updates is initiated will get the XML document. Whose which find an
>> entry with their data (language, platform, architecture) will state that an
>> update is available. All the others will state that the OOo 3.3 installation
>> is up to date.
>>
>>
>> To start this first phase the following tasks need to be finished:
>> (1) Choose the OOo 3.3 candidates for the first phase.
>> -- orw's proposal: italian on all four platforms
>> (2) Get in contact with the ASF infrastructure team to get the redirect
>> established at a certain day.
>> -- orw is volunteering for this task
>> (3) Fill the landing page [6] with content and links and activate tracking
>> for this page.
>> -- at least one volunteer is needed here.
>> (4) Choose the time frame for the first phase.
>> -- orw's proposal: 2012-07-05 until 2012-07-08 (if redirect can be
>> established on Tuesday, 2012-07-05 and task (3) can be finished until
>> Monday.)
>>
>>
>> BTW, as we have for each language own entries in the XML document we can
>> provide translated landing pages if somebody is willing to translate the
>> "master" landing page.
>>
>
> Is the text in the dialog box in OOo 3.3 localized? The text that
> says an update is available, please go to this page to download? Or
> is that in English only?
A second ago I've tried it also with German and I get a German text in
the dialog box.
Marcus
> One approach might be to have the landing page be the NL home page,
> e.g., http://de.openoffice.org. These already exist, and either have
> the download links on that page, or have text that explains how to
> download. (En is the exception -- we'd send them to
> http://download.openoffice.org directly)
>
> To distinguish these visits from non-upgrade visits, we could tag them
> using URL parameters in a way that Google Analytics can understand.
>
> For example:
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/download.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade
>
> or
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/de/index.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade
>
> or
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/it/index.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade
>
> The extra parameters would be ignored by our website, but GA would
> understand them.
>
> One other question: does this take care of OOo 3.2 upgrades as well?
> Do we think there are many out there?
>
> -Rob
>
>> [6]
>> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/index.html
>>
>>
>> Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
Am 04.06.12 19:22, schrieb Rob Weir:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
> <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>> Let see what happens, when we start tomorrow with the "Italian OOo 3.3
>>>>>> update service".
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tomorrow at which time?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If nobody objects and nothing unforeseen happened I would like to start
>>>> tomorrow
>>>> European morning at 10:00 (GMT+2).
>>>>
>>>> FYI, I have to check with ASF infrastructure team, if the redirect will
>>>> be
>>>> available at this time.
>>>>
>>>
>>> ASF infrastructure team has established the redirect. It needs to be
>>> propagated
>>> through the dns servers - will take some time.
>>> I will check the redirect today. May be I will also get some numbers in
>>> advance
>>> - how many OOo 3.3 instances are trying today to contact the update
>>> service.
>>>
>>
>> I have checked the redirect - it is working.
>> Thanks a lot to the ASF infrastructure team which helped me a lot.
>>
>> Since the redirect has been established at approx. noon in Europe we already
>> had more than 600k HTTP GET request to the (currently not existing)
>> check.Update file.
>>
>
> Does one HTTP request == 1 update check? Or if the server is down,
> are there multiple retries?
>
These were 600k HTTP GET requests from unique IP adresses.
The overall number was more than 1M HTTP GET requests.
There was not made a deeper analysis, if all HTTP GET requests are
coming from OOo 3.3 instances.
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
<or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 04.06.2012 12:11, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>>
>>> On 04.06.2012 10:11, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>> Let see what happens, when we start tomorrow with the "Italian OOo 3.3
>>>>> update service".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tomorrow at which time?
>>>>
>>>
>>> If nobody objects and nothing unforeseen happened I would like to start
>>> tomorrow
>>> European morning at 10:00 (GMT+2).
>>>
>>> FYI, I have to check with ASF infrastructure team, if the redirect will
>>> be
>>> available at this time.
>>>
>>
>> ASF infrastructure team has established the redirect. It needs to be
>> propagated
>> through the dns servers - will take some time.
>> I will check the redirect today. May be I will also get some numbers in
>> advance
>> - how many OOo 3.3 instances are trying today to contact the update
>> service.
>>
>
> I have checked the redirect - it is working.
> Thanks a lot to the ASF infrastructure team which helped me a lot.
>
> Since the redirect has been established at approx. noon in Europe we already
> had more than 600k HTTP GET request to the (currently not existing)
> check.Update file.
>
Does one HTTP request == 1 update check? Or if the server is down,
are there multiple retries?
> Thus, I am looking forward to what will happen tomorrow.
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
>> Our first phase XML document check.Update will be in place tomorrow
>> morning. I
>> have a working copy a the same URL as file check.Update.firstphase.
>>
>> Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 04.06.2012 12:11, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>> On 04.06.2012 10:11, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>> Let see what happens, when we start tomorrow with the "Italian OOo 3.3
>>>> update service".
>>>
>>> Tomorrow at which time?
>>>
>>
>> If nobody objects and nothing unforeseen happened I would like to start tomorrow
>> European morning at 10:00 (GMT+2).
>>
>> FYI, I have to check with ASF infrastructure team, if the redirect will be
>> available at this time.
>>
>
> ASF infrastructure team has established the redirect. It needs to be propagated
> through the dns servers - will take some time.
> I will check the redirect today. May be I will also get some numbers in advance
> - how many OOo 3.3 instances are trying today to contact the update service.
>
I have checked the redirect - it is working.
Thanks a lot to the ASF infrastructure team which helped me a lot.
Since the redirect has been established at approx. noon in Europe we already had
more than 600k HTTP GET request to the (currently not existing) check.Update file.
Thus, I am looking forward to what will happen tomorrow.
Best regards, Oliver.
> Our first phase XML document check.Update will be in place tomorrow morning. I
> have a working copy a the same URL as file check.Update.firstphase.
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 04.06.2012 11:29, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 04.06.2012 10:11, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
>> <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 02.06.2012 18:21, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 2:24 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann<
>>>> orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> One other question: does this take care of OOo 3.2 upgrades as well?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Not yet planned nor tested, but I assume that the XML document only needs
>>>>> minor adjustments.
>>>>> OOo 3.2 has the UpdateURL
>>>>> http://update34.services.**openoffice.org/.<http://update34.services.openoffice.org/.>
>>>>>
>>>>> ..
>>>>> OOo 3.2.1 has the Update URL
>>>>> http://update35.services.**openoffice.org/.<http://update35.services.openoffice.org/.>
>>>>>
>>>>> ..
>>>>>
>>>>> But once the update service is working for OOo 3.3, we can easily do the
>>>>> same for OOo 3.2 and OOo 3.2.1 (and even former versions).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Oliver, don't go any further back than maybe 3.1. The 3.0 update URL is
>>>> the one that uses POST instead of GET, and creates mayhem!
>>>>
>>>> This is update30....
>>>>
>>>> DO NOT redirect this one. I don't know about some of the others.
>>>>
>>>> We should probably be fie with update34, update 35.
>>>>
>>>
>>> My personal opinion is that an update service for OOo 3.3, OOo 3.2.1 and OOo
>>> 3.2 is enough to reach our user base. May be also for OOo 3.1.1 and OOo 3.1,
>>> if we see a high number of users on OOo 3.2.1 and OOo 3.2.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Everything else seems great!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>> Let see what happens, when we start tomorrow with the "Italian OOo 3.3
>>> update service".
>>
>> Tomorrow at which time?
>>
>
> If nobody objects and nothing unforeseen happened I would like to start tomorrow
> European morning at 10:00 (GMT+2).
>
> FYI, I have to check with ASF infrastructure team, if the redirect will be
> available at this time.
>
ASF infrastructure team has established the redirect. It needs to be propagated
through the dns servers - will take some time.
I will check the redirect today. May be I will also get some numbers in advance
- how many OOo 3.3 instances are trying today to contact the update service.
Our first phase XML document check.Update will be in place tomorrow morning. I
have a working copy a the same URL as file check.Update.full.
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 04.06.2012 10:11, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
> <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On 02.06.2012 18:21, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 2:24 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann<
>>> orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> One other question: does this take care of OOo 3.2 upgrades as well?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not yet planned nor tested, but I assume that the XML document only needs
>>>> minor adjustments.
>>>> OOo 3.2 has the UpdateURL
>>>> http://update34.services.**openoffice.org/.<http://update34.services.openoffice.org/.>
>>>> ..
>>>> OOo 3.2.1 has the Update URL
>>>> http://update35.services.**openoffice.org/.<http://update35.services.openoffice.org/.>
>>>> ..
>>>>
>>>> But once the update service is working for OOo 3.3, we can easily do the
>>>> same for OOo 3.2 and OOo 3.2.1 (and even former versions).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Oliver, don't go any further back than maybe 3.1. The 3.0 update URL is
>>> the one that uses POST instead of GET, and creates mayhem!
>>>
>>> This is update30....
>>>
>>> DO NOT redirect this one. I don't know about some of the others.
>>>
>>> We should probably be fie with update34, update 35.
>>>
>>
>> My personal opinion is that an update service for OOo 3.3, OOo 3.2.1 and OOo
>> 3.2 is enough to reach our user base. May be also for OOo 3.1.1 and OOo 3.1,
>> if we see a high number of users on OOo 3.2.1 and OOo 3.2.
>>
>>>
>>> Everything else seems great!
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>> Let see what happens, when we start tomorrow with the "Italian OOo 3.3
>> update service".
>
> Tomorrow at which time?
>
If nobody objects and nothing unforeseen happened I would like to start tomorrow
European morning at 10:00 (GMT+2).
FYI, I have to check with ASF infrastructure team, if the redirect will be
available at this time.
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Roberto Galoppini <rg...@geek.net>.
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
<or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 02.06.2012 18:21, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 2:24 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann<
>> orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>
>>> One other question: does this take care of OOo 3.2 upgrades as well?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not yet planned nor tested, but I assume that the XML document only needs
>>> minor adjustments.
>>> OOo 3.2 has the UpdateURL
>>> http://update34.services.**openoffice.org/.<http://update34.services.openoffice.org/.>
>>> ..
>>> OOo 3.2.1 has the Update URL
>>> http://update35.services.**openoffice.org/.<http://update35.services.openoffice.org/.>
>>> ..
>>>
>>> But once the update service is working for OOo 3.3, we can easily do the
>>> same for OOo 3.2 and OOo 3.2.1 (and even former versions).
>>
>>
>>
>> Oliver, don't go any further back than maybe 3.1. The 3.0 update URL is
>> the one that uses POST instead of GET, and creates mayhem!
>>
>> This is update30....
>>
>> DO NOT redirect this one. I don't know about some of the others.
>>
>> We should probably be fie with update34, update 35.
>>
>
> My personal opinion is that an update service for OOo 3.3, OOo 3.2.1 and OOo
> 3.2 is enough to reach our user base. May be also for OOo 3.1.1 and OOo 3.1,
> if we see a high number of users on OOo 3.2.1 and OOo 3.2.
>
>>
>> Everything else seems great!
>>
>>
>
> Thanks.
> Let see what happens, when we start tomorrow with the "Italian OOo 3.3
> update service".
Tomorrow at which time?
Roberto
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
--
====
This e- mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. It
may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the
intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail and any attachment(s) is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately
notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any
attachment(s) from your system. Thank you.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 02.06.2012 18:21, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 2:24 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann<
> orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> [snip]
>>
>> One other question: does this take care of OOo 3.2 upgrades as well?
>>>
>>
>> Not yet planned nor tested, but I assume that the XML document only needs
>> minor adjustments.
>> OOo 3.2 has the UpdateURL http://update34.services.**openoffice.org/.<http://update34.services.openoffice.org/.>
>> ..
>> OOo 3.2.1 has the Update URL http://update35.services.**openoffice.org/.<http://update35.services.openoffice.org/.>
>> ..
>>
>> But once the update service is working for OOo 3.3, we can easily do the
>> same for OOo 3.2 and OOo 3.2.1 (and even former versions).
>
>
> Oliver, don't go any further back than maybe 3.1. The 3.0 update URL is
> the one that uses POST instead of GET, and creates mayhem!
>
> This is update30....
>
> DO NOT redirect this one. I don't know about some of the others.
>
> We should probably be fie with update34, update 35.
>
My personal opinion is that an update service for OOo 3.3, OOo 3.2.1 and OOo 3.2
is enough to reach our user base. May be also for OOo 3.1.1 and OOo 3.1, if we
see a high number of users on OOo 3.2.1 and OOo 3.2.
>
> Everything else seems great!
>
>
Thanks.
Let see what happens, when we start tomorrow with the "Italian OOo 3.3 update
service".
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 2:24 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 31.05.2012 19:56, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
>> <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ok.
>>> Roberto, Rob and Kay are in favor to activate the update service only
>>> for a
>>> part of the possible OOo 3.3 instances in order to check, if the traffic
>>> can
>>> be handled. No objections from my side.
>>>
>>> One important remark which I had not given yet:
>>> When we had the redirect from [5] to [4] established by the ASF
>>> infrastructure team, all (yes, all) installed OOo 3.3 instances in which
>>> the
>>> check of updates is initiated will get the XML document. Whose which
>>> find an
>>> entry with their data (language, platform, architecture) will state that
>>> an
>>> update is available. All the others will state that the OOo 3.3
>>> installation
>>> is up to date.
>>>
>>>
>>> To start this first phase the following tasks need to be finished:
>>> (1) Choose the OOo 3.3 candidates for the first phase.
>>> -- orw's proposal: italian on all four platforms
>>> (2) Get in contact with the ASF infrastructure team to get the redirect
>>> established at a certain day.
>>> -- orw is volunteering for this task
>>> (3) Fill the landing page [6] with content and links and activate
>>> tracking
>>> for this page.
>>> -- at least one volunteer is needed here.
>>> (4) Choose the time frame for the first phase.
>>> -- orw's proposal: 2012-07-05 until 2012-07-08 (if redirect can be
>>> established on Tuesday, 2012-07-05 and task (3) can be finished until
>>> Monday.)
>>>
>>>
>>> BTW, as we have for each language own entries in the XML document we can
>>> provide translated landing pages if somebody is willing to translate the
>>> "master" landing page.
>>>
>>>
>> Is the text in the dialog box in OOo 3.3 localized? The text that
>> says an update is available, please go to this page to download? Or
>> is that in English only?
>>
>
> It is localized.
>
>
>
>> One approach might be to have the landing page be the NL home page,
>> e.g., http://de.openoffice.org. These already exist, and either have
>> the download links on that page, or have text that explains how to
>> download. (En is the exception -- we'd send them to
>> http://download.openoffice.org directly)
>>
>>
> +1 for using the NL pages as the "update landing pages".
>
>
> To distinguish these visits from non-upgrade visits, we could tag them
>> using URL parameters in a way that Google Analytics can understand.
>>
>> For example:
>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/**download.html?utm_source=OOo3_**
>> 3&utm_medium=Client&utm_**campaign=Upgrade<http://www.openoffice.org/download.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade>
>>
>> or
>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/de/**index.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&**
>> utm_medium=Client&utm_**campaign=Upgrade<http://www.openoffice.org/de/index.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade>
>>
>> or
>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/it/**index.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&**
>> utm_medium=Client&utm_**campaign=Upgrade<http://www.openoffice.org/it/index.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade>
>>
>> The extra parameters would be ignored by our website, but GA would
>> understand them.
>>
>>
> No problem to include such parameters.
>
>
>
> One other question: does this take care of OOo 3.2 upgrades as well?
>>
>
> Not yet planned nor tested, but I assume that the XML document only needs
> minor adjustments.
> OOo 3.2 has the UpdateURL http://update34.services.**openoffice.org/.<http://update34.services.openoffice.org/.>
> ..
> OOo 3.2.1 has the Update URL http://update35.services.**openoffice.org/.<http://update35.services.openoffice.org/.>
> ..
>
> But once the update service is working for OOo 3.3, we can easily do the
> same for OOo 3.2 and OOo 3.2.1 (and even former versions).
Oliver, don't go any further back than maybe 3.1. The 3.0 update URL is
the one that uses POST instead of GET, and creates mayhem!
This is update30....
DO NOT redirect this one. I don't know about some of the others.
We should probably be fie with update34, update 35.
Everything else seems great!
> We can redirect these URLs to another XML document which contains
> different "update landing page URLs" in order to distinguish e.g. OOo 3.2
> update requests from OOo 3.3 update requests.
>
> Before activating the update service for former versions I would like to
> think about including languages/platform combinations for which we do _not_
> have yet an installation package available. It could be a possibility to
> aware these users about the AOO 3.4 release. May be we can get feedback
> which languages and/or platforms our users are requesting. May be we can
> activate certain volunteers for these languages/platforms. May be certain
> users would be also satisfied with another localization.
>
>
> Do we think there are many out there?
>>
>>
> I do not know.
>
> OOo 3.2 was released at 2010-02-11, OOo 3.2.1 at 2010-06-03.
> OOo 3.3 was out at 2011-01-27. I assume that at this time the former
> update services for OOo 3.2 and OOo 3.2.1 were available. Thus, the users
> had at least 2,5 months (until mid April 2011) to upgrade. May be former
> update services were longer available - I do not know.
> I could conclude that our OOo 3.2/3.2.1 user base is small compared to the
> OOo 3.3 one from these assumption, but I am not sure.
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
>
>> [6]
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**projects/update36/**
>>> ProductUpdateService/index.**html<http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/index.html>
>>>
>>>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"So let it rock, let it roll
Let the bible belt come and save my soul
Hold on to sixteen as long as you can
Changes come around real soon make us woman and men."
-- "Jack and Diane", John Mellencamp
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 31.05.2012 19:56, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
> <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>
>> Ok.
>> Roberto, Rob and Kay are in favor to activate the update service only for a
>> part of the possible OOo 3.3 instances in order to check, if the traffic can
>> be handled. No objections from my side.
>>
>> One important remark which I had not given yet:
>> When we had the redirect from [5] to [4] established by the ASF
>> infrastructure team, all (yes, all) installed OOo 3.3 instances in which the
>> check of updates is initiated will get the XML document. Whose which find an
>> entry with their data (language, platform, architecture) will state that an
>> update is available. All the others will state that the OOo 3.3 installation
>> is up to date.
>>
>>
>> To start this first phase the following tasks need to be finished:
>> (1) Choose the OOo 3.3 candidates for the first phase.
>> -- orw's proposal: italian on all four platforms
>> (2) Get in contact with the ASF infrastructure team to get the redirect
>> established at a certain day.
>> -- orw is volunteering for this task
>> (3) Fill the landing page [6] with content and links and activate tracking
>> for this page.
>> -- at least one volunteer is needed here.
>> (4) Choose the time frame for the first phase.
>> -- orw's proposal: 2012-07-05 until 2012-07-08 (if redirect can be
>> established on Tuesday, 2012-07-05 and task (3) can be finished until
>> Monday.)
>>
>>
>> BTW, as we have for each language own entries in the XML document we can
>> provide translated landing pages if somebody is willing to translate the
>> "master" landing page.
>>
>
> Is the text in the dialog box in OOo 3.3 localized? The text that
> says an update is available, please go to this page to download? Or
> is that in English only?
It is localized.
>
> One approach might be to have the landing page be the NL home page,
> e.g., http://de.openoffice.org. These already exist, and either have
> the download links on that page, or have text that explains how to
> download. (En is the exception -- we'd send them to
> http://download.openoffice.org directly)
>
+1 for using the NL pages as the "update landing pages".
> To distinguish these visits from non-upgrade visits, we could tag them
> using URL parameters in a way that Google Analytics can understand.
>
> For example:
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/download.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade
>
> or
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/de/index.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade
>
> or
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/it/index.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade
>
> The extra parameters would be ignored by our website, but GA would
> understand them.
>
No problem to include such parameters.
> One other question: does this take care of OOo 3.2 upgrades as well?
Not yet planned nor tested, but I assume that the XML document only needs minor
adjustments.
OOo 3.2 has the UpdateURL http://update34.services.openoffice.org/...
OOo 3.2.1 has the Update URL http://update35.services.openoffice.org/...
But once the update service is working for OOo 3.3, we can easily do the same
for OOo 3.2 and OOo 3.2.1 (and even former versions). We can redirect these URLs
to another XML document which contains different "update landing page URLs" in
order to distinguish e.g. OOo 3.2 update requests from OOo 3.3 update requests.
Before activating the update service for former versions I would like to think
about including languages/platform combinations for which we do _not_ have yet
an installation package available. It could be a possibility to aware these
users about the AOO 3.4 release. May be we can get feedback which languages
and/or platforms our users are requesting. May be we can activate certain
volunteers for these languages/platforms. May be certain users would be also
satisfied with another localization.
> Do we think there are many out there?
>
I do not know.
OOo 3.2 was released at 2010-02-11, OOo 3.2.1 at 2010-06-03.
OOo 3.3 was out at 2011-01-27. I assume that at this time the former update
services for OOo 3.2 and OOo 3.2.1 were available. Thus, the users had at least
2,5 months (until mid April 2011) to upgrade. May be former update services were
longer available - I do not know.
I could conclude that our OOo 3.2/3.2.1 user base is small compared to the OOo
3.3 one from these assumption, but I am not sure.
Best regards, Oliver.
>
>> [6]
>> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/index.html
>>
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
<or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 30.05.2012 22:09, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Roberto Galoppini<rg...@geek.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
>>> <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On 22.05.2012 15:21, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It looks like we can go with the "static" solution as a short-term
>>>>> solution.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thus, I will do the following:
>>>>> - Creation of a complete XML document
>>>>> - Include entries for at least one languages for which we have
>>>>> currently
>>>>> no AOO
>>>>> 3.4 installation package.
>>>>> - Providing the XML document and possible variants on [3] for testing
>>>>> and
>>>>> verification.
>>>>> - Call for volunteers to test the XML document at [3].
>>>>> - Integrate feedback, if we want to have direct download links or links
>>>>> to
>>>>> a
>>>>> certain existing web page for manual download.
>>>>> - Activate the update service
>>>>> -- move the final XML document to [4].
>>>>> -- ask ASF infrastructure team to redirect OOo 3.3 Update URL [5] to
>>>>> [4].
>>>>>
>>>>> My goal is to have the update service for OOo 3.3 running at the end of
>>>>> next week.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any objections?
>>>>>
>>>>> Any volunteers in advance which want to test?
>>>>> If yes, please provide information about your OOo 3.3 installation
>>>>> (operating
>>>>> system and language) and the test cases (direct download link, link to
>>>>> download
>>>>> page, ...) you want to test.
>>>>>
>>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/
>>>>> [4]
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>>>>> [5]
>>>>>
>>>>> http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have finished the creation of an XML document. It contains a feed with
>>>> entries for all platform and language combinations for which we have an
>>>> AOO
>>>> 3.4 installation package.
>>>> Each entry provides a link to web page [6]. This web page is a currently
>>>> empty landing page for our OOo 3.3 users. On this page we can provide
>>>> information about our new home at the Apache Software Foundation and our
>>>> AOO
>>>> 3.4 release. From here we can direct our OOo 3.3 to our download page
>>>> [7].
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Oliver,
>>>
>>> could we eventually jointly work on a test phase for a fraction of
>>> the user base? Maybe we could enable the auto-updates for a given
>>> language, or so. Actually this could help us to make some realistic
>>> assumptions on the total load, and if needed the necessary adjustments
>>> to ensure the optimal performance.
>>>
>>
>> So, if we know from existing AOO 3.4 downloads that language/platform
>> X is Y% of the total, then if we test the OOo 3.3 upgrade with only X,
>> we can project what the total upgrade volume would be. That sounds
>> reasonable.
>>
>>
>>> Ideally we'd like to start the test phase as soon as possible.
>>>
>
> Ok.
> Roberto, Rob and Kay are in favor to activate the update service only for a
> part of the possible OOo 3.3 instances in order to check, if the traffic can
> be handled. No objections from my side.
>
> One important remark which I had not given yet:
> When we had the redirect from [5] to [4] established by the ASF
> infrastructure team, all (yes, all) installed OOo 3.3 instances in which the
> check of updates is initiated will get the XML document. Whose which find an
> entry with their data (language, platform, architecture) will state that an
> update is available. All the others will state that the OOo 3.3 installation
> is up to date.
>
>
> To start this first phase the following tasks need to be finished:
> (1) Choose the OOo 3.3 candidates for the first phase.
> -- orw's proposal: italian on all four platforms
> (2) Get in contact with the ASF infrastructure team to get the redirect
> established at a certain day.
> -- orw is volunteering for this task
> (3) Fill the landing page [6] with content and links and activate tracking
> for this page.
> -- at least one volunteer is needed here.
> (4) Choose the time frame for the first phase.
> -- orw's proposal: 2012-07-05 until 2012-07-08 (if redirect can be
> established on Tuesday, 2012-07-05 and task (3) can be finished until
> Monday.)
>
>
> BTW, as we have for each language own entries in the XML document we can
> provide translated landing pages if somebody is willing to translate the
> "master" landing page.
>
Is the text in the dialog box in OOo 3.3 localized? The text that
says an update is available, please go to this page to download? Or
is that in English only?
One approach might be to have the landing page be the NL home page,
e.g., http://de.openoffice.org. These already exist, and either have
the download links on that page, or have text that explains how to
download. (En is the exception -- we'd send them to
http://download.openoffice.org directly)
To distinguish these visits from non-upgrade visits, we could tag them
using URL parameters in a way that Google Analytics can understand.
For example:
http://www.openoffice.org/download.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade
or
http://www.openoffice.org/de/index.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade
or
http://www.openoffice.org/it/index.html?utm_source=OOo3_3&utm_medium=Client&utm_campaign=Upgrade
The extra parameters would be ignored by our website, but GA would
understand them.
One other question: does this take care of OOo 3.2 upgrades as well?
Do we think there are many out there?
-Rob
> [6]
> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/index.html
>
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 30.05.2012 22:09, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Roberto Galoppini<rg...@geek.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
>> <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 22.05.2012 15:21, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It looks like we can go with the "static" solution as a short-term
>>>> solution.
>>>>
>>>> Thus, I will do the following:
>>>> - Creation of a complete XML document
>>>> - Include entries for at least one languages for which we have currently
>>>> no AOO
>>>> 3.4 installation package.
>>>> - Providing the XML document and possible variants on [3] for testing and
>>>> verification.
>>>> - Call for volunteers to test the XML document at [3].
>>>> - Integrate feedback, if we want to have direct download links or links to
>>>> a
>>>> certain existing web page for manual download.
>>>> - Activate the update service
>>>> -- move the final XML document to [4].
>>>> -- ask ASF infrastructure team to redirect OOo 3.3 Update URL [5] to [4].
>>>>
>>>> My goal is to have the update service for OOo 3.3 running at the end of
>>>> next week.
>>>>
>>>> Any objections?
>>>>
>>>> Any volunteers in advance which want to test?
>>>> If yes, please provide information about your OOo 3.3 installation
>>>> (operating
>>>> system and language) and the test cases (direct download link, link to
>>>> download
>>>> page, ...) you want to test.
>>>>
>>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/
>>>> [4]
>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>>>> [5]
>>>> http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have finished the creation of an XML document. It contains a feed with
>>> entries for all platform and language combinations for which we have an AOO
>>> 3.4 installation package.
>>> Each entry provides a link to web page [6]. This web page is a currently
>>> empty landing page for our OOo 3.3 users. On this page we can provide
>>> information about our new home at the Apache Software Foundation and our AOO
>>> 3.4 release. From here we can direct our OOo 3.3 to our download page [7].
>>
>> Hi Oliver,
>>
>> could we eventually jointly work on a test phase for a fraction of
>> the user base? Maybe we could enable the auto-updates for a given
>> language, or so. Actually this could help us to make some realistic
>> assumptions on the total load, and if needed the necessary adjustments
>> to ensure the optimal performance.
>>
>
> So, if we know from existing AOO 3.4 downloads that language/platform
> X is Y% of the total, then if we test the OOo 3.3 upgrade with only X,
> we can project what the total upgrade volume would be. That sounds
> reasonable.
>
>
>> Ideally we'd like to start the test phase as soon as possible.
>>
Ok.
Roberto, Rob and Kay are in favor to activate the update service only for a part
of the possible OOo 3.3 instances in order to check, if the traffic can be
handled. No objections from my side.
One important remark which I had not given yet:
When we had the redirect from [5] to [4] established by the ASF infrastructure
team, all (yes, all) installed OOo 3.3 instances in which the check of updates
is initiated will get the XML document. Whose which find an entry with their
data (language, platform, architecture) will state that an update is available.
All the others will state that the OOo 3.3 installation is up to date.
To start this first phase the following tasks need to be finished:
(1) Choose the OOo 3.3 candidates for the first phase.
-- orw's proposal: italian on all four platforms
(2) Get in contact with the ASF infrastructure team to get the redirect
established at a certain day.
-- orw is volunteering for this task
(3) Fill the landing page [6] with content and links and activate tracking for
this page.
-- at least one volunteer is needed here.
(4) Choose the time frame for the first phase.
-- orw's proposal: 2012-07-05 until 2012-07-08 (if redirect can be established
on Tuesday, 2012-07-05 and task (3) can be finished until Monday.)
BTW, as we have for each language own entries in the XML document we can provide
translated landing pages if somebody is willing to translate the "master"
landing page.
[6] http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/index.html
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Roberto Galoppini <rg...@geek.net> wrote:
> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
> <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 22.05.2012 15:21, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>
>>> It looks like we can go with the "static" solution as a short-term
>>> solution.
>>>
>>> Thus, I will do the following:
>>> - Creation of a complete XML document
>>> - Include entries for at least one languages for which we have currently
>>> no AOO
>>> 3.4 installation package.
>>> - Providing the XML document and possible variants on [3] for testing and
>>> verification.
>>> - Call for volunteers to test the XML document at [3].
>>> - Integrate feedback, if we want to have direct download links or links to
>>> a
>>> certain existing web page for manual download.
>>> - Activate the update service
>>> -- move the final XML document to [4].
>>> -- ask ASF infrastructure team to redirect OOo 3.3 Update URL [5] to [4].
>>>
>>> My goal is to have the update service for OOo 3.3 running at the end of
>>> next week.
>>>
>>> Any objections?
>>>
>>> Any volunteers in advance which want to test?
>>> If yes, please provide information about your OOo 3.3 installation
>>> (operating
>>> system and language) and the test cases (direct download link, link to
>>> download
>>> page, ...) you want to test.
>>>
>>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/
>>> [4]
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>>> [5]
>>> http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I have finished the creation of an XML document. It contains a feed with
>> entries for all platform and language combinations for which we have an AOO
>> 3.4 installation package.
>> Each entry provides a link to web page [6]. This web page is a currently
>> empty landing page for our OOo 3.3 users. On this page we can provide
>> information about our new home at the Apache Software Foundation and our AOO
>> 3.4 release. From here we can direct our OOo 3.3 to our download page [7].
>
> Hi Oliver,
>
> could we eventually jointly work on a test phase for a fraction of
> the user base? Maybe we could enable the auto-updates for a given
> language, or so. Actually this could help us to make some realistic
> assumptions on the total load, and if needed the necessary adjustments
> to ensure the optimal performance.
>
So, if we know from existing AOO 3.4 downloads that language/platform
X is Y% of the total, then if we test the OOo 3.3 upgrade with only X,
we can project what the total upgrade volume would be. That sounds
reasonable.
> Ideally we'd like to start the test phase as soon as possible.
>
> Roberto
>
>
>> The reasons why I choose to provide a link to web page instead of providing
>> direct download links are the following:
>> - for platform Linux the "static" solution can not decide which package
>> format is requested.
>> - Rob and myself are in favor of such a landing page.
>> From the OOo 3.3 update functionality the user can directly open this web
>> page in the default browser.
>> The XML document can be found at [4]. I also put it at [3] as file
>> "check.Update".
>>
>> Please start your testing.
>> To test please perform the following steps:
>> (step 1) stop your running OOo 3.3 instance inclusive quickstarter.
>> (step 2) find in your OOo 3.3 installation the file "version.ini" (Windows)
>> respectively the file "versionrc" (other platforms).
>> (step 3) in this file replace in field "UpdateURL" the string
>> [5] by [4] or by
>> "http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/check.Update".
>> Please keep an existing query part, e.g. "?pkgformat=rpm".
>> (step 4) start your OOo 3.3
>> (step 5a) check for an update manually via Menu Help - Check for Updates
>> (step 5b) wait for the automatic update check configured via Menu Tools -
>> Options - OpenOffice.org - Online Update. An available update should be
>> notified on the right of your menu bar.
>>
>> Thanks in advance for your test efforts.
>>
>> Currently, I have no variants of the XML document ready. But, I am prepared
>> to create the one or the other corresponding to your feedback.
>>
>> [6]
>> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/index.html
>> [7] http://www.openoffice.org/download
>>
>>
>> Best regards, Oliver.
>
> --
> ====
> This e- mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. It
> may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the
> intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this e-mail and any attachment(s) is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately
> notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any
> attachment(s) from your system. Thank you.
>
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Roberto Galoppini <rg...@geek.net>.
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
<or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 22.05.2012 15:21, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>
>> It looks like we can go with the "static" solution as a short-term
>> solution.
>>
>> Thus, I will do the following:
>> - Creation of a complete XML document
>> - Include entries for at least one languages for which we have currently
>> no AOO
>> 3.4 installation package.
>> - Providing the XML document and possible variants on [3] for testing and
>> verification.
>> - Call for volunteers to test the XML document at [3].
>> - Integrate feedback, if we want to have direct download links or links to
>> a
>> certain existing web page for manual download.
>> - Activate the update service
>> -- move the final XML document to [4].
>> -- ask ASF infrastructure team to redirect OOo 3.3 Update URL [5] to [4].
>>
>> My goal is to have the update service for OOo 3.3 running at the end of
>> next week.
>>
>> Any objections?
>>
>> Any volunteers in advance which want to test?
>> If yes, please provide information about your OOo 3.3 installation
>> (operating
>> system and language) and the test cases (direct download link, link to
>> download
>> page, ...) you want to test.
>>
>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/
>> [4]
>> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>> [5]
>> http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>>
>>
>
> I have finished the creation of an XML document. It contains a feed with
> entries for all platform and language combinations for which we have an AOO
> 3.4 installation package.
> Each entry provides a link to web page [6]. This web page is a currently
> empty landing page for our OOo 3.3 users. On this page we can provide
> information about our new home at the Apache Software Foundation and our AOO
> 3.4 release. From here we can direct our OOo 3.3 to our download page [7].
Hi Oliver,
could we eventually jointly work on a test phase for a fraction of
the user base? Maybe we could enable the auto-updates for a given
language, or so. Actually this could help us to make some realistic
assumptions on the total load, and if needed the necessary adjustments
to ensure the optimal performance.
Ideally we'd like to start the test phase as soon as possible.
Roberto
> The reasons why I choose to provide a link to web page instead of providing
> direct download links are the following:
> - for platform Linux the "static" solution can not decide which package
> format is requested.
> - Rob and myself are in favor of such a landing page.
> From the OOo 3.3 update functionality the user can directly open this web
> page in the default browser.
> The XML document can be found at [4]. I also put it at [3] as file
> "check.Update".
>
> Please start your testing.
> To test please perform the following steps:
> (step 1) stop your running OOo 3.3 instance inclusive quickstarter.
> (step 2) find in your OOo 3.3 installation the file "version.ini" (Windows)
> respectively the file "versionrc" (other platforms).
> (step 3) in this file replace in field "UpdateURL" the string
> [5] by [4] or by
> "http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/check.Update".
> Please keep an existing query part, e.g. "?pkgformat=rpm".
> (step 4) start your OOo 3.3
> (step 5a) check for an update manually via Menu Help - Check for Updates
> (step 5b) wait for the automatic update check configured via Menu Tools -
> Options - OpenOffice.org - Online Update. An available update should be
> notified on the right of your menu bar.
>
> Thanks in advance for your test efforts.
>
> Currently, I have no variants of the XML document ready. But, I am prepared
> to create the one or the other corresponding to your feedback.
>
> [6]
> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/index.html
> [7] http://www.openoffice.org/download
>
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
--
====
This e- mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. It
may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the
intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail and any attachment(s) is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately
notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any
attachment(s) from your system. Thank you.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 6:43 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
<or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 22.05.2012 15:21, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>
>> It looks like we can go with the "static" solution as a short-term
>> solution.
>>
>> Thus, I will do the following:
>> - Creation of a complete XML document
>> - Include entries for at least one languages for which we have currently
>> no AOO
>> 3.4 installation package.
>> - Providing the XML document and possible variants on [3] for testing and
>> verification.
>> - Call for volunteers to test the XML document at [3].
>> - Integrate feedback, if we want to have direct download links or links to
>> a
>> certain existing web page for manual download.
>> - Activate the update service
>> -- move the final XML document to [4].
>> -- ask ASF infrastructure team to redirect OOo 3.3 Update URL [5] to [4].
>>
>> My goal is to have the update service for OOo 3.3 running at the end of
>> next week.
>>
>> Any objections?
>>
>> Any volunteers in advance which want to test?
>> If yes, please provide information about your OOo 3.3 installation
>> (operating
>> system and language) and the test cases (direct download link, link to
>> download
>> page, ...) you want to test.
>>
>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/
>> [4]
>> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>> [5]
>> http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>>
>>
>
> I have finished the creation of an XML document. It contains a feed with
> entries for all platform and language combinations for which we have an AOO
> 3.4 installation package.
> Each entry provides a link to web page [6]. This web page is a currently
> empty landing page for our OOo 3.3 users. On this page we can provide
> information about our new home at the Apache Software Foundation and our AOO
> 3.4 release. From here we can direct our OOo 3.3 to our download page [7].
> The reasons why I choose to provide a link to web page instead of providing
> direct download links are the following:
> - for platform Linux the "static" solution can not decide which package
> format is requested.
> - Rob and myself are in favor of such a landing page.
> From the OOo 3.3 update functionality the user can directly open this web
> page in the default browser.
> The XML document can be found at [4]. I also put it at [3] as file
> "check.Update".
>
> Please start your testing.
I'm testing on Windows XP SP3, a clean install of OOo 3.3.0 en_US.
> To test please perform the following steps:
> (step 1) stop your running OOo 3.3 instance inclusive quickstarter.
OK.
> (step 2) find in your OOo 3.3 installation the file "version.ini" (Windows)
> respectively the file "versionrc" (other platforms).
It was in c:\Program files\OpenOffice.org 3\program
> (step 3) in this file replace in field "UpdateURL" the string
> [5] by [4] or by
> "http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/check.Update".
I replaced with:
http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
> Please keep an existing query part, e.g. "?pkgformat=rpm".
My original string did not have any URL parameters like that.
> (step 4) start your OOo 3.3
OK
> (step 5a) check for an update manually via Menu Help - Check for Updates
OK.
> (step 5b) wait for the automatic update check configured via Menu Tools -
I did not need to wait long. It returned immediately with the note
that "Apache OpenOffice 3.4 is available"
> Options - OpenOffice.org - Online Update. An available update should be
> notified on the right of your menu bar.
>
Clicking download loads the correct webpage into the browser.
Good work, Oliver!
So, for the landing page, we'll want to remind users that they need to
exit OOo 3.3 before installing AOO 3.4
-Rob
> Thanks in advance for your test efforts.
>
> Currently, I have no variants of the XML document ready. But, I am prepared
> to create the one or the other corresponding to your feedback.
>
> [6]
> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/index.html
> [7] http://www.openoffice.org/download
>
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:43 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 22.05.2012 15:21, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>
>> It looks like we can go with the "static" solution as a short-term
>> solution.
>>
>> Thus, I will do the following:
>> - Creation of a complete XML document
>> - Include entries for at least one languages for which we have currently
>> no AOO
>> 3.4 installation package.
>> - Providing the XML document and possible variants on [3] for testing and
>> verification.
>> - Call for volunteers to test the XML document at [3].
>> - Integrate feedback, if we want to have direct download links or links
>> to a
>> certain existing web page for manual download.
>> - Activate the update service
>> -- move the final XML document to [4].
>> -- ask ASF infrastructure team to redirect OOo 3.3 Update URL [5] to [4].
>>
>> My goal is to have the update service for OOo 3.3 running at the end of
>> next week.
>>
>> Any objections?
>>
>> Any volunteers in advance which want to test?
>> If yes, please provide information about your OOo 3.3 installation
>> (operating
>> system and language) and the test cases (direct download link, link to
>> download
>> page, ...) you want to test.
>>
>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~orw/**testupdateservice/<http://people.apache.org/%7Eorw/testupdateservice/>
>> [4] http://www.openoffice.org/**projects/update36/**
>> ProductUpdateService/check.**Update<http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/check.Update>
>> [5] http://update36.services.**openoffice.org/**
>> ProductUpdateService/check.**Update<http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update>
>>
>>
>>
> I have finished the creation of an XML document. It contains a feed with
> entries for all platform and language combinations for which we have an AOO
> 3.4 installation package.
>
Oliver -- wow! -- a big undertaking! I applaud your efforts!
Each entry provides a link to web page [6]. This web page is a currently
> empty landing page for our OOo 3.3 users. On this page we can provide
> information about our new home at the Apache Software Foundation and our
> AOO 3.4 release. From here we can direct our OOo 3.3 to our download page
> [7].
> The reasons why I choose to provide a link to web page instead of
> providing direct download links are the following:
> - for platform Linux the "static" solution can not decide which package
> format is requested.
> - Rob and myself are in favor of such a landing page.
> From the OOo 3.3 update functionality the user can directly open this web
> page in the default browser.
> The XML document can be found at [4]. I also put it at [3] as file
> "check.Update".
>
> Please start your testing.
> To test please perform the following steps:
> (step 1) stop your running OOo 3.3 instance inclusive quickstarter.
> (step 2) find in your OOo 3.3 installation the file "version.ini"
> (Windows) respectively the file "versionrc" (other platforms).
> (step 3) in this file replace in field "UpdateURL" the string
> [5] by [4] or by "http://people.apache.org/~**orw/testupdateservice/check.
> **Update <http://people.apache.org/%7Eorw/testupdateservice/check.Update>
> ".
> Please keep an existing query part, e.g. "?pkgformat=rpm".
> (step 4) start your OOo 3.3
>
from Marcus reply, it looks like the pkgfmt did not cause an issue, so this
is good!
Super work!
I agree with Roberto's comment. We should unleash a subset of the entries
"in the real world" and see what happens.
> (step 5a) check for an update manually via Menu Help - Check for Updates
> (step 5b) wait for the automatic update check configured via Menu Tools -
> Options - OpenOffice.org - Online Update. An available update should be
> notified on the right of your menu bar.
>
> Thanks in advance for your test efforts.
>
> Currently, I have no variants of the XML document ready. But, I am
> prepared to create the one or the other corresponding to your feedback.
>
> [6] http://www.openoffice.org/**projects/update36/**
> ProductUpdateService/index.**html<http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/index.html>
> [7] http://www.openoffice.org/**download<http://www.openoffice.org/download>
>
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated."
-- Mark Twain
Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 05/30/2012 12:43 PM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann:
> Hi,
>
> On 22.05.2012 15:21, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> It looks like we can go with the "static" solution as a short-term
>> solution.
>>
>> Thus, I will do the following:
>> - Creation of a complete XML document
>> - Include entries for at least one languages for which we have
>> currently no AOO
>> 3.4 installation package.
>> - Providing the XML document and possible variants on [3] for testing and
>> verification.
>> - Call for volunteers to test the XML document at [3].
>> - Integrate feedback, if we want to have direct download links or
>> links to a
>> certain existing web page for manual download.
>> - Activate the update service
>> -- move the final XML document to [4].
>> -- ask ASF infrastructure team to redirect OOo 3.3 Update URL [5] to [4].
>>
>> My goal is to have the update service for OOo 3.3 running at the end
>> of next week.
>>
>> Any objections?
>>
>> Any volunteers in advance which want to test?
>> If yes, please provide information about your OOo 3.3 installation
>> (operating
>> system and language) and the test cases (direct download link, link to
>> download
>> page, ...) you want to test.
>>
>> [3] http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/
>> [4]
>> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>>
>> [5]
>> http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>>
>>
>
> I have finished the creation of an XML document. It contains a feed with
> entries for all platform and language combinations for which we have an
> AOO 3.4 installation package.
> Each entry provides a link to web page [6]. This web page is a currently
> empty landing page for our OOo 3.3 users. On this page we can provide
> information about our new home at the Apache Software Foundation and our
> AOO 3.4 release. From here we can direct our OOo 3.3 to our download
> page [7].
> The reasons why I choose to provide a link to web page instead of
> providing direct download links are the following:
> - for platform Linux the "static" solution can not decide which package
> format is requested.
> - Rob and myself are in favor of such a landing page.
> From the OOo 3.3 update functionality the user can directly open this
> web page in the default browser.
> The XML document can be found at [4]. I also put it at [3] as file
> "check.Update".
>
> Please start your testing.
> To test please perform the following steps:
> (step 1) stop your running OOo 3.3 instance inclusive quickstarter.
> (step 2) find in your OOo 3.3 installation the file "version.ini"
> (Windows) respectively the file "versionrc" (other platforms).
> (step 3) in this file replace in field "UpdateURL" the string
> [5] by [4] or by
> "http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/check.Update".
> Please keep an existing query part, e.g. "?pkgformat=rpm".
> (step 4) start your OOo 3.3
> (step 5a) check for an update manually via Menu Help - Check for Updates
> (step 5b) wait for the automatic update check configured via Menu Tools
> - Options - OpenOffice.org - Online Update. An available update should
> be notified on the right of your menu bar.
>
> Thanks in advance for your test efforts.
>
> Currently, I have no variants of the XML document ready. But, I am
> prepared to create the one or the other corresponding to your feedback.
>
> [6]
> http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/index.html
> [7] http://www.openoffice.org/download
>
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
I've tested on Linux with OOo 3.3.0 (OOO330m20 Build 9567).
A restart was not necessary but doing so has shown exactly the same
result. Via "Help - Check for updates" and after 2 seconds I got the
following text in the dialog box:
"OpenOffice.org - Apache OpenOffice 3.4 is available.
The installed version is OpenOffice.org 3.3.0.
Note: Before dwnloading an update ..."
When clicking on the [Download] button I get to this webpage with the
dummy text:
http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/
So, for me it seems to work well. :-)
Marcus
[HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 22.05.2012 15:21, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
> It looks like we can go with the "static" solution as a short-term solution.
>
> Thus, I will do the following:
> - Creation of a complete XML document
> - Include entries for at least one languages for which we have currently no AOO
> 3.4 installation package.
> - Providing the XML document and possible variants on [3] for testing and
> verification.
> - Call for volunteers to test the XML document at [3].
> - Integrate feedback, if we want to have direct download links or links to a
> certain existing web page for manual download.
> - Activate the update service
> -- move the final XML document to [4].
> -- ask ASF infrastructure team to redirect OOo 3.3 Update URL [5] to [4].
>
> My goal is to have the update service for OOo 3.3 running at the end of next week.
>
> Any objections?
>
> Any volunteers in advance which want to test?
> If yes, please provide information about your OOo 3.3 installation (operating
> system and language) and the test cases (direct download link, link to download
> page, ...) you want to test.
>
> [3] http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/
> [4] http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
> [5] http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
>
>
I have finished the creation of an XML document. It contains a feed with entries
for all platform and language combinations for which we have an AOO 3.4
installation package.
Each entry provides a link to web page [6]. This web page is a currently empty
landing page for our OOo 3.3 users. On this page we can provide information
about our new home at the Apache Software Foundation and our AOO 3.4 release.
From here we can direct our OOo 3.3 to our download page [7].
The reasons why I choose to provide a link to web page instead of providing
direct download links are the following:
- for platform Linux the "static" solution can not decide which package format
is requested.
- Rob and myself are in favor of such a landing page.
From the OOo 3.3 update functionality the user can directly open this web page
in the default browser.
The XML document can be found at [4]. I also put it at [3] as file "check.Update".
Please start your testing.
To test please perform the following steps:
(step 1) stop your running OOo 3.3 instance inclusive quickstarter.
(step 2) find in your OOo 3.3 installation the file "version.ini" (Windows)
respectively the file "versionrc" (other platforms).
(step 3) in this file replace in field "UpdateURL" the string
[5] by [4] or by "http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/check.Update".
Please keep an existing query part, e.g. "?pkgformat=rpm".
(step 4) start your OOo 3.3
(step 5a) check for an update manually via Menu Help - Check for Updates
(step 5b) wait for the automatic update check configured via Menu Tools -
Options - OpenOffice.org - Online Update. An available update should be notified
on the right of your menu bar.
Thanks in advance for your test efforts.
Currently, I have no variants of the XML document ready. But, I am prepared to
create the one or the other corresponding to your feedback.
[6] http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/index.html
[7] http://www.openoffice.org/download
Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 16.05.2012 13:24, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as our release AOO 3.4 is out now for more than a week I think it would make
> sense to reactivate a simple update service for installed OOo 3.3 versions.
> I have already seen a post on the users mailing list that the update
> functionality is not working in OOo 3.3. I assume that corresponding posts also
> exist in the forum.
> From my point of view it is time to let our OOo 3.3 users know via the update
> functionality that we have released AOO 3.4.
>
> The update URL for OOo 3.3 is:
> http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update (plus
> a query part ?pkgfmt=<pkgformat> for non-Windows platforms)
>
> As this URL resolves to nothing, the user currently gets the following response
> from the update functionality in OOo 3.3:
> Status: Checking for an update failed.
> Description: Error reading data from the network.
> Server error message: Could not read status line: An existing connection was
> forcibly closed by the remote host.
>
> There are two solutions:
>
> (A) "static" solution:
> Provide an XML document similar to the one which is attached when an HTTP GET
> request to the above given URL is made.
> The attached XML document contains an atom feed according to [1]
> Currently, it only contains entries for:
> - German, Windows
> - German, MacOS X
> - German, Linux, 32bit
> - German, Linux, 64bit
> - English-US, Windows
> I hope I got the inst:os and inst:arch content right for all the platforms.
> For Windows and MacOS we could directly provide download links. Thus, the update
> functionality can download it and install it on corresponding user demand.
> For Linux we can not distinguish the different needed package formats in this
> "static" solution - as far as I know. Thus, a landing page can be given here.
> The update functionality can open it in the user's default browser on
> corresponding user demand. In the attached XML document I included our AOO 3.4
> release announcement page as this landing page - this is only a proposal.
> The final XML document needs to be extended by entries for all possible
> combinations. This would mean 4 entries (Windows, MacOS X, Linux 32bit, Linux
> 64bit) for each language which we had released for AOO 3.4.
> It would be also be possible to include more combinations for which we have no
> package. We could create a special landing page for these which state that AOO
> 3.4 is out and that the user might want to have a look, if one of the provided
> packages would fit her/his needs.
>
> For this solution we need to provide the XML document at the above given URL.
>
> (B) "dynamic" solution:
> As the HTTP GET request contains all the information needed to identify the
> installed version performing the HTTP GET request - see [2], with some
> server-side logic an XML document could be dynamically created which servers the
> identified version.
> E.g.:
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <inst:description xmlns:inst="http://installation.openoffice.org/description">
> <inst:version>- Apache OpenOffice 3.4</inst:version>
> <inst:buildid>9590</inst:buildid>
> <inst:os>Linux</inst:os>
> <inst:arch>x86</inst:arch>
> <inst:update type="application/octet-stream"
> src="http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/stable/3.4.0/Apache_OpenOffice_incubating_3.4.0_Linux_x86_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz/download"
> />
> </inst:description>
> which would serve a OOo 3.3, en-US, Linux 32bit, packgage format deb
> If there is no AOO 3.4 for the identified OOo 3.3 the script should create the
> following XML document:
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <inst:description xmlns:inst="http://installation.openoffice.org/description">
> </inst:description>
>
> For this solution we need some server-side based script reacting on the above
> given URL, which can evaluate the provided information and can create XML
> documents as given above.
>
> [1] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Update_Notification_Protocol
> [2]
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Update_Notification_Protocol#summary_information_about_request_to_.3CUpdateURL.3E
>
>
> I would prefer the "static" solution as a short-term one which could be working
> next week.
> For the "dynamic" solution a script is needed. I have no experience in
> programming such a script. Is there a volunteer who would take over this task?
>
>
> Any thoughts/comments/improvements/changes/...?
>
>
It looks like we can go with the "static" solution as a short-term solution.
Thus, I will do the following:
- Creation of a complete XML document
- Include entries for at least one languages for which we have currently no AOO
3.4 installation package.
- Providing the XML document and possible variants on [3] for testing and
verification.
- Call for volunteers to test the XML document at [3].
- Integrate feedback, if we want to have direct download links or links to a
certain existing web page for manual download.
- Activate the update service
-- move the final XML document to [4].
-- ask ASF infrastructure team to redirect OOo 3.3 Update URL [5] to [4].
My goal is to have the update service for OOo 3.3 running at the end of next week.
Any objections?
Any volunteers in advance which want to test?
If yes, please provide information about your OOo 3.3 installation (operating
system and language) and the test cases (direct download link, link to download
page, ...) you want to test.
[3] http://people.apache.org/~orw/testupdateservice/
[4] http://www.openoffice.org/projects/update36/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
[5] http://update36.services.openoffice.org/ProductUpdateService/check.Update
Thanks in advance, Oliver.