You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com> on 2012/05/01 20:23:44 UTC
Re: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
On 4/30/12 11:16 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>
> On 04/30/2012 12:47 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
>>> Am 04/30/2012 07:00 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Kay Schenk<ka...@gmail.com> �wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>>> Right now I have the DL friendly script setup to only use SF...which is
>>>>> setup in the "old" way. I don't think we'll be usign Apache for pre-build
>>>>> client downloads.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, I have a question -- who will be setting up the SF packs and will
>>>>> they
>>>>> just stick with the current structure on that system for DLs --
>>>>>
>>>>> i.e.
>>>>>
>>>>> <root>/files/stable/<version>/
>>>>> <pack name>
>>>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>>> <root>/files/localized/<language>/<version>/<pack name>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm hoping the answer is "YES".
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Whatever we do, let's try to get a directory schem that works now and
>>>> for AOO 3.4.1 and AOO 3.5 and for AOO 4.0, etc.. �This is not
>>>> something where it will be easier to clean up later.
>>>
>>>
>>> Honestly spoken, I don't know if this will work.
>>>
>>> Of course it could be easy and fast to think about a directory structure
>>> that will work also for a AOO 5.0 release.
>>>
>>> However, I doubt that we will have the time to make the DL logic work this
>>> way, too.
>>>
>>> As I've no idea how close we are from the first public download of AOO 3.4 I
>>> wouldn't do bigger changes now.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Thinking ahead, what do we do when we have a new release, like a
>>>> 3.4.1? �And what can we do now to make that future less painful?
>>>
>>>
>>> The DL logic for 3.4.1 can be the same as for 3.4.0. There shouldn't be big
>>> changes. For further releases see above.
>>>
>>> Juergen is already OK to setup the structure like it was in the old project,
>>> so that the need changes to the DL logic is minimal.
>>
>> It seems the easiest way to go to me too.
>>
>> Roberto
>
> OK, I need some clarification here -- again.
>
> I am to understand by the above statements by Marcus and Roberto that
> the directory structure for 3.4 will be the same as it is for 3.3, but....
>
>
> we will have a *different* structure on www.apache.org/dist? Also, OK,
> we just need some awareness.
>
> So -- can someone tell me what's what here.
I am currently also confused. I would still prefer my proposed structure
in the beginning of this thread if it is possible.
That would allow us to easy add further platforms and keep the bits a
little bit separated. Think about 100 languages and 5 files (including
the checksum files) for each downloadable file.
And it will work for future releases as well.
I have agreed to use the same structure as for 3.3 but I also have said
that I skip the version in the localized folder because we already have
it in the path. No direct feedback on this and I took it as common
consensus.
But now I am confused. We should clarify the structure before I will
start the upload tomorrow.
I haven't looked in the details behind the download scripts and don't
know how much work it is to adapt them to a new directory structure.
That means I will use the structure that will work for now.
Juergen
>
> I CAN change the friendly scripts to go with the NEW (Apache) structure.
> In fact I'm going to work on THAT approach today (along with Rob's
> changes) and hopefully we'll be set for either instance.
>
>
>>
>>> To setup a new structure that makes maybe more sense can be done later for a
>>> release after 3.4.x.
>>
>>
>>> my 2 ct
>>>
>>> Marcus
>> ====
>> 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: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 05/01/2012 10:27 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
>> Am 05/01/2012 08:23 PM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
>>
>>> On 4/30/12 11:16 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 04/30/2012 12:47 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 04/30/2012 07:00 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Kay Schenk<ka...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> �wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Right now I have the DL friendly script setup to only use
>>>>>>>> SF...which is
>>>>>>>> setup in the "old" way. I don't think we'll be usign Apache for
>>>>>>>> pre-build
>>>>>>>> client downloads.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, I have a question -- who will be setting up the SF packs and will
>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>> just stick with the current structure on that system for DLs --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> i.e.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <root>/files/stable/<version>/
>>>>>>>> <pack name>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <root>/files/localized/<language>/<version>/<pack name>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm hoping the answer is "YES".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Whatever we do, let's try to get a directory schem that works now and
>>>>>>> for AOO 3.4.1 and AOO 3.5 and for AOO 4.0, etc.. �This is not
>>>>>>> something where it will be easier to clean up later.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Honestly spoken, I don't know if this will work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course it could be easy and fast to think about a directory
>>>>>> structure
>>>>>> that will work also for a AOO 5.0 release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, I doubt that we will have the time to make the DL logic
>>>>>> work this
>>>>>> way, too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I've no idea how close we are from the first public download of
>>>>>> AOO 3.4 I
>>>>>> wouldn't do bigger changes now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thinking ahead, what do we do when we have a new release, like a
>>>>>>> 3.4.1? �And what can we do now to make that future less painful?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The DL logic for 3.4.1 can be the same as for 3.4.0. There shouldn't
>>>>>> be big
>>>>>> changes. For further releases see above.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Juergen is already OK to setup the structure like it was in the old
>>>>>> project,
>>>>>> so that the need changes to the DL logic is minimal.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems the easiest way to go to me too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Roberto
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> OK, I need some clarification here -- again.
>>>>
>>>> I am to understand by the above statements by Marcus and Roberto that
>>>> the directory structure for 3.4 will be the same as it is for 3.3,
>>>> but....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> we will have a *different* structure on www.apache.org/dist? Also, OK,
>>>> we just need some awareness.
>>>>
>>>> So -- can someone tell me what's what here.
>>>
>>>
>>> I am currently also confused. I would still prefer my proposed structure
>>> in the beginning of this thread if it is possible.
>>>
>>> That would allow us to easy add further platforms and keep the bits a
>>> little bit separated. Think about 100 languages and 5 files (including
>>> the checksum files) for each downloadable file.
>>
>>
>> Maybe it will look more clean but thats not important. Normally the average
>> user should not be pointed to a mirror to find her/his favorite file. For
>> this we have the user-friendly and one-click-download webpages.
>>
>> For the former OOo release the structure was very good and also scalable for
>> new releases and languages. And it is much easier to upload everything into
>> a flat structure. To have every version, platform and language in its own
>> directory is much more complicated to handle in the DL scripts.
>>
>
> One difference between how did it before now: On the Apache mirrors
> will only keep the most recent release. We don't keep the complete
> history of previous releases, not even the history of Apache releases.
That's how it worked (more or less) also in the old OOo project. There
we had for every language and platform the most recent version and the
older were moved to the archive.
> (Those go to archive.apache.org). So when we do a new release, we
> need to remove the old one from the Apache servers. So have versions
Thats fine.
> as directory roots, instead of languages as roots, makes this a lot
> easier.
Also this is fine. We can take this into account when we rework the DL
logic to support a different directory structure.
> Of course a script can do anything.
Of course, so please, no killer argumentS. ;-)
Marcus
>> Currently we can assume that all platform files are in the same location.
>> You would like to split them up into different this has to be taken into
>> account. Plus the lanuages.
>>
>>
>>> And it will work for future releases as well.
>>>
>>> I have agreed to use the same structure as for 3.3 but I also have said
>>> that I skip the version in the localized folder because we already have
>>> it in the path. No direct feedback on this and I took it as common
>>> consensus.
>>>
>>> But now I am confused. We should clarify the structure before I will
>>> start the upload tomorrow.
>>
>>
>> To make it short (and maybe painful ;-) ). When you don't create the sam
>> edirectory structure than for OOo 3.3.0, then I'm pretty sure the DL logic
>> will not work.
>>
>> For the structure as reference please have a look here:
>>
>> http://openoffice.mirrorbrain.org/files/stable/3.3.0/
>> http://openoffice.mirrorbrain.org/files/localized/de/3.3.0/
>>
>> So, when you will start the upload tomorrow, I think we are pretty close to
>> our official release. IMHO too less time to rework the DL logic for a new
>> structure.
>>
>>
>>> I haven't looked in the details behind the download scripts and don't
>>> know how much work it is to adapt them to a new directory structure.
>>> That means I will use the structure that will work for now.
>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> I really believe you that you want to improve the structure (e.g., I could
>> think of the split into stable and localized, this is IMHO no longer needed
>> and could be brought together) but we shouldn't change this now.
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>>>> I CAN change the friendly scripts to go with the NEW (Apache) structure.
>>>> In fact I'm going to work on THAT approach today (along with Rob's
>>>> changes) and hopefully we'll be set for either instance.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> To setup a new structure that makes maybe more sense can be done
>>>>>> later for a
>>>>>> release after 3.4.x.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> my 2 ct
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Marcus
Re: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> Am 05/01/2012 08:23 PM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
>
>> On 4/30/12 11:16 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 04/30/2012 12:47 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 04/30/2012 07:00 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Kay Schenk<ka...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> �wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Right now I have the DL friendly script setup to only use
>>>>>>> SF...which is
>>>>>>> setup in the "old" way. I don't think we'll be usign Apache for
>>>>>>> pre-build
>>>>>>> client downloads.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, I have a question -- who will be setting up the SF packs and will
>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>> just stick with the current structure on that system for DLs --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i.e.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <root>/files/stable/<version>/
>>>>>>> <pack name>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <root>/files/localized/<language>/<version>/<pack name>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm hoping the answer is "YES".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Whatever we do, let's try to get a directory schem that works now and
>>>>>> for AOO 3.4.1 and AOO 3.5 and for AOO 4.0, etc.. �This is not
>>>>>> something where it will be easier to clean up later.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Honestly spoken, I don't know if this will work.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course it could be easy and fast to think about a directory
>>>>> structure
>>>>> that will work also for a AOO 5.0 release.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I doubt that we will have the time to make the DL logic
>>>>> work this
>>>>> way, too.
>>>>>
>>>>> As I've no idea how close we are from the first public download of
>>>>> AOO 3.4 I
>>>>> wouldn't do bigger changes now.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thinking ahead, what do we do when we have a new release, like a
>>>>>> 3.4.1? �And what can we do now to make that future less painful?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The DL logic for 3.4.1 can be the same as for 3.4.0. There shouldn't
>>>>> be big
>>>>> changes. For further releases see above.
>>>>>
>>>>> Juergen is already OK to setup the structure like it was in the old
>>>>> project,
>>>>> so that the need changes to the DL logic is minimal.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It seems the easiest way to go to me too.
>>>>
>>>> Roberto
>>>
>>>
>>> OK, I need some clarification here -- again.
>>>
>>> I am to understand by the above statements by Marcus and Roberto that
>>> the directory structure for 3.4 will be the same as it is for 3.3,
>>> but....
>>>
>>>
>>> we will have a *different* structure on www.apache.org/dist? Also, OK,
>>> we just need some awareness.
>>>
>>> So -- can someone tell me what's what here.
>>
>>
>> I am currently also confused. I would still prefer my proposed structure
>> in the beginning of this thread if it is possible.
>>
>> That would allow us to easy add further platforms and keep the bits a
>> little bit separated. Think about 100 languages and 5 files (including
>> the checksum files) for each downloadable file.
>
>
> Maybe it will look more clean but thats not important. Normally the average
> user should not be pointed to a mirror to find her/his favorite file. For
> this we have the user-friendly and one-click-download webpages.
>
> For the former OOo release the structure was very good and also scalable for
> new releases and languages. And it is much easier to upload everything into
> a flat structure. To have every version, platform and language in its own
> directory is much more complicated to handle in the DL scripts.
>
One difference between how did it before now: On the Apache mirrors
will only keep the most recent release. We don't keep the complete
history of previous releases, not even the history of Apache releases.
(Those go to archive.apache.org). So when we do a new release, we
need to remove the old one from the Apache servers. So have versions
as directory roots, instead of languages as roots, makes this a lot
easier.
Of course a script can do anything.
> Currently we can assume that all platform files are in the same location.
> You would like to split them up into different this has to be taken into
> account. Plus the lanuages.
>
>
>> And it will work for future releases as well.
>>
>> I have agreed to use the same structure as for 3.3 but I also have said
>> that I skip the version in the localized folder because we already have
>> it in the path. No direct feedback on this and I took it as common
>> consensus.
>>
>> But now I am confused. We should clarify the structure before I will
>> start the upload tomorrow.
>
>
> To make it short (and maybe painful ;-) ). When you don't create the sam
> edirectory structure than for OOo 3.3.0, then I'm pretty sure the DL logic
> will not work.
>
> For the structure as reference please have a look here:
>
> http://openoffice.mirrorbrain.org/files/stable/3.3.0/
> http://openoffice.mirrorbrain.org/files/localized/de/3.3.0/
>
> So, when you will start the upload tomorrow, I think we are pretty close to
> our official release. IMHO too less time to rework the DL logic for a new
> structure.
>
>
>> I haven't looked in the details behind the download scripts and don't
>> know how much work it is to adapt them to a new directory structure.
>> That means I will use the structure that will work for now.
>
>
> Thanks.
>
> I really believe you that you want to improve the structure (e.g., I could
> think of the split into stable and localized, this is IMHO no longer needed
> and could be brought together) but we shouldn't change this now.
>
> Marcus
>
>
>>> I CAN change the friendly scripts to go with the NEW (Apache) structure.
>>> In fact I'm going to work on THAT approach today (along with Rob's
>>> changes) and hopefully we'll be set for either instance.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> To setup a new structure that makes maybe more sense can be done
>>>>> later for a
>>>>> release after 3.4.x.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> my 2 ct
>>>>>
>>>>> Marcus
>>>>
>>>> ====
>>>> 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: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 05/02/2012 08:54 AM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
> On 5/2/12 12:23 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>> Am 05/01/2012 11:09 PM, schrieb Juergen Schmidt:
>>> On Tuesday, 1. May 2012 at 22:11, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>> Am 05/01/2012 08:23 PM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
>>>>> On 4/30/12 11:16 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 04/30/2012 12:47 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am 04/30/2012 07:00 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Kay Schenk<ka...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> �wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Right now I have the DL friendly script setup to only use
>>>>>>>>>> SF...which is
>>>>>>>>>> setup in the "old" way. I don't think we'll be usign Apache for
>>>>>>>>>> pre-build
>>>>>>>>>> client downloads.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So, I have a question -- who will be setting up the SF packs
>>>>>>>>>> and will
>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>> just stick with the current structure on that system for DLs --
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> i.e.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <root>/files/stable/<version>/
>>>>>>>>>> <pack name>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <root>/files/localized/<language>/<version>/<pack name>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm hoping the answer is "YES".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Whatever we do, let's try to get a directory schem that works
>>>>>>>>> now and
>>>>>>>>> for AOO 3.4.1 and AOO 3.5 and for AOO 4.0, etc.. �This is not
>>>>>>>>> something where it will be easier to clean up later.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Honestly spoken, I don't know if this will work.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Of course it could be easy and fast to think about a directory
>>>>>>>> structure
>>>>>>>> that will work also for a AOO 5.0 release.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> However, I doubt that we will have the time to make the DL logic
>>>>>>>> work this
>>>>>>>> way, too.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As I've no idea how close we are from the first public download of
>>>>>>>> AOO 3.4 I
>>>>>>>> wouldn't do bigger changes now.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thinking ahead, what do we do when we have a new release, like a
>>>>>>>>> 3.4.1? �And what can we do now to make that future less painful?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The DL logic for 3.4.1 can be the same as for 3.4.0. There
>>>>>>>> shouldn't
>>>>>>>> be big
>>>>>>>> changes. For further releases see above.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Juergen is already OK to setup the structure like it was in the old
>>>>>>>> project,
>>>>>>>> so that the need changes to the DL logic is minimal.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It seems the easiest way to go to me too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Roberto
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OK, I need some clarification here -- again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am to understand by the above statements by Marcus and Roberto that
>>>>>> the directory structure for 3.4 will be the same as it is for 3.3,
>>>>>> but....
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> we will have a *different* structure on www.apache.org/dist? Also,
>>>>>> OK,
>>>>>> we just need some awareness.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So -- can someone tell me what's what here.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am currently also confused. I would still prefer my proposed
>>>>> structure
>>>>> in the beginning of this thread if it is possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> That would allow us to easy add further platforms and keep the bits a
>>>>> little bit separated. Think about 100 languages and 5 files (including
>>>>> the checksum files) for each downloadable file.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Maybe it will look more clean but thats not important. Normally the
>>>> average user should not be pointed to a mirror to find her/his favorite
>>>> file. For this we have the user-friendly and one-click-download
>>>> webpages.
>>>>
>>>> For the former OOo release the structure was very good and also
>>>> scalable
>>>> for new releases and languages. And it is much easier to upload
>>>> everything into a flat structure.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I can't really see a flat structure in the old directory tree. One
>>> directory for each language etc.
>>
>> OK, maybe it was not the right wording and my thinking not correct.
>>
>> So, your idea is the following:
>>
>> <root path>/ooo/<version>/source/...
>> <root path>/ooo/<version>/<platform>/...
>> <root path>/ooo/<version>/<platform>/languagepacks/...
>>
>> It seems there is not other ASF project with releases for specific
>> platforms *and* languages (otherwise please point me to the project), so
>> maybe we can stick with this and divide only into platform-specifc
>> directories.
>>
>> Maybe we can agree on the following structure for a AOO 3.5 release?
>>
>> <root path>/dist/incubator/ooo/<version>/src/...
>> <root path>/dist/incubator/ooo/<version>/bin/<platform>/...
>>
>
> why should we add a further indirection "bin" here? Keep it simple!
> Either we split in different platform directories or we can use one for
> all but not both.
Because with your initial path structure proposal I thought you want to
be more Apache-compliance. Other projects have this setup.
Of course we don't need to copy this. :-)
> We will discuss the future structure in new thread asap to have enough
> time to adapt the scripts.
OK
Marcus
>> If necessary we can provide additional files as subdirs inside the
>> <version>/ directory (e.g., documentation in "docs/", hotfixes in
>> "patches/", etc.).
>>
>> And new releases as Beta or RC can be uploaded into a new and own
>> <version>/ subdirectory.
>>
>> BTW:
>> The checksum files are created for every file and checksum format
>> separately, right? Do we have to store them together with the respective
>> files? Or is it allowed to store them in a separate directory?
>>
>>>> To have every version, platform and
>>>> language in its own directory is much more complicated to handle in the
>>>> DL scripts.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> My proposed structure used the version as start directory and than
>>> only split the platforms and the language packs but that can be
>>> dropped if it makes things easier. Then we would have a very flat
>>> structure.
>>
>> I would prefer to have them together with the full builds.
>>
>>> I really don't see here a technical problem to put the already
>>> collected items (platform, lang, version, mirror...) in the right
>>> order to prepare a download url.
>>
>> There is indeed no technical problem. It's only a problem to get there
>> in time. ;-)
>>
>>> But anyway we will keep the old structure for now
>>
>> Thanks again. :-)
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>>
>>>> Currently we can assume that all platform files are in the same
>>>> location. You would like to split them up into different this has to be
>>>> taken into account. Plus the lanuages.
>>>>
>>> All languages in the same directory only language packs goes in a sub
>>> directory.
>>>>
>>>>> And it will work for future releases as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have agreed to use the same structure as for 3.3 but I also have
>>>>> said
>>>>> that I skip the version in the localized folder because we already
>>>>> have
>>>>> it in the path. No direct feedback on this and I took it as common
>>>>> consensus.
>>>>>
>>>>> But now I am confused. We should clarify the structure before I will
>>>>> start the upload tomorrow.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To make it short (and maybe painful ;-) ). When you don't create the
>>>> sam
>>>> edirectory structure than for OOo 3.3.0, then I'm pretty sure the DL
>>>> logic will not work.
>>>>
>>>> For the structure as reference please have a look here:
>>>>
>>>> http://openoffice.mirrorbrain.org/files/stable/3.3.0/
>>>> http://openoffice.mirrorbrain.org/files/localized/de/3.3.0/
>>>>
>>>> So, when you will start the upload tomorrow, I think we are pretty
>>>> close
>>>> to our official release. IMHO too less time to rework the DL logic
>>>> for a
>>>> new structure.
>>>>
>>>>> I haven't looked in the details behind the download scripts and don't
>>>>> know how much work it is to adapt them to a new directory structure.
>>>>> That means I will use the structure that will work for now.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> I really believe you that you want to improve the structure (e.g., I
>>>> could think of the split into stable and localized, this is IMHO no
>>>> longer needed and could be brought together) but we shouldn't change
>>>> this now.
>>>>
>>>> Marcus
>>>>
>>>>>> I CAN change the friendly scripts to go with the NEW (Apache)
>>>>>> structure.
>>>>>> In fact I'm going to work on THAT approach today (along with Rob's
>>>>>> changes) and hopefully we'll be set for either instance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To setup a new structure that makes maybe more sense can be done
>>>>>>>> later for a
>>>>>>>> release after 3.4.x.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> my 2 ct
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Marcus
Re: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by Roberto Galoppini <rg...@geek.net>.
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 10:15 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 05/02/2012 09:48 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Kay Schenk<ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 05/02/2012 03:04 AM, J�rgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> to sum up this longer thread and the structure how I will upload the
>>>> bits
>>>>
>>>> Source release reflecting a future directory structure already:
>>>>
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.bz2
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.gz
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.zip
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/...
>>>>
>>>> Binary releases keeping the old structure:
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/stable/3.4.0/...
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ar/3.4.0/...
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/cs/3.4.0/...
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/de/3.4.0/...
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/en-BG/3.4.0/...
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/es/3.4.0/...
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/fr/3.4.0/...
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/gl/3.4.0/...
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/hu/3.4.0/...
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/it/3.4.0/...
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ja/3.4.0/...
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/nl/3.4.0/...
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/pt-BR/3.4.0/...
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ru/3.4.0/...
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/zh-CN/3.4.0/...
>>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/zh-TW/3.4.0/...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The directories will include all files (including the checksum files)
>>>> for all platforms and the language packs. The SDK is available in en-US
>>>> only and o only in ...files/stable
>>>>
>>>> Juergen
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks again for keeping things as they were for the time being.
>>>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> We've loaded the current files, please let us know when youupload more
>> files, so that we can update the rest in a timely manner.
>
>
> Roberto--
>
> Hi. Well my test index page worked well with my linux setup for client
> download -- i.e. from
>
> files/stable/3.4.0/Apache_OpenOffice_incubating_3.4.0_Linux_x86_install-rpm_en-US.tar.gz/download
>
> so happy so far. :)
Thanks for the feedback.
Roberto
>
>
>>
>> Please note that the 3.4.0 folder is "staged" on sourceforge, which means
>> that directly links to files in it will work, but visitors
>> browsing the files will not see them.
>>
>> By the way, is someone coordinating with MirrorBrain maintainers to manage
>> updates to serve the "Look for updates" function?
>>
>> Roberto
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
--
====
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: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 05/02/2012 09:48 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Kay Schenk<ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 05/02/2012 03:04 AM, J�rgen Schmidt wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> to sum up this longer thread and the structure how I will upload the bits
>>>
>>> Source release reflecting a future directory structure already:
>>>
>>> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.bz2
>>> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.gz
>>> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.zip
>>> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/...
>>>
>>> Binary releases keeping the old structure:
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/stable/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ar/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/cs/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/de/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/en-BG/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/es/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/fr/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/gl/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/hu/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/it/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ja/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/nl/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/pt-BR/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ru/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/zh-CN/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/zh-TW/3.4.0/...
>>>
>>>
>>> The directories will include all files (including the checksum files)
>>> for all platforms and the language packs. The SDK is available in en-US
>>> only and o only in ...files/stable
>>>
>>> Juergen
>>
>> Thanks again for keeping things as they were for the time being.
>>
>
> Hi all,
>
> We've loaded the current files, please let us know when youupload more
> files, so that we can update the rest in a timely manner.
Roberto--
Hi. Well my test index page worked well with my linux setup for client
download -- i.e. from
files/stable/3.4.0/Apache_OpenOffice_incubating_3.4.0_Linux_x86_install-rpm_en-US.tar.gz/download
so happy so far. :)
>
> Please note that the 3.4.0 folder is "staged" on sourceforge, which means
> that directly links to files in it will work, but visitors
> browsing the files will not see them.
>
> By the way, is someone coordinating with MirrorBrain maintainers to manage
> updates to serve the "Look for updates" function?
>
> Roberto
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>>
>
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by Roberto Galoppini <rg...@geek.net>.
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 05/02/2012 03:04 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > to sum up this longer thread and the structure how I will upload the bits
> >
> > Source release reflecting a future directory structure already:
> >
> > .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.bz2
> > .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.gz
> > .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.zip
> > .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/...
> >
> > Binary releases keeping the old structure:
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/stable/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ar/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/cs/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/de/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/en-BG/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/es/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/fr/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/gl/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/hu/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/it/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ja/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/nl/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/pt-BR/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ru/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/zh-CN/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/zh-TW/3.4.0/...
> >
> >
> > The directories will include all files (including the checksum files)
> > for all platforms and the language packs. The SDK is available in en-US
> > only and o only in ...files/stable
> >
> > Juergen
>
> Thanks again for keeping things as they were for the time being.
>
Hi all,
We've loaded the current files, please let us know when youupload more
files, so that we can update the rest in a timely manner.
Please note that the 3.4.0 folder is "staged" on sourceforge, which means
that directly links to files in it will work, but visitors
browsing the files will not see them.
By the way, is someone coordinating with MirrorBrain maintainers to manage
updates to serve the "Look for updates" function?
Roberto
>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
--
====
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: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 05/02/2012 03:04 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> to sum up this longer thread and the structure how I will upload the bits
>
> Source release reflecting a future directory structure already:
>
> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.bz2
> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.gz
> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.zip
> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/...
>
> Binary releases keeping the old structure:
> .../incubator/ooo/files/stable/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ar/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/cs/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/de/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/en-BG/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/es/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/fr/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/gl/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/hu/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/it/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ja/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/nl/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/pt-BR/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ru/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/zh-CN/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/zh-TW/3.4.0/...
>
>
> The directories will include all files (including the checksum files)
> for all platforms and the language packs. The SDK is available in en-US
> only and o only in ...files/stable
>
> Juergen
Thanks again for keeping things as they were for the time being.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 05/02/2012 06:00 PM, schrieb Juergen Schmidt:
> On Wednesday, 2. May 2012 at 17:02, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>
>> On May 2, 2012, at 3:04 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> to sum up this longer thread and the structure how I will upload the bits
>>>
>>> Source release reflecting a future directory structure already:
>>>
>>> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.bz2
>>> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.gz
>>> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.zip
>>> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/...
>>>
>>> Binary releases keeping the old structure:
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/stable/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ar/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/cs/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/de/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/en-BG/3.4.0/...
>>>
>>
>>
>> Do you mean en-GB?
> Yes, I hope I have no real typo. Have to check it when I am at home. In the subway right now...
>
> Juergen
>>
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/es/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/fr/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/gl/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/hu/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/it/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ja/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/nl/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/pt-BR/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ru/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/zh-CN/3.4.0/...
>>> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/zh-TW/3.4.0/...
>>>
>>>
>>> The directories will include all files (including the checksum files) for all platforms and the language packs. The SDK is available in en-US only and o only in ...files/stable
Looks good from my point of view.
>> Thanks for all of your hard work as Release Manager!
Yes, also my side big thanks for your work.
Marcus
Re: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by Juergen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>.
On Wednesday, 2. May 2012 at 17:02, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> On May 2, 2012, at 3:04 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > to sum up this longer thread and the structure how I will upload the bits
> >
> > Source release reflecting a future directory structure already:
> >
> > .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.bz2
> > .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.gz
> > .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.zip
> > .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/...
> >
> > Binary releases keeping the old structure:
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/stable/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ar/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/cs/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/de/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/en-BG/3.4.0/...
> >
>
>
> Do you mean en-GB?
Yes, I hope I have no real typo. Have to check it when I am at home. In the subway right now...
Juergen
>
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/es/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/fr/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/gl/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/hu/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/it/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ja/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/nl/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/pt-BR/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ru/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/zh-CN/3.4.0/...
> > .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/zh-TW/3.4.0/...
> >
> >
> > The directories will include all files (including the checksum files) for all platforms and the language packs. The SDK is available in en-US only and o only in ...files/stable
>
> Thanks for all of your hard work as Release Manager!
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> >
> > Juergen
Re: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On May 2, 2012, at 3:04 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> to sum up this longer thread and the structure how I will upload the bits
>
> Source release reflecting a future directory structure already:
>
> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.bz2
> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.gz
> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.zip
> .../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/...
>
> Binary releases keeping the old structure:
> .../incubator/ooo/files/stable/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ar/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/cs/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/de/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/en-BG/3.4.0/...
Do you mean en-GB?
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/es/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/fr/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/gl/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/hu/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/it/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ja/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/nl/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/pt-BR/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ru/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/zh-CN/3.4.0/...
> .../incubator/ooo/files/localized/zh-TW/3.4.0/...
>
>
> The directories will include all files (including the checksum files) for all platforms and the language packs. The SDK is available in en-US only and o only in ...files/stable
Thanks for all of your hard work as Release Manager!
Regards,
Dave
>
> Juergen
Re: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
to sum up this longer thread and the structure how I will upload the bits
Source release reflecting a future directory structure already:
.../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.bz2
.../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.gz
.../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.zip
.../incubator/ooo/3.4.0/source/...
Binary releases keeping the old structure:
.../incubator/ooo/files/stable/3.4.0/...
.../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ar/3.4.0/...
.../incubator/ooo/files/localized/cs/3.4.0/...
.../incubator/ooo/files/localized/de/3.4.0/...
.../incubator/ooo/files/localized/en-BG/3.4.0/...
.../incubator/ooo/files/localized/es/3.4.0/...
.../incubator/ooo/files/localized/fr/3.4.0/...
.../incubator/ooo/files/localized/gl/3.4.0/...
.../incubator/ooo/files/localized/hu/3.4.0/...
.../incubator/ooo/files/localized/it/3.4.0/...
.../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ja/3.4.0/...
.../incubator/ooo/files/localized/nl/3.4.0/...
.../incubator/ooo/files/localized/pt-BR/3.4.0/...
.../incubator/ooo/files/localized/ru/3.4.0/...
.../incubator/ooo/files/localized/zh-CN/3.4.0/...
.../incubator/ooo/files/localized/zh-TW/3.4.0/...
The directories will include all files (including the checksum files)
for all platforms and the language packs. The SDK is available in en-US
only and o only in ...files/stable
Juergen
Re: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>.
On 5/2/12 12:23 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Am 05/01/2012 11:09 PM, schrieb Juergen Schmidt:
>> On Tuesday, 1. May 2012 at 22:11, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>> Am 05/01/2012 08:23 PM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
>>>> On 4/30/12 11:16 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 04/30/2012 12:47 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Am 04/30/2012 07:00 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Kay Schenk<ka...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> �wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Right now I have the DL friendly script setup to only use
>>>>>>>>> SF...which is
>>>>>>>>> setup in the "old" way. I don't think we'll be usign Apache for
>>>>>>>>> pre-build
>>>>>>>>> client downloads.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, I have a question -- who will be setting up the SF packs
>>>>>>>>> and will
>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>> just stick with the current structure on that system for DLs --
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> i.e.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <root>/files/stable/<version>/
>>>>>>>>> <pack name>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <root>/files/localized/<language>/<version>/<pack name>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm hoping the answer is "YES".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Whatever we do, let's try to get a directory schem that works
>>>>>>>> now and
>>>>>>>> for AOO 3.4.1 and AOO 3.5 and for AOO 4.0, etc.. �This is not
>>>>>>>> something where it will be easier to clean up later.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Honestly spoken, I don't know if this will work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Of course it could be easy and fast to think about a directory
>>>>>>> structure
>>>>>>> that will work also for a AOO 5.0 release.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, I doubt that we will have the time to make the DL logic
>>>>>>> work this
>>>>>>> way, too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As I've no idea how close we are from the first public download of
>>>>>>> AOO 3.4 I
>>>>>>> wouldn't do bigger changes now.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thinking ahead, what do we do when we have a new release, like a
>>>>>>>> 3.4.1? �And what can we do now to make that future less painful?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The DL logic for 3.4.1 can be the same as for 3.4.0. There shouldn't
>>>>>>> be big
>>>>>>> changes. For further releases see above.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Juergen is already OK to setup the structure like it was in the old
>>>>>>> project,
>>>>>>> so that the need changes to the DL logic is minimal.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems the easiest way to go to me too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Roberto
>>>>>
>>>>> OK, I need some clarification here -- again.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am to understand by the above statements by Marcus and Roberto that
>>>>> the directory structure for 3.4 will be the same as it is for 3.3,
>>>>> but....
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> we will have a *different* structure on www.apache.org/dist? Also, OK,
>>>>> we just need some awareness.
>>>>>
>>>>> So -- can someone tell me what's what here.
>>>>
>>>> I am currently also confused. I would still prefer my proposed
>>>> structure
>>>> in the beginning of this thread if it is possible.
>>>>
>>>> That would allow us to easy add further platforms and keep the bits a
>>>> little bit separated. Think about 100 languages and 5 files (including
>>>> the checksum files) for each downloadable file.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe it will look more clean but thats not important. Normally the
>>> average user should not be pointed to a mirror to find her/his favorite
>>> file. For this we have the user-friendly and one-click-download
>>> webpages.
>>>
>>> For the former OOo release the structure was very good and also scalable
>>> for new releases and languages. And it is much easier to upload
>>> everything into a flat structure.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I can't really see a flat structure in the old directory tree. One
>> directory for each language etc.
>
> OK, maybe it was not the right wording and my thinking not correct.
>
> So, your idea is the following:
>
> <root path>/ooo/<version>/source/...
> <root path>/ooo/<version>/<platform>/...
> <root path>/ooo/<version>/<platform>/languagepacks/...
>
> It seems there is not other ASF project with releases for specific
> platforms *and* languages (otherwise please point me to the project), so
> maybe we can stick with this and divide only into platform-specifc
> directories.
>
> Maybe we can agree on the following structure for a AOO 3.5 release?
>
> <root path>/dist/incubator/ooo/<version>/src/...
> <root path>/dist/incubator/ooo/<version>/bin/<platform>/...
>
why should we add a further indirection "bin" here? Keep it simple!
Either we split in different platform directories or we can use one for
all but not both.
We will discuss the future structure in new thread asap to have enough
time to adapt the scripts.
Juergen
> If necessary we can provide additional files as subdirs inside the
> <version>/ directory (e.g., documentation in "docs/", hotfixes in
> "patches/", etc.).
>
> And new releases as Beta or RC can be uploaded into a new and own
> <version>/ subdirectory.
>
> BTW:
> The checksum files are created for every file and checksum format
> separately, right? Do we have to store them together with the respective
> files? Or is it allowed to store them in a separate directory?
>
>>> To have every version, platform and
>>> language in its own directory is much more complicated to handle in the
>>> DL scripts.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> My proposed structure used the version as start directory and than
>> only split the platforms and the language packs but that can be
>> dropped if it makes things easier. Then we would have a very flat
>> structure.
>
> I would prefer to have them together with the full builds.
>
>> I really don't see here a technical problem to put the already
>> collected items (platform, lang, version, mirror...) in the right
>> order to prepare a download url.
>
> There is indeed no technical problem. It's only a problem to get there
> in time. ;-)
>
>> But anyway we will keep the old structure for now
>
> Thanks again. :-)
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
>>> Currently we can assume that all platform files are in the same
>>> location. You would like to split them up into different this has to be
>>> taken into account. Plus the lanuages.
>>>
>> All languages in the same directory only language packs goes in a sub
>> directory.
>>>
>>>> And it will work for future releases as well.
>>>>
>>>> I have agreed to use the same structure as for 3.3 but I also have said
>>>> that I skip the version in the localized folder because we already have
>>>> it in the path. No direct feedback on this and I took it as common
>>>> consensus.
>>>>
>>>> But now I am confused. We should clarify the structure before I will
>>>> start the upload tomorrow.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To make it short (and maybe painful ;-) ). When you don't create the sam
>>> edirectory structure than for OOo 3.3.0, then I'm pretty sure the DL
>>> logic will not work.
>>>
>>> For the structure as reference please have a look here:
>>>
>>> http://openoffice.mirrorbrain.org/files/stable/3.3.0/
>>> http://openoffice.mirrorbrain.org/files/localized/de/3.3.0/
>>>
>>> So, when you will start the upload tomorrow, I think we are pretty close
>>> to our official release. IMHO too less time to rework the DL logic for a
>>> new structure.
>>>
>>>> I haven't looked in the details behind the download scripts and don't
>>>> know how much work it is to adapt them to a new directory structure.
>>>> That means I will use the structure that will work for now.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> I really believe you that you want to improve the structure (e.g., I
>>> could think of the split into stable and localized, this is IMHO no
>>> longer needed and could be brought together) but we shouldn't change
>>> this now.
>>>
>>> Marcus
>>>
>>>>> I CAN change the friendly scripts to go with the NEW (Apache)
>>>>> structure.
>>>>> In fact I'm going to work on THAT approach today (along with Rob's
>>>>> changes) and hopefully we'll be set for either instance.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To setup a new structure that makes maybe more sense can be done
>>>>>>> later for a
>>>>>>> release after 3.4.x.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> my 2 ct
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Marcus
Re: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 05/01/2012 11:09 PM, schrieb Juergen Schmidt:
> On Tuesday, 1. May 2012 at 22:11, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>> Am 05/01/2012 08:23 PM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
>>> On 4/30/12 11:16 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 04/30/2012 12:47 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Am 04/30/2012 07:00 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Kay Schenk<ka...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> �wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Right now I have the DL friendly script setup to only use
>>>>>>>> SF...which is
>>>>>>>> setup in the "old" way. I don't think we'll be usign Apache for
>>>>>>>> pre-build
>>>>>>>> client downloads.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, I have a question -- who will be setting up the SF packs and will
>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>> just stick with the current structure on that system for DLs --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> i.e.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <root>/files/stable/<version>/
>>>>>>>> <pack name>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <root>/files/localized/<language>/<version>/<pack name>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm hoping the answer is "YES".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Whatever we do, let's try to get a directory schem that works now and
>>>>>>> for AOO 3.4.1 and AOO 3.5 and for AOO 4.0, etc.. �This is not
>>>>>>> something where it will be easier to clean up later.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Honestly spoken, I don't know if this will work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course it could be easy and fast to think about a directory
>>>>>> structure
>>>>>> that will work also for a AOO 5.0 release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, I doubt that we will have the time to make the DL logic
>>>>>> work this
>>>>>> way, too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I've no idea how close we are from the first public download of
>>>>>> AOO 3.4 I
>>>>>> wouldn't do bigger changes now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thinking ahead, what do we do when we have a new release, like a
>>>>>>> 3.4.1? �And what can we do now to make that future less painful?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The DL logic for 3.4.1 can be the same as for 3.4.0. There shouldn't
>>>>>> be big
>>>>>> changes. For further releases see above.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Juergen is already OK to setup the structure like it was in the old
>>>>>> project,
>>>>>> so that the need changes to the DL logic is minimal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems the easiest way to go to me too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Roberto
>>>>
>>>> OK, I need some clarification here -- again.
>>>>
>>>> I am to understand by the above statements by Marcus and Roberto that
>>>> the directory structure for 3.4 will be the same as it is for 3.3,
>>>> but....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> we will have a *different* structure on www.apache.org/dist? Also, OK,
>>>> we just need some awareness.
>>>>
>>>> So -- can someone tell me what's what here.
>>>
>>> I am currently also confused. I would still prefer my proposed structure
>>> in the beginning of this thread if it is possible.
>>>
>>> That would allow us to easy add further platforms and keep the bits a
>>> little bit separated. Think about 100 languages and 5 files (including
>>> the checksum files) for each downloadable file.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Maybe it will look more clean but thats not important. Normally the
>> average user should not be pointed to a mirror to find her/his favorite
>> file. For this we have the user-friendly and one-click-download webpages.
>>
>> For the former OOo release the structure was very good and also scalable
>> for new releases and languages. And it is much easier to upload
>> everything into a flat structure.
>>
>>
>
> I can't really see a flat structure in the old directory tree. One directory for each language etc.
OK, maybe it was not the right wording and my thinking not correct.
So, your idea is the following:
<root path>/ooo/<version>/source/...
<root path>/ooo/<version>/<platform>/...
<root path>/ooo/<version>/<platform>/languagepacks/...
It seems there is not other ASF project with releases for specific
platforms *and* languages (otherwise please point me to the project), so
maybe we can stick with this and divide only into platform-specifc
directories.
Maybe we can agree on the following structure for a AOO 3.5 release?
<root path>/dist/incubator/ooo/<version>/src/...
<root path>/dist/incubator/ooo/<version>/bin/<platform>/...
If necessary we can provide additional files as subdirs inside the
<version>/ directory (e.g., documentation in "docs/", hotfixes in
"patches/", etc.).
And new releases as Beta or RC can be uploaded into a new and own
<version>/ subdirectory.
BTW:
The checksum files are created for every file and checksum format
separately, right? Do we have to store them together with the respective
files? Or is it allowed to store them in a separate directory?
>> To have every version, platform and
>> language in its own directory is much more complicated to handle in the
>> DL scripts.
>>
>>
>
> My proposed structure used the version as start directory and than only split the platforms and the language packs but that can be dropped if it makes things easier. Then we would have a very flat structure.
I would prefer to have them together with the full builds.
> I really don't see here a technical problem to put the already collected items (platform, lang, version, mirror...) in the right order to prepare a download url.
There is indeed no technical problem. It's only a problem to get there
in time. ;-)
> But anyway we will keep the old structure for now
Thanks again. :-)
Marcus
>> Currently we can assume that all platform files are in the same
>> location. You would like to split them up into different this has to be
>> taken into account. Plus the lanuages.
>>
> All languages in the same directory only language packs goes in a sub directory.
>>
>>> And it will work for future releases as well.
>>>
>>> I have agreed to use the same structure as for 3.3 but I also have said
>>> that I skip the version in the localized folder because we already have
>>> it in the path. No direct feedback on this and I took it as common
>>> consensus.
>>>
>>> But now I am confused. We should clarify the structure before I will
>>> start the upload tomorrow.
>>>
>>
>>
>> To make it short (and maybe painful ;-) ). When you don't create the sam
>> edirectory structure than for OOo 3.3.0, then I'm pretty sure the DL
>> logic will not work.
>>
>> For the structure as reference please have a look here:
>>
>> http://openoffice.mirrorbrain.org/files/stable/3.3.0/
>> http://openoffice.mirrorbrain.org/files/localized/de/3.3.0/
>>
>> So, when you will start the upload tomorrow, I think we are pretty close
>> to our official release. IMHO too less time to rework the DL logic for a
>> new structure.
>>
>>> I haven't looked in the details behind the download scripts and don't
>>> know how much work it is to adapt them to a new directory structure.
>>> That means I will use the structure that will work for now.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> I really believe you that you want to improve the structure (e.g., I
>> could think of the split into stable and localized, this is IMHO no
>> longer needed and could be brought together) but we shouldn't change
>> this now.
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>>> I CAN change the friendly scripts to go with the NEW (Apache) structure.
>>>> In fact I'm going to work on THAT approach today (along with Rob's
>>>> changes) and hopefully we'll be set for either instance.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> To setup a new structure that makes maybe more sense can be done
>>>>>> later for a
>>>>>> release after 3.4.x.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> my 2 ct
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Marcus
Re: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by Juergen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>.
On Tuesday, 1. May 2012 at 22:11, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Am 05/01/2012 08:23 PM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
> > On 4/30/12 11:16 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 04/30/2012 12:47 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Am 04/30/2012 07:00 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Kay Schenk<ka...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > �wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > <snip>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Right now I have the DL friendly script setup to only use
> > > > > > > SF...which is
> > > > > > > setup in the "old" way. I don't think we'll be usign Apache for
> > > > > > > pre-build
> > > > > > > client downloads.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So, I have a question -- who will be setting up the SF packs and will
> > > > > > > they
> > > > > > > just stick with the current structure on that system for DLs --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > i.e.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > <root>/files/stable/<version>/
> > > > > > > <pack name>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > <root>/files/localized/<language>/<version>/<pack name>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm hoping the answer is "YES".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Whatever we do, let's try to get a directory schem that works now and
> > > > > > for AOO 3.4.1 and AOO 3.5 and for AOO 4.0, etc.. �This is not
> > > > > > something where it will be easier to clean up later.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Honestly spoken, I don't know if this will work.
> > > > >
> > > > > Of course it could be easy and fast to think about a directory
> > > > > structure
> > > > > that will work also for a AOO 5.0 release.
> > > > >
> > > > > However, I doubt that we will have the time to make the DL logic
> > > > > work this
> > > > > way, too.
> > > > >
> > > > > As I've no idea how close we are from the first public download of
> > > > > AOO 3.4 I
> > > > > wouldn't do bigger changes now.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thinking ahead, what do we do when we have a new release, like a
> > > > > > 3.4.1? �And what can we do now to make that future less painful?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The DL logic for 3.4.1 can be the same as for 3.4.0. There shouldn't
> > > > > be big
> > > > > changes. For further releases see above.
> > > > >
> > > > > Juergen is already OK to setup the structure like it was in the old
> > > > > project,
> > > > > so that the need changes to the DL logic is minimal.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It seems the easiest way to go to me too.
> > > >
> > > > Roberto
> > >
> > > OK, I need some clarification here -- again.
> > >
> > > I am to understand by the above statements by Marcus and Roberto that
> > > the directory structure for 3.4 will be the same as it is for 3.3,
> > > but....
> > >
> > >
> > > we will have a *different* structure on www.apache.org/dist? Also, OK,
> > > we just need some awareness.
> > >
> > > So -- can someone tell me what's what here.
> >
> > I am currently also confused. I would still prefer my proposed structure
> > in the beginning of this thread if it is possible.
> >
> > That would allow us to easy add further platforms and keep the bits a
> > little bit separated. Think about 100 languages and 5 files (including
> > the checksum files) for each downloadable file.
> >
>
>
> Maybe it will look more clean but thats not important. Normally the
> average user should not be pointed to a mirror to find her/his favorite
> file. For this we have the user-friendly and one-click-download webpages.
>
> For the former OOo release the structure was very good and also scalable
> for new releases and languages. And it is much easier to upload
> everything into a flat structure.
>
>
I can't really see a flat structure in the old directory tree. One directory for each language etc.
> To have every version, platform and
> language in its own directory is much more complicated to handle in the
> DL scripts.
>
>
My proposed structure used the version as start directory and than only split the platforms and the language packs but that can be dropped if it makes things easier. Then we would have a very flat structure.
I really don't see here a technical problem to put the already collected items (platform, lang, version, mirror...) in the right order to prepare a download url.
But anyway we will keep the old structure for now
Juergen
>
> Currently we can assume that all platform files are in the same
> location. You would like to split them up into different this has to be
> taken into account. Plus the lanuages.
>
All languages in the same directory only language packs goes in a sub directory.
>
> > And it will work for future releases as well.
> >
> > I have agreed to use the same structure as for 3.3 but I also have said
> > that I skip the version in the localized folder because we already have
> > it in the path. No direct feedback on this and I took it as common
> > consensus.
> >
> > But now I am confused. We should clarify the structure before I will
> > start the upload tomorrow.
> >
>
>
> To make it short (and maybe painful ;-) ). When you don't create the sam
> edirectory structure than for OOo 3.3.0, then I'm pretty sure the DL
> logic will not work.
>
> For the structure as reference please have a look here:
>
> http://openoffice.mirrorbrain.org/files/stable/3.3.0/
> http://openoffice.mirrorbrain.org/files/localized/de/3.3.0/
>
> So, when you will start the upload tomorrow, I think we are pretty close
> to our official release. IMHO too less time to rework the DL logic for a
> new structure.
>
> > I haven't looked in the details behind the download scripts and don't
> > know how much work it is to adapt them to a new directory structure.
> > That means I will use the structure that will work for now.
> >
>
>
> Thanks.
>
> I really believe you that you want to improve the structure (e.g., I
> could think of the split into stable and localized, this is IMHO no
> longer needed and could be brought together) but we shouldn't change
> this now.
>
> Marcus
>
> > > I CAN change the friendly scripts to go with the NEW (Apache) structure.
> > > In fact I'm going to work on THAT approach today (along with Rob's
> > > changes) and hopefully we'll be set for either instance.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > To setup a new structure that makes maybe more sense can be done
> > > > > later for a
> > > > > release after 3.4.x.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > my 2 ct
> > > > >
> > > > > Marcus
> > > > ====
> > > > 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: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 05/01/2012 08:23 PM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
> On 4/30/12 11:16 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 04/30/2012 12:47 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Am 04/30/2012 07:00 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Kay Schenk<ka...@gmail.com>
>>>>> �wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Right now I have the DL friendly script setup to only use
>>>>>> SF...which is
>>>>>> setup in the "old" way. I don't think we'll be usign Apache for
>>>>>> pre-build
>>>>>> client downloads.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, I have a question -- who will be setting up the SF packs and will
>>>>>> they
>>>>>> just stick with the current structure on that system for DLs --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i.e.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <root>/files/stable/<version>/
>>>>>> <pack name>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <root>/files/localized/<language>/<version>/<pack name>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm hoping the answer is "YES".
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Whatever we do, let's try to get a directory schem that works now and
>>>>> for AOO 3.4.1 and AOO 3.5 and for AOO 4.0, etc.. �This is not
>>>>> something where it will be easier to clean up later.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Honestly spoken, I don't know if this will work.
>>>>
>>>> Of course it could be easy and fast to think about a directory
>>>> structure
>>>> that will work also for a AOO 5.0 release.
>>>>
>>>> However, I doubt that we will have the time to make the DL logic
>>>> work this
>>>> way, too.
>>>>
>>>> As I've no idea how close we are from the first public download of
>>>> AOO 3.4 I
>>>> wouldn't do bigger changes now.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Thinking ahead, what do we do when we have a new release, like a
>>>>> 3.4.1? �And what can we do now to make that future less painful?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The DL logic for 3.4.1 can be the same as for 3.4.0. There shouldn't
>>>> be big
>>>> changes. For further releases see above.
>>>>
>>>> Juergen is already OK to setup the structure like it was in the old
>>>> project,
>>>> so that the need changes to the DL logic is minimal.
>>>
>>> It seems the easiest way to go to me too.
>>>
>>> Roberto
>>
>> OK, I need some clarification here -- again.
>>
>> I am to understand by the above statements by Marcus and Roberto that
>> the directory structure for 3.4 will be the same as it is for 3.3,
>> but....
>>
>>
>> we will have a *different* structure on www.apache.org/dist? Also, OK,
>> we just need some awareness.
>>
>> So -- can someone tell me what's what here.
>
> I am currently also confused. I would still prefer my proposed structure
> in the beginning of this thread if it is possible.
>
> That would allow us to easy add further platforms and keep the bits a
> little bit separated. Think about 100 languages and 5 files (including
> the checksum files) for each downloadable file.
Maybe it will look more clean but thats not important. Normally the
average user should not be pointed to a mirror to find her/his favorite
file. For this we have the user-friendly and one-click-download webpages.
For the former OOo release the structure was very good and also scalable
for new releases and languages. And it is much easier to upload
everything into a flat structure. To have every version, platform and
language in its own directory is much more complicated to handle in the
DL scripts.
Currently we can assume that all platform files are in the same
location. You would like to split them up into different this has to be
taken into account. Plus the lanuages.
> And it will work for future releases as well.
>
> I have agreed to use the same structure as for 3.3 but I also have said
> that I skip the version in the localized folder because we already have
> it in the path. No direct feedback on this and I took it as common
> consensus.
>
> But now I am confused. We should clarify the structure before I will
> start the upload tomorrow.
To make it short (and maybe painful ;-) ). When you don't create the sam
edirectory structure than for OOo 3.3.0, then I'm pretty sure the DL
logic will not work.
For the structure as reference please have a look here:
http://openoffice.mirrorbrain.org/files/stable/3.3.0/
http://openoffice.mirrorbrain.org/files/localized/de/3.3.0/
So, when you will start the upload tomorrow, I think we are pretty close
to our official release. IMHO too less time to rework the DL logic for a
new structure.
> I haven't looked in the details behind the download scripts and don't
> know how much work it is to adapt them to a new directory structure.
> That means I will use the structure that will work for now.
Thanks.
I really believe you that you want to improve the structure (e.g., I
could think of the split into stable and localized, this is IMHO no
longer needed and could be brought together) but we shouldn't change
this now.
Marcus
>> I CAN change the friendly scripts to go with the NEW (Apache) structure.
>> In fact I'm going to work on THAT approach today (along with Rob's
>> changes) and hopefully we'll be set for either instance.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> To setup a new structure that makes maybe more sense can be done
>>>> later for a
>>>> release after 3.4.x.
>>>
>>>
>>>> my 2 ct
>>>>
>>>> Marcus
>>> ====
>>> 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: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 05/01/2012 01:58 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
> On Tuesday, 1. May 2012 at 22:10, Kay Schenk wrote:
>> On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Jürgen Schmidt
>> <jo...@googlemail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/30/12 11:16 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 04/30/2012 12:47 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 04/30/2012 07:00 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Kay Schenk<ka...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> �wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Right now I have the DL friendly script setup to only use SF...which
>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> setup in the "old" way. I don't think we'll be usign Apache for
>>>>>>>> pre-build
>>>>>>>> client downloads.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, I have a question -- who will be setting up the SF packs and will
>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>> just stick with the current structure on that system for DLs --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> i.e.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <root>/files/stable/<version>/
>>>>>>>> <pack name>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <root>/files/localized/<**language>/<version>/<pack name>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm hoping the answer is "YES".
>>>>>>> Whatever we do, let's try to get a directory schem that works now and
>>>>>>> for AOO 3.4.1 and AOO 3.5 and for AOO 4.0, etc.. �This is not
>>>>>>> something where it will be easier to clean up later.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Honestly spoken, I don't know if this will work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course it could be easy and fast to think about a directory structure
>>>>>> that will work also for a AOO 5.0 release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, I doubt that we will have the time to make the DL logic work
>>>>>> this
>>>>>> way, too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I've no idea how close we are from the first public download of AOO
>>>>>> 3.4 I
>>>>>> wouldn't do bigger changes now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thinking ahead, what do we do when we have a new release, like a
>>>>>>> 3.4.1? �And what can we do now to make that future less painful?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The DL logic for 3.4.1 can be the same as for 3.4.0. There shouldn't be
>>>>>> big
>>>>>> changes. For further releases see above.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Juergen is already OK to setup the structure like it was in the old
>>>>>> project,
>>>>>> so that the need changes to the DL logic is minimal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems the easiest way to go to me too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Roberto
>>>>
>>>> OK, I need some clarification here -- again.
>>>>
>>>> I am to understand by the above statements by Marcus and Roberto that
>>>> the directory structure for 3.4 will be the same as it is for 3.3, but....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> we will have a *different* structure on www.apache.org/dist? Also, OK,
>>>> we just need some awareness.
>>>>
>>>> So -- can someone tell me what's what here.
>>>
>>> I am currently also confused. I would still prefer my proposed structure
>>> in the beginning of this thread if it is possible.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Your very first suggestion would entail *really* major changes right now,
>> so this is the LEAST of my favorite!
>>
>>
>>> That would allow us to easy add further platforms and keep the bits a
>>> little bit separated. Think about 100 languages and 5 files (including the
>>> checksum files) for each downloadable file.
>>>
>>> And it will work for future releases as well.
>>>
>>> I have agreed to use the same structure as for 3.3 but I also have said
>>> that I skip the version in the localized folder because we already have it
>>> in the path. No direct feedback on this and I took it as common consensus.
>>>
>>
>>
>> OK, I don't understand this last bit.
> Well I gave a very clear example how I planned to organize the bits on dist based on a structure that came from Marcus . And this was slightly different than the former structure but closer to my proposal. And no clear veto or response so I took it as accepted.
>>
>> Please again take a look at to the current setup on SourceForge:
>>
>> <DL url>/files/localized/<language-code>/3.4.0/<packages>
>>
>> It would simplify our rollout if we could just stick with the current
>> structure on SourceForge. We will be using that as our primary DL mirror
>> for clients.
>>
>>
>
> We will do that but in general the dist folder should be our reference for all mirrors.
hmmm...OK, I see what you're saying...someone is coordinating this with
SourceForge I take it? Or...what needs to be done?
A thousand THANK YOUs for leaving things as they are!
>>
>> Marcus's alternate suggestion of :
>>
>> <root-path>/files/3.4.0/...
>> <root-path>/files/3.4.1/...
>> <root-path>/files/3.5.0/...
>>
>> seems like a good option to me as well, and you responded to this. But, the
>> least amount of change -- i.e. keeping the structure we have -- is really
>> the best at this point in terms of getting something done in a reasonable
>> time. Maybe we could discuss alternatives for *after* 3.4 in the future? We
>> are planning on a retool of the DL script after this, and incorporating
>> easier ways to deal with changes like this are high on the priority list.
>>
>> Right now, we are planning on using SF for the majority of downloads --
>> typical clients -- and that structure -- good or bad -- is already in
>> place, and the test DL script is working based on this.
>>
>>
>
> taken and we will keep the old structure
>>
>> We will probably only use the Apache "dist" system for source.
>> So, in terms of how you setup things there I don't really care, but, of
>> course, we need information about that.
>>
> well we should care about it, the dist folder is the place where releases are provided and where the release manager have to upload the bits.
> And I would have preferred to have a clean structure from the beginning.
>
> For me the future and future releases are more important than older versions. But it is of course good to have the older versions available.
>>
>>
>> As silly as this probably seems to you, could we PLEASE just stick with the
>> current structure for now?
>>
> Yes, we will go with the old structure for now
Thank you, thank you, thank you!
I will start a new thread on the SourceForge, Apache "dist" business
though there may already be an awareness here.
>
> Juergen
>>
>>
>>> But now I am confused. We should clarify the structure before I will start
>>> the upload tomorrow.
>>>
>>> I haven't looked in the details behind the download scripts and don't know
>>> how much work it is to adapt them to a new directory structure. That means
>>> I will use the structure that will work for now.
>>>
>>> Juergen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I CAN change the friendly scripts to go with the NEW (Apache) structure.
>>>> In fact I'm going to work on THAT approach today (along with Rob's
>>>> changes) and hopefully we'll be set for either instance.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> To setup a new structure that makes maybe more sense can be done later
>>>>>> for a
>>>>>> release after 3.4.x.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> my 2 ct
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>> ====
>>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by Juergen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>.
On Tuesday, 1. May 2012 at 22:10, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Jürgen Schmidt
> <jo...@googlemail.com>wrote:
>
> > On 4/30/12 11:16 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 04/30/2012 12:47 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Am 04/30/2012 07:00 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Kay Schenk<ka...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > �wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > <snip>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Right now I have the DL friendly script setup to only use SF...which
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > setup in the "old" way. I don't think we'll be usign Apache for
> > > > > > > pre-build
> > > > > > > client downloads.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So, I have a question -- who will be setting up the SF packs and will
> > > > > > > they
> > > > > > > just stick with the current structure on that system for DLs --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > i.e.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > <root>/files/stable/<version>/
> > > > > > > <pack name>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > <root>/files/localized/<**language>/<version>/<pack name>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm hoping the answer is "YES".
> > > > > > Whatever we do, let's try to get a directory schem that works now and
> > > > > > for AOO 3.4.1 and AOO 3.5 and for AOO 4.0, etc.. �This is not
> > > > > > something where it will be easier to clean up later.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Honestly spoken, I don't know if this will work.
> > > > >
> > > > > Of course it could be easy and fast to think about a directory structure
> > > > > that will work also for a AOO 5.0 release.
> > > > >
> > > > > However, I doubt that we will have the time to make the DL logic work
> > > > > this
> > > > > way, too.
> > > > >
> > > > > As I've no idea how close we are from the first public download of AOO
> > > > > 3.4 I
> > > > > wouldn't do bigger changes now.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thinking ahead, what do we do when we have a new release, like a
> > > > > > 3.4.1? �And what can we do now to make that future less painful?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The DL logic for 3.4.1 can be the same as for 3.4.0. There shouldn't be
> > > > > big
> > > > > changes. For further releases see above.
> > > > >
> > > > > Juergen is already OK to setup the structure like it was in the old
> > > > > project,
> > > > > so that the need changes to the DL logic is minimal.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It seems the easiest way to go to me too.
> > > >
> > > > Roberto
> > >
> > > OK, I need some clarification here -- again.
> > >
> > > I am to understand by the above statements by Marcus and Roberto that
> > > the directory structure for 3.4 will be the same as it is for 3.3, but....
> > >
> > >
> > > we will have a *different* structure on www.apache.org/dist? Also, OK,
> > > we just need some awareness.
> > >
> > > So -- can someone tell me what's what here.
> >
> > I am currently also confused. I would still prefer my proposed structure
> > in the beginning of this thread if it is possible.
> >
>
>
> Your very first suggestion would entail *really* major changes right now,
> so this is the LEAST of my favorite!
>
>
> > That would allow us to easy add further platforms and keep the bits a
> > little bit separated. Think about 100 languages and 5 files (including the
> > checksum files) for each downloadable file.
> >
> > And it will work for future releases as well.
> >
> > I have agreed to use the same structure as for 3.3 but I also have said
> > that I skip the version in the localized folder because we already have it
> > in the path. No direct feedback on this and I took it as common consensus.
> >
>
>
> OK, I don't understand this last bit.
Well I gave a very clear example how I planned to organize the bits on dist based on a structure that came from Marcus . And this was slightly different than the former structure but closer to my proposal. And no clear veto or response so I took it as accepted.
>
> Please again take a look at to the current setup on SourceForge:
>
> <DL url>/files/localized/<language-code>/3.4.0/<packages>
>
> It would simplify our rollout if we could just stick with the current
> structure on SourceForge. We will be using that as our primary DL mirror
> for clients.
>
>
We will do that but in general the dist folder should be our reference for all mirrors.
>
> Marcus's alternate suggestion of :
>
> <root-path>/files/3.4.0/...
> <root-path>/files/3.4.1/...
> <root-path>/files/3.5.0/...
>
> seems like a good option to me as well, and you responded to this. But, the
> least amount of change -- i.e. keeping the structure we have -- is really
> the best at this point in terms of getting something done in a reasonable
> time. Maybe we could discuss alternatives for *after* 3.4 in the future? We
> are planning on a retool of the DL script after this, and incorporating
> easier ways to deal with changes like this are high on the priority list.
>
> Right now, we are planning on using SF for the majority of downloads --
> typical clients -- and that structure -- good or bad -- is already in
> place, and the test DL script is working based on this.
>
>
taken and we will keep the old structure
>
> We will probably only use the Apache "dist" system for source.
> So, in terms of how you setup things there I don't really care, but, of
> course, we need information about that.
>
well we should care about it, the dist folder is the place where releases are provided and where the release manager have to upload the bits.
And I would have preferred to have a clean structure from the beginning.
For me the future and future releases are more important than older versions. But it is of course good to have the older versions available.
>
>
> As silly as this probably seems to you, could we PLEASE just stick with the
> current structure for now?
>
Yes, we will go with the old structure for now
Juergen
>
>
> > But now I am confused. We should clarify the structure before I will start
> > the upload tomorrow.
> >
> > I haven't looked in the details behind the download scripts and don't know
> > how much work it is to adapt them to a new directory structure. That means
> > I will use the structure that will work for now.
> >
> > Juergen
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > I CAN change the friendly scripts to go with the NEW (Apache) structure.
> > > In fact I'm going to work on THAT approach today (along with Rob's
> > > changes) and hopefully we'll be set for either instance.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > To setup a new structure that makes maybe more sense can be done later
> > > > > for a
> > > > > release after 3.4.x.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > my 2 ct
> > > > >
> > > > > Marcus
> > > > ====
> > > > 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.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Jürgen Schmidt
<jo...@googlemail.com>wrote:
> On 4/30/12 11:16 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 04/30/2012 12:47 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Am 04/30/2012 07:00 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Kay Schenk<ka...@gmail.com>
>>>>> �wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>> Right now I have the DL friendly script setup to only use SF...which
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> setup in the "old" way. I don't think we'll be usign Apache for
>>>>>> pre-build
>>>>>> client downloads.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, I have a question -- who will be setting up the SF packs and will
>>>>>> they
>>>>>> just stick with the current structure on that system for DLs --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i.e.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <root>/files/stable/<version>/
>>>>>> <pack name>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <root>/files/localized/<**language>/<version>/<pack name>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm hoping the answer is "YES".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Whatever we do, let's try to get a directory schem that works now and
>>>>> for AOO 3.4.1 and AOO 3.5 and for AOO 4.0, etc.. �This is not
>>>>> something where it will be easier to clean up later.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Honestly spoken, I don't know if this will work.
>>>>
>>>> Of course it could be easy and fast to think about a directory structure
>>>> that will work also for a AOO 5.0 release.
>>>>
>>>> However, I doubt that we will have the time to make the DL logic work
>>>> this
>>>> way, too.
>>>>
>>>> As I've no idea how close we are from the first public download of AOO
>>>> 3.4 I
>>>> wouldn't do bigger changes now.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thinking ahead, what do we do when we have a new release, like a
>>>>> 3.4.1? �And what can we do now to make that future less painful?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The DL logic for 3.4.1 can be the same as for 3.4.0. There shouldn't be
>>>> big
>>>> changes. For further releases see above.
>>>>
>>>> Juergen is already OK to setup the structure like it was in the old
>>>> project,
>>>> so that the need changes to the DL logic is minimal.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It seems the easiest way to go to me too.
>>>
>>> Roberto
>>>
>>
>> OK, I need some clarification here -- again.
>>
>> I am to understand by the above statements by Marcus and Roberto that
>> the directory structure for 3.4 will be the same as it is for 3.3, but....
>>
>>
>> we will have a *different* structure on www.apache.org/dist? Also, OK,
>> we just need some awareness.
>>
>> So -- can someone tell me what's what here.
>>
>
> I am currently also confused. I would still prefer my proposed structure
> in the beginning of this thread if it is possible.
>
Your very first suggestion would entail *really* major changes right now,
so this is the LEAST of my favorite!
> That would allow us to easy add further platforms and keep the bits a
> little bit separated. Think about 100 languages and 5 files (including the
> checksum files) for each downloadable file.
>
> And it will work for future releases as well.
>
> I have agreed to use the same structure as for 3.3 but I also have said
> that I skip the version in the localized folder because we already have it
> in the path. No direct feedback on this and I took it as common consensus.
>
OK, I don't understand this last bit.
Please again take a look at to the current setup on SourceForge:
<DL url>/files/localized/<language-code>/3.4.0/<packages>
It would simplify our rollout if we could just stick with the current
structure on SourceForge. We will be using that as our primary DL mirror
for clients.
Marcus's alternate suggestion of :
<root-path>/files/3.4.0/...
<root-path>/files/3.4.1/...
<root-path>/files/3.5.0/...
seems like a good option to me as well, and you responded to this. But, the
least amount of change -- i.e. keeping the structure we have -- is really
the best at this point in terms of getting something done in a reasonable
time. Maybe we could discuss alternatives for *after* 3.4 in the future? We
are planning on a retool of the DL script after this, and incorporating
easier ways to deal with changes like this are high on the priority list.
Right now, we are planning on using SF for the majority of downloads --
typical clients -- and that structure -- good or bad -- is already in
place, and the test DL script is working based on this.
We will probably only use the Apache "dist" system for source.
So, in terms of how you setup things there I don't really care, but, of
course, we need information about that.
As silly as this probably seems to you, could we PLEASE just stick with the
current structure for now?
> But now I am confused. We should clarify the structure before I will start
> the upload tomorrow.
>
> I haven't looked in the details behind the download scripts and don't know
> how much work it is to adapt them to a new directory structure. That means
> I will use the structure that will work for now.
>
> Juergen
>
>
>
>
>> I CAN change the friendly scripts to go with the NEW (Apache) structure.
>> In fact I'm going to work on THAT approach today (along with Rob's
>> changes) and hopefully we'll be set for either instance.
>>
>>
>>
>>> To setup a new structure that makes maybe more sense can be done later
>>>> for a
>>>> release after 3.4.x.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> my 2 ct
>>>>
>>>> Marcus
>>>>
>>> ====
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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