You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> on 2012/03/22 03:23:46 UTC
Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
when moving off of MirrorBrain.
Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
most direct method.
Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
-Rob
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 09:02 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:55 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 08:43 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:42 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 07:38 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >> >> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:31 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> >> >> > On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 22:23 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >> >> >> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
> >> >> >> geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
> >> >> >> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
> >> >> >> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
> >> >> >> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
> >> >> >> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
> >> >> >> most direct method.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> > Howdy Rob
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The data collected would be available to the public or?
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> We could certainly run periodic reports and make them public. There
> >> >> is nothing that prevents us from doing that. But GA itself is account
> >> >> based, so anyone with direct access requires an email
> >> >> address/password. But they do allow multiple users, so one option
> >> >> would be to add PMC members to the account on request.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> > Hi Rob
> >> >
> >> > Ok - but would like to see us decide how the data will be used and
> >> > disseminated prior to setting this up.
> >> >
> >> > -1 on the request for the moment then.
> >> >
> >>
> >> So what is your exact objection to "run periodic reports and make them public"?
> >
> > None really - I would just like to cover a few things prior to launch
> > and right now I need to focus on a couple of other tasks - given the way
> > you worded the first request with a reference to lazy consensus and
> > invoking a clock doesn't leave much wiggle room... so I figure it cuts
> > both ways and I'm trying to turn off the clock for another day, two
> > tops. I'll do my best to come back to this today.
> >
> > Is that OK with you.
> >
>
> OK. That is fine. But remember, one reason we're trying to collect
> this info is for mirror planning, to give SourceForge some info they
> were seeking. So this is 3.4-related as well. If you want, we could
> just go ahead with instrumentation of the download page, for that
> purpose, and hold with that for now.
I understand - I'll do my level best to come back to this topic before
COB (your/our time) today. Prep work is of course reasonable.
Best wishes,
//drew
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:55 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 08:43 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:42 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>> > On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 07:38 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:31 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>> >> > On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 22:23 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> >> >> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
>> >> >> geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
>> >> >> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
>> >> >> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
>> >> >> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
>> >> >> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
>> >> >> most direct method.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
>> >> >>
>> >> > Howdy Rob
>> >> >
>> >> > The data collected would be available to the public or?
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> We could certainly run periodic reports and make them public. There
>> >> is nothing that prevents us from doing that. But GA itself is account
>> >> based, so anyone with direct access requires an email
>> >> address/password. But they do allow multiple users, so one option
>> >> would be to add PMC members to the account on request.
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> > Hi Rob
>> >
>> > Ok - but would like to see us decide how the data will be used and
>> > disseminated prior to setting this up.
>> >
>> > -1 on the request for the moment then.
>> >
>>
>> So what is your exact objection to "run periodic reports and make them public"?
>
> None really - I would just like to cover a few things prior to launch
> and right now I need to focus on a couple of other tasks - given the way
> you worded the first request with a reference to lazy consensus and
> invoking a clock doesn't leave much wiggle room... so I figure it cuts
> both ways and I'm trying to turn off the clock for another day, two
> tops. I'll do my best to come back to this today.
>
> Is that OK with you.
>
OK. That is fine. But remember, one reason we're trying to collect
this info is for mirror planning, to give SourceForge some info they
were seeking. So this is 3.4-related as well. If you want, we could
just go ahead with instrumentation of the download page, for that
purpose, and hold with that for now.
-Rob
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > //drew
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by Roberto Galoppini <rg...@geek.net>.
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 1:55 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 08:43 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:42 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>> > On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 07:38 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:31 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>> >> > On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 22:23 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> >> >> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
>> >> >> geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
>> >> >> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
>> >> >> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
>> >> >> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
>> >> >> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
>> >> >> most direct method.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
>> >> >>
>> >> > Howdy Rob
>> >> >
>> >> > The data collected would be available to the public or?
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> We could certainly run periodic reports and make them public. There
>> >> is nothing that prevents us from doing that. But GA itself is account
>> >> based, so anyone with direct access requires an email
>> >> address/password. But they do allow multiple users, so one option
>> >> would be to add PMC members to the account on request.
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> > Hi Rob
>> >
>> > Ok - but would like to see us decide how the data will be used and
>> > disseminated prior to setting this up.
>> >
>> > -1 on the request for the moment then.
>> >
>>
>> So what is your exact objection to "run periodic reports and make them public"?
>
> None really - I would just like to cover a few things prior to launch
> and right now I need to focus on a couple of other tasks - given the way
> you worded the first request with a reference to lazy consensus and
> invoking a clock doesn't leave much wiggle room... so I figure it cuts
> both ways and I'm trying to turn off the clock for another day, two
> tops. I'll do my best to come back to this today.
While we removed GA from both AOO Extensions and Templates sites as
required, I can actually monitor downloads happening at SourceForge
site, though. For example, for Extensions these are the Top Countries
by Downloads.
1. United States
2. Germany
3. France
4. Italy
5. Japan
6. Spain
7. Russia
8. UK
9. Brazil
10. Poland
% Operative Systems.
1. Windows 82.84%
2. Linux 9.97%
3. Macintosh 7.19%
As anticipated in another thread, we plan to inform both Extensions
and Templates users about top downloads and alike.
Getting back to the original discussion, my opinion is that if we
could use GA for downloads this would turn useful in many respects,
ranging from marketing to capacity planning.
Roberto
>
> Is that OK with you.
>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > //drew
====
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: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 08:43 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:42 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 07:38 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:31 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> >> > On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 22:23 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >> >> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
> >> >>
> >> >> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
> >> >> geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
> >> >> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
> >> >> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
> >> >> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
> >> >>
> >> >> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
> >> >> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
> >> >> most direct method.
> >> >>
> >> >> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
> >> >>
> >> > Howdy Rob
> >> >
> >> > The data collected would be available to the public or?
> >> >
> >>
> >> We could certainly run periodic reports and make them public. There
> >> is nothing that prevents us from doing that. But GA itself is account
> >> based, so anyone with direct access requires an email
> >> address/password. But they do allow multiple users, so one option
> >> would be to add PMC members to the account on request.
> >
> >
> >>
> > Hi Rob
> >
> > Ok - but would like to see us decide how the data will be used and
> > disseminated prior to setting this up.
> >
> > -1 on the request for the moment then.
> >
>
> So what is your exact objection to "run periodic reports and make them public"?
None really - I would just like to cover a few things prior to launch
and right now I need to focus on a couple of other tasks - given the way
you worded the first request with a reference to lazy consensus and
invoking a clock doesn't leave much wiggle room... so I figure it cuts
both ways and I'm trying to turn off the clock for another day, two
tops. I'll do my best to come back to this today.
Is that OK with you.
>
> -Rob
>
> > Thanks,
> >
> > //drew
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:42 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 07:38 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:31 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>> > On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 22:23 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>> >> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
>>> >>
>>> >> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
>>> >> geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
>>> >> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
>>> >> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
>>> >> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
>>> >>
>>> >> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
>>> >> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
>>> >> most direct method.
>>> >>
>>> >> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
>>> >>
>>> > Howdy Rob
>>> >
>>> > The data collected would be available to the public or?
>>> >
>>>
>>> We could certainly run periodic reports and make them public. There
>>> is nothing that prevents us from doing that. But GA itself is account
>>> based, so anyone with direct access requires an email
>>> address/password. But they do allow multiple users, so one option
>>> would be to add PMC members to the account on request.
>>
>>
>>>
>> Hi Rob
>>
>> Ok - but would like to see us decide how the data will be used and
>> disseminated prior to setting this up.
>>
>> -1 on the request for the moment then.
>>
>
> So what is your exact objection to "run periodic reports and make them public"?
>
In other words, look at the typical way we do things at Apache. We
check in code, make it public and put few restrictions on how it can
be used. That is what we do. So I assume any data we make public is
similarly made available for use without restriction. And since we
work transparently, there should be little or no data that we (PPMC)
would keep private. There is not a confidentiality concern, since GA
does not track information at a per-user basis. So we don't have
access to any confidential/personal data.
So I'd be interesting in knowing what exactly your concern is, e.g.,
an example of a GA report that we should not disseminate, or a report
that we could disseminate, but with restrictions. It might be easiest
to exclude areas that you see as problematic.
-Rob
> -Rob
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> //drew
>>
>>
>>
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:42 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 07:38 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:31 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 22:23 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> >> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
>> >>
>> >> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
>> >> geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
>> >> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
>> >> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
>> >> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
>> >>
>> >> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
>> >> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
>> >> most direct method.
>> >>
>> >> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
>> >>
>> > Howdy Rob
>> >
>> > The data collected would be available to the public or?
>> >
>>
>> We could certainly run periodic reports and make them public. There
>> is nothing that prevents us from doing that. But GA itself is account
>> based, so anyone with direct access requires an email
>> address/password. But they do allow multiple users, so one option
>> would be to add PMC members to the account on request.
>
>
>>
> Hi Rob
>
> Ok - but would like to see us decide how the data will be used and
> disseminated prior to setting this up.
>
> -1 on the request for the moment then.
>
So what is your exact objection to "run periodic reports and make them public"?
-Rob
> Thanks,
>
> //drew
>
>
>
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 07:38 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:31 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 22:23 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
> >>
> >> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
> >> geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
> >> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
> >> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
> >> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
> >>
> >> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
> >> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
> >> most direct method.
> >>
> >> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
> >>
> > Howdy Rob
> >
> > The data collected would be available to the public or?
> >
>
> We could certainly run periodic reports and make them public. There
> is nothing that prevents us from doing that. But GA itself is account
> based, so anyone with direct access requires an email
> address/password. But they do allow multiple users, so one option
> would be to add PMC members to the account on request.
>
Hi Rob
Ok - but would like to see us decide how the data will be used and
disseminated prior to setting this up.
-1 on the request for the moment then.
Thanks,
//drew
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:31 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 22:23 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
>>
>> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
>> geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
>> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
>> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
>> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
>>
>> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
>> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
>> most direct method.
>>
>> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
>>
> Howdy Rob
>
> The data collected would be available to the public or?
>
We could certainly run periodic reports and make them public. There
is nothing that prevents us from doing that. But GA itself is account
based, so anyone with direct access requires an email
address/password. But they do allow multiple users, so one option
would be to add PMC members to the account on request.
-Rob
> Thanks,
>
> //drew
>
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 22:23 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
>
> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
> geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
>
> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
> most direct method.
>
> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
>
Howdy Rob
The data collected would be available to the public or?
Thanks,
//drew
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 22:28 -0400, Tim Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:23 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> > I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
> >
> > This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
> > geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
> > been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
> > continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
> > when moving off of MirrorBrain.
> >
> > Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
> > collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
> > most direct method.
> >
> > Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
>
> Hi Rob,
> As long as it's accompanied by a link to a privacy policy, you should
> be fine. Jackrabbit's[1] is, I think, the canonical example around
> here...
>
> Thanks,
Howdy tim
Right, used Jackrabbit as the template for this page
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/website-privacy-policy-draft
just add back the part regarding GA, assuming we add GA to the page.
//drew
>
> [1] - http://jackrabbit.apache.org/privacy-policy.html
>
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Mar 21, 2012, at 7:28 PM, Tim Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:23 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
>>
>> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
>> geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
>> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
>> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
>> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
>>
>> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
>> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
>> most direct method.
>>
>> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
>
> Hi Rob,
> As long as it's accompanied by a link to a privacy policy, you should
> be fine. Jackrabbit's[1] is, I think, the canonical example around
> here...
I would consider putting this on these pages.
(1) www.openoffice.org/download/index.html (the actual url)
(2) The "user" contributing page that is displayed in parallel with the click to download.
(3) On the "noregistration" page we are discussing.
Regards,
Dave
>
> Thanks,
> --tim
>
> [1] - http://jackrabbit.apache.org/privacy-policy.html
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:23 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
>
> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
> geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
>
> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
> most direct method.
>
> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
Hi Rob,
As long as it's accompanied by a link to a privacy policy, you should
be fine. Jackrabbit's[1] is, I think, the canonical example around
here...
Thanks,
--tim
[1] - http://jackrabbit.apache.org/privacy-policy.html
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com>.
Note: httpd server logs are available on people.apache.org
under /x1/logarchive/eosnew/www/
Up until recently ooo-site.apache.org was the line prefix
for www.openoffice.org, but I've reconfigured things so
www.openoffice.org is the right line prefix for relevant
logfile entries.
HTH
>________________________________
> From: drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>
>To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 2:46 PM
>Subject: Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
>
>On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 10:40 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts <lu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> >
>> > On 2012-03-23, at 12:03 , Kay Schenk wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On 03/21/2012 07:23 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>> > >> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
>> > >>
>> > >> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
>> > >> geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
>> > >> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
>> > >> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
>> > >> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
>> > >>
>> > >> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
>> > >> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
>> > >> most direct method.
>> > >>
>> > >> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
>> > >>
>> > >> -Rob
>> > > This sounds fine with me. Yes, we should state our privacy policy on
>> > use, and at some point, if you do produce a public report, maybe nix IP
>> > addresses if that's a concern.
>> >
>> > I think nixing IP addresses is a necessity, if one were to publish this
>> > data, as is informing the downloader of the privacy issues.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> This part is really easy, since Google Analytics does not provide us with
>> IP addresses. It is giving us aggregate information, not per-user
>> information.
>>
>> FWIW, we used to use several means to track downloads of the binaries. None
>> > was particularly great and none satisfied the desires of corporate
>> > marketing. And all made some in the corporate hierarchy uncomfortable, if
>> > only because a download of a binary is hardly the same as a contribution to
>> > source.
>> >
>> > We used Google Analytics but also, as was then called, Omniture. Selected
>> > data were published in graphical form to the services wiki.
>> >
>> > In addition, more or less from the start, I published spreadsheets of
>> > downloads, and particularized it according to language but not region. (I
>> > also listed OS of version downloaded.) There were many problems to these
>> > spreadsheets, as I noted at http://stats.openoffice.org/, not least of
>> > which was spurious duplication and misleading numeration.
>> >
>> > What I always desired was a mechanism by which a successful download could
>> > "call home", thus supplying rather useful information. In the end, a
>> > version of just this was indeed done, via update calls, extensions, etc.
>> > However, there was no direct insertion of such a mechanism. If we were ever
>> > to do that, I would argue that we do need then to inform any would-be
>> > downloader of the privacy issues.
>> >
>> > -louis
>> >
>> > PS Roberto asked me about the old data and if it a) was extant and b)
>> > reflected geolocation. Answers: It was not extant, and I didn't keep the
>> > raw data. (I could probably find it stuffed into some archive, but why? As
>> > I pointed out to Roberto, the ODF Alliance information regarding ODF uptake
>> > is actually a better indicator, as most ODF implementations they track were
>> > or are based on OOo.)
>> >
>> >
>
>Howdy Louis, Kay, Rob, et al
>
>I've certainly delayed this long enough, longer then my intent in fact.
>
>There is no real question that analytics are important, Google is likely
>the fastest and easiest road to acquiring them, I suppose.
>
>I'm glad that Louis added some historic view to the subject, it might be
>worth noting that in the case of the Omniture data gathering campaign
>individual site users could opt out.
>
>The real real question is access IMO, Louis also broached the subject of
>his employer when he uses the phrase, "the desires of corporate
>marketing". Historically of course, SUN or Oracle, the analytics where
>the purview of the corporate owner. With Apache OpenOffice there of
>course is no corporate owner, analytics are then a resource of the
>Apache Software Foundation and from this flows, I would say, to the
>(P)PMC.
>
>This distinction I would submit means that the full analytics are not
>available to any specific employer of someone volunteering their time to
>the communal effort within AOO.
>
>However, another way to look at that would be that the analytics are
>available to all PPMC members. Of course as Rob points out, with Google
>this requires access to a specific account, so it would make sense that
>individual PPMC would need to request full access.
>
>I just want to emphasize that whomever is maintaining the Google account
>is doing so as a steward for the entire Apache OpenOffice (P)PMC, at
>least this is how I see it.
>
>Otherwise, it would make sense with regards to public access to not look
>much beyond what basic charting was available in the past, but to at
>least shot for building a system to deliver that.
>
>So, it seems everyone is ok with this and I certainly don't want to
>deter it anylonger - it's a +1 from me now.
>
>@Rob - if I can help with generating reports, let me know.
>
>//drew
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 15:21 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 2:46 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 10:40 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts <luispo@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 2012-03-23, at 12:03 , Kay Schenk wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 03/21/2012 07:23 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> > > > >> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
> > > > >> geographical distribution of download requests. This information
> > has
> > > > >> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also
> > provide
> > > > >> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
> > > > >> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way
> > of
> > > > >> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is
> > the
> > > > >> most direct method.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -Rob
> > > > > This sounds fine with me. Yes, we should state our privacy policy on
> > > > use, and at some point, if you do produce a public report, maybe nix IP
> > > > addresses if that's a concern.
> > > >
> > > > I think nixing IP addresses is a necessity, if one were to publish this
> > > > data, as is informing the downloader of the privacy issues.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > This part is really easy, since Google Analytics does not provide us with
> > > IP addresses. It is giving us aggregate information, not per-user
> > > information.
> > >
> > > FWIW, we used to use several means to track downloads of the binaries.
> > None
> > > > was particularly great and none satisfied the desires of corporate
> > > > marketing. And all made some in the corporate hierarchy uncomfortable,
> > if
> > > > only because a download of a binary is hardly the same as a
> > contribution to
> > > > source.
> > > >
> > > > We used Google Analytics but also, as was then called, Omniture.
> > Selected
> > > > data were published in graphical form to the services wiki.
> > > >
> > > > In addition, more or less from the start, I published spreadsheets of
> > > > downloads, and particularized it according to language but not region.
> > (I
> > > > also listed OS of version downloaded.) There were many problems to
> > these
> > > > spreadsheets, as I noted at http://stats.openoffice.org/, not least of
> > > > which was spurious duplication and misleading numeration.
> > > >
> > > > What I always desired was a mechanism by which a successful download
> > could
> > > > "call home", thus supplying rather useful information. In the end, a
> > > > version of just this was indeed done, via update calls, extensions,
> > etc.
> > > > However, there was no direct insertion of such a mechanism. If we were
> > ever
> > > > to do that, I would argue that we do need then to inform any would-be
> > > > downloader of the privacy issues.
> > > >
> > > > -louis
> > > >
> > > > PS Roberto asked me about the old data and if it a) was extant and b)
> > > > reflected geolocation. Answers: It was not extant, and I didn't keep
> > the
> > > > raw data. (I could probably find it stuffed into some archive, but
> > why? As
> > > > I pointed out to Roberto, the ODF Alliance information regarding ODF
> > uptake
> > > > is actually a better indicator, as most ODF implementations they track
> > were
> > > > or are based on OOo.)
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > Howdy Louis, Kay, Rob, et al
> >
> > I've certainly delayed this long enough, longer then my intent in fact.
> >
> > There is no real question that analytics are important, Google is likely
> > the fastest and easiest road to acquiring them, I suppose.
> >
> > I'm glad that Louis added some historic view to the subject, it might be
> > worth noting that in the case of the Omniture data gathering campaign
> > individual site users could opt out.
> >
> > The real real question is access IMO, Louis also broached the subject of
> > his employer when he uses the phrase, "the desires of corporate
> > marketing". Historically of course, SUN or Oracle, the analytics where
> > the purview of the corporate owner. With Apache OpenOffice there of
> > course is no corporate owner, analytics are then a resource of the
> > Apache Software Foundation and from this flows, I would say, to the
> > (P)PMC.
> >
> >
> Or the other way around. I'm not sure the ASF claims primacy over the PMC
> in regards to data ownership.
>
>
> > This distinction I would submit means that the full analytics are not
> > available to any specific employer of someone volunteering their time to
> > the communal effort within AOO.
> >
> >
> Another way of saying this would be to agree that the information is
> treated as sensitive and it is not shared beyond the PMC except by
> agreement, e.g., via lazy consensus. This would include sharing with
> employers, but also sharing with other open source projects, etc.
hi Rob,
Yes, I would say we are in agreement, the data is sensitive, access is
premised on ones membership on the PPMC, use beyond the public reporting
is possible with agreement of the PPMC, lazy consensus works for me.
Open, transparent and shared being my desire.
//drew
<snip>
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 2:46 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 10:40 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts <luispo@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2012-03-23, at 12:03 , Kay Schenk wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 03/21/2012 07:23 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> > > >> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
> > > >>
> > > >> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
> > > >> geographical distribution of download requests. This information
> has
> > > >> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also
> provide
> > > >> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
> > > >> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
> > > >>
> > > >> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way
> of
> > > >> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is
> the
> > > >> most direct method.
> > > >>
> > > >> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
> > > >>
> > > >> -Rob
> > > > This sounds fine with me. Yes, we should state our privacy policy on
> > > use, and at some point, if you do produce a public report, maybe nix IP
> > > addresses if that's a concern.
> > >
> > > I think nixing IP addresses is a necessity, if one were to publish this
> > > data, as is informing the downloader of the privacy issues.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > This part is really easy, since Google Analytics does not provide us with
> > IP addresses. It is giving us aggregate information, not per-user
> > information.
> >
> > FWIW, we used to use several means to track downloads of the binaries.
> None
> > > was particularly great and none satisfied the desires of corporate
> > > marketing. And all made some in the corporate hierarchy uncomfortable,
> if
> > > only because a download of a binary is hardly the same as a
> contribution to
> > > source.
> > >
> > > We used Google Analytics but also, as was then called, Omniture.
> Selected
> > > data were published in graphical form to the services wiki.
> > >
> > > In addition, more or less from the start, I published spreadsheets of
> > > downloads, and particularized it according to language but not region.
> (I
> > > also listed OS of version downloaded.) There were many problems to
> these
> > > spreadsheets, as I noted at http://stats.openoffice.org/, not least of
> > > which was spurious duplication and misleading numeration.
> > >
> > > What I always desired was a mechanism by which a successful download
> could
> > > "call home", thus supplying rather useful information. In the end, a
> > > version of just this was indeed done, via update calls, extensions,
> etc.
> > > However, there was no direct insertion of such a mechanism. If we were
> ever
> > > to do that, I would argue that we do need then to inform any would-be
> > > downloader of the privacy issues.
> > >
> > > -louis
> > >
> > > PS Roberto asked me about the old data and if it a) was extant and b)
> > > reflected geolocation. Answers: It was not extant, and I didn't keep
> the
> > > raw data. (I could probably find it stuffed into some archive, but
> why? As
> > > I pointed out to Roberto, the ODF Alliance information regarding ODF
> uptake
> > > is actually a better indicator, as most ODF implementations they track
> were
> > > or are based on OOo.)
> > >
> > >
>
> Howdy Louis, Kay, Rob, et al
>
> I've certainly delayed this long enough, longer then my intent in fact.
>
> There is no real question that analytics are important, Google is likely
> the fastest and easiest road to acquiring them, I suppose.
>
> I'm glad that Louis added some historic view to the subject, it might be
> worth noting that in the case of the Omniture data gathering campaign
> individual site users could opt out.
>
> The real real question is access IMO, Louis also broached the subject of
> his employer when he uses the phrase, "the desires of corporate
> marketing". Historically of course, SUN or Oracle, the analytics where
> the purview of the corporate owner. With Apache OpenOffice there of
> course is no corporate owner, analytics are then a resource of the
> Apache Software Foundation and from this flows, I would say, to the
> (P)PMC.
>
>
Or the other way around. I'm not sure the ASF claims primacy over the PMC
in regards to data ownership.
> This distinction I would submit means that the full analytics are not
> available to any specific employer of someone volunteering their time to
> the communal effort within AOO.
>
>
Another way of saying this would be to agree that the information is
treated as sensitive and it is not shared beyond the PMC except by
agreement, e.g., via lazy consensus. This would include sharing with
employers, but also sharing with other open source projects, etc.
However, another way to look at that would be that the analytics are
> available to all PPMC members. Of course as Rob points out, with Google
> this requires access to a specific account, so it would make sense that
> individual PPMC would need to request full access.
>
>
This is similar to how we treated other external sites that are "related"
to the project. For example, the Ohloh page allows multiple "managers".
Anyone on the PPMC who is interested in helping manage it is welcome to
request access. Google+ allows multiple authors for an account. I hope we
can get that enabled as well. Although one individual may be the "manager
of record", they are doing it on behalf of the PMC.
> I just want to emphasize that whomever is maintaining the Google account
> is doing so as a steward for the entire Apache OpenOffice (P)PMC, at
> least this is how I see it.
>
>
That is how I understand it as well.
> Otherwise, it would make sense with regards to public access to not look
> much beyond what basic charting was available in the past, but to at
> least shot for building a system to deliver that.
>
> So, it seems everyone is ok with this and I certainly don't want to
> deter it anylonger - it's a +1 from me now.
>
>
So a question for Dave, then.
I have a privacy policy up, based on Jackrabbit's privacy policy. This has
the required statements for using Google Analytics:
http://www.openoffice.org/privacy.html
What is the best way to get a link to that added to the page bottom, where
we currently have "Copyright & License" and "Contact Us"? Is there anyway
to do this without forcing a complete site rebuild?
> @Rob - if I can help with generating reports, let me know.
>
>
If you (or anyone else on the PMC) wants access to the account, send me
your Google user ID, off list if desired.
-Rob
> //drew
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 10:40 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts <lu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > On 2012-03-23, at 12:03 , Kay Schenk wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 03/21/2012 07:23 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> > >> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
> > >>
> > >> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
> > >> geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
> > >> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
> > >> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
> > >> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
> > >>
> > >> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
> > >> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
> > >> most direct method.
> > >>
> > >> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
> > >>
> > >> -Rob
> > > This sounds fine with me. Yes, we should state our privacy policy on
> > use, and at some point, if you do produce a public report, maybe nix IP
> > addresses if that's a concern.
> >
> > I think nixing IP addresses is a necessity, if one were to publish this
> > data, as is informing the downloader of the privacy issues.
> >
> >
>
> This part is really easy, since Google Analytics does not provide us with
> IP addresses. It is giving us aggregate information, not per-user
> information.
>
> FWIW, we used to use several means to track downloads of the binaries. None
> > was particularly great and none satisfied the desires of corporate
> > marketing. And all made some in the corporate hierarchy uncomfortable, if
> > only because a download of a binary is hardly the same as a contribution to
> > source.
> >
> > We used Google Analytics but also, as was then called, Omniture. Selected
> > data were published in graphical form to the services wiki.
> >
> > In addition, more or less from the start, I published spreadsheets of
> > downloads, and particularized it according to language but not region. (I
> > also listed OS of version downloaded.) There were many problems to these
> > spreadsheets, as I noted at http://stats.openoffice.org/, not least of
> > which was spurious duplication and misleading numeration.
> >
> > What I always desired was a mechanism by which a successful download could
> > "call home", thus supplying rather useful information. In the end, a
> > version of just this was indeed done, via update calls, extensions, etc.
> > However, there was no direct insertion of such a mechanism. If we were ever
> > to do that, I would argue that we do need then to inform any would-be
> > downloader of the privacy issues.
> >
> > -louis
> >
> > PS Roberto asked me about the old data and if it a) was extant and b)
> > reflected geolocation. Answers: It was not extant, and I didn't keep the
> > raw data. (I could probably find it stuffed into some archive, but why? As
> > I pointed out to Roberto, the ODF Alliance information regarding ODF uptake
> > is actually a better indicator, as most ODF implementations they track were
> > or are based on OOo.)
> >
> >
Howdy Louis, Kay, Rob, et al
I've certainly delayed this long enough, longer then my intent in fact.
There is no real question that analytics are important, Google is likely
the fastest and easiest road to acquiring them, I suppose.
I'm glad that Louis added some historic view to the subject, it might be
worth noting that in the case of the Omniture data gathering campaign
individual site users could opt out.
The real real question is access IMO, Louis also broached the subject of
his employer when he uses the phrase, "the desires of corporate
marketing". Historically of course, SUN or Oracle, the analytics where
the purview of the corporate owner. With Apache OpenOffice there of
course is no corporate owner, analytics are then a resource of the
Apache Software Foundation and from this flows, I would say, to the
(P)PMC.
This distinction I would submit means that the full analytics are not
available to any specific employer of someone volunteering their time to
the communal effort within AOO.
However, another way to look at that would be that the analytics are
available to all PPMC members. Of course as Rob points out, with Google
this requires access to a specific account, so it would make sense that
individual PPMC would need to request full access.
I just want to emphasize that whomever is maintaining the Google account
is doing so as a steward for the entire Apache OpenOffice (P)PMC, at
least this is how I see it.
Otherwise, it would make sense with regards to public access to not look
much beyond what basic charting was available in the past, but to at
least shot for building a system to deliver that.
So, it seems everyone is ok with this and I certainly don't want to
deter it anylonger - it's a +1 from me now.
@Rob - if I can help with generating reports, let me know.
//drew
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts <lu...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 2012-03-23, at 12:03 , Kay Schenk wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On 03/21/2012 07:23 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> >> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
> >>
> >> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
> >> geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
> >> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
> >> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
> >> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
> >>
> >> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
> >> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
> >> most direct method.
> >>
> >> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
> >>
> >> -Rob
> > This sounds fine with me. Yes, we should state our privacy policy on
> use, and at some point, if you do produce a public report, maybe nix IP
> addresses if that's a concern.
>
> I think nixing IP addresses is a necessity, if one were to publish this
> data, as is informing the downloader of the privacy issues.
>
>
This part is really easy, since Google Analytics does not provide us with
IP addresses. It is giving us aggregate information, not per-user
information.
FWIW, we used to use several means to track downloads of the binaries. None
> was particularly great and none satisfied the desires of corporate
> marketing. And all made some in the corporate hierarchy uncomfortable, if
> only because a download of a binary is hardly the same as a contribution to
> source.
>
> We used Google Analytics but also, as was then called, Omniture. Selected
> data were published in graphical form to the services wiki.
>
> In addition, more or less from the start, I published spreadsheets of
> downloads, and particularized it according to language but not region. (I
> also listed OS of version downloaded.) There were many problems to these
> spreadsheets, as I noted at http://stats.openoffice.org/, not least of
> which was spurious duplication and misleading numeration.
>
> What I always desired was a mechanism by which a successful download could
> "call home", thus supplying rather useful information. In the end, a
> version of just this was indeed done, via update calls, extensions, etc.
> However, there was no direct insertion of such a mechanism. If we were ever
> to do that, I would argue that we do need then to inform any would-be
> downloader of the privacy issues.
>
> -louis
>
> PS Roberto asked me about the old data and if it a) was extant and b)
> reflected geolocation. Answers: It was not extant, and I didn't keep the
> raw data. (I could probably find it stuffed into some archive, but why? As
> I pointed out to Roberto, the ODF Alliance information regarding ODF uptake
> is actually a better indicator, as most ODF implementations they track were
> or are based on OOo.)
>
>
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by Louis Suárez-Potts <lu...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On 2012-03-23, at 12:03 , Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>
> On 03/21/2012 07:23 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
>>
>> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
>> geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
>> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
>> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
>> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
>>
>> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
>> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
>> most direct method.
>>
>> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
>>
>> -Rob
> This sounds fine with me. Yes, we should state our privacy policy on use, and at some point, if you do produce a public report, maybe nix IP addresses if that's a concern.
I think nixing IP addresses is a necessity, if one were to publish this data, as is informing the downloader of the privacy issues.
FWIW, we used to use several means to track downloads of the binaries. None was particularly great and none satisfied the desires of corporate marketing. And all made some in the corporate hierarchy uncomfortable, if only because a download of a binary is hardly the same as a contribution to source.
We used Google Analytics but also, as was then called, Omniture. Selected data were published in graphical form to the services wiki.
In addition, more or less from the start, I published spreadsheets of downloads, and particularized it according to language but not region. (I also listed OS of version downloaded.) There were many problems to these spreadsheets, as I noted at http://stats.openoffice.org/, not least of which was spurious duplication and misleading numeration.
What I always desired was a mechanism by which a successful download could "call home", thus supplying rather useful information. In the end, a version of just this was indeed done, via update calls, extensions, etc. However, there was no direct insertion of such a mechanism. If we were ever to do that, I would argue that we do need then to inform any would-be downloader of the privacy issues.
-louis
PS Roberto asked me about the old data and if it a) was extant and b) reflected geolocation. Answers: It was not extant, and I didn't keep the raw data. (I could probably find it stuffed into some archive, but why? As I pointed out to Roberto, the ODF Alliance information regarding ODF uptake is actually a better indicator, as most ODF implementations they track were or are based on OOo.)
Re: Google Analytics on download.openoffice.org
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 03/21/2012 07:23 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page.
>
> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the
> geographical distribution of download requests. This information has
> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide
> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose
> when moving off of MirrorBrain.
>
> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of
> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the
> most direct method.
>
> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc.
>
> -Rob
This sounds fine with me. Yes, we should state our privacy policy on
use, and at some point, if you do produce a public report, maybe nix IP
addresses if that's a concern.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Women and cats will do as they please,
and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea."
-- Robert Heinlein