Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

I don't want to take this response to either ooo-dev or tdf-discuss.

I think your compromise is an interesting one, but I don't think it is 
feasible.  There are political issues and technical issues.

The technical issue is having a different URL that accesses the same pages be 
served back as if they are all at that URL, but without any other change of 
content.  As soon as an absolute URL is followed within the forums, that is 
going to be the URL in the response.

(Redirection doesn't work for the reasons I just gave.  Framing doesn't work 
for lots of reasons. I tried that until I switched to add-on domains on a LAMP 
hosting service.)

If the served content is to be changed (top banners, page footers, custom 
content in addition to that) there is far more server load and the problem 
that the service will be hosted by Apache and any terms of service will be 
those by the ASF.  And ASF would have to operate it and have acceptable-to-it 
site administrators, forum administrators, etc.

There is where the political and governance issues collide - OOo Marketing, 
TDF concern about being captive, ASF concern about the integrity of sites they 
operate, and the issues of degrees of distrust among the respective 
communities.  From the TDF side alone, consider the antipathy to questions on 
Microsoft Office - document interchange and the hostility to 
Lotus Symphony issues being addressed.

The anguish over the iCLA and PPMC oversight that the Forums 
team just went through would be nothing compared to what it would take to 
allow separate governance over a TDF-facing aspect of the Forums.  Of course, 
that anguish was a tempest in a teapot.  I notice that no one has been 
disturbed about it since the cut-over succeeded, mostly because the PPMC has 
far more critical matters for its attention.

I favor how you are looking for compromise solutions, but multiple branding of 
the same site is perhaps not going to work.

It would be useful to discuss this with the current Forum 
operators if you have not already.  I am not sure how they would react to this 
prospect.  And they might have some insight that others have not noticed.

Cordiali saluti,

 - Dennis E. Hamilton
   tools for document interoperability,  <>  gsm: +1-206-779-9430  @orcmid

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrea Pescetti []
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2011 03:18
Subject: Re: [tdf-discuss] user forums ?

Cor Nouws wrote:
Andrea Pescetti wrote (05-11-11 13:02)
when it comes to user support the people
involved are much more pragmatic
That would be my expectation too. And then 'people involved', I would
read as those with questions, answers and with moderation tasks.

Yes, that was my understanding.

But I'd still give a thought if we can't really avoid the massive
duplication of effort and, through simple DNS tweaking, offer the same
forum under the two adresses and ...
Sounds as an interesting idea. Then both could redirect to say (just to give it a name now) which
should have a look that is more neutral and serving both.

You don't need a third "neutral" URL: people accessing through would always just see that URL, exactly as
it happens now with and (which are totally equivalent, and if you
use one you don't notice that the other one exists). And branding can be
adapted too, and possibly made dependent on the URL. But technology is
really easy in this case: the main issue, as I wrote, is political.


Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.