Apache ODF Toolkit migration

Board Discuss
#1

hello TDF folks,
hello ODF Toolkit community,

i'm writing here as a Committer (fwiw) of the Apache ODF Toolkit (incubating) project.

it turns out the ASF has voted to rename the Apache ODF Toolkit (incubating) project to Apache ODF Toolkit (retired).

https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/d4b4b33470a7bc3e70dc6192527168bb5907810045df5453c784cc93@<odf-dev.incubator.apache.org>

https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201811.mbox/<CA61FCD0-FF43-4E4A-BC30-5A942AE53B86@comcast.net>

the ODF Toolkit project is important for the ODF ecosystem in general and for LibreOffice in particular, since it contains not only the ODFDOM Java library, but also the most accurate ODF Validator, which we use in the LibreOffice test suite to check the ODF export filter.

so i'll propose to migrate the ODF Toolkit to The Document Foundation.

this is my (probably incomplete) understanding of the various different parts of the project that need some action:

1. git: the repository of record is on GitHub, and will be changed to
    read-only by the ASF:

    https://github.com/apache/odftoolkit

    the obvious options are:
    a) move the git repository to gerrit.libreoffice.org
    b) fork the GitHub project and continue hosting on GitHub

    In any case, we should have a redirect from the old incubator project
    to the new sources (perhaps a big red notice in README will be
    enough?).

2. the web site, in SVN (will also be changed to read-only):

    https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/odf/site/

    the SVN repo contains some MarkDown files that are converted to
    static HTML by some mysterious ASF-grown tool (Svante claims that
    Perl scripts that rewrite references and a custom CMS are involved
    somehow) that doesn't talk to anything other than the ASF SVN server
    and which nobody in the ODF Toolkit project understands.

    presumably there should be a way to preserve the (relatively small
    and simple) content of the repo to either Wiki markup, or something
    that some other MarkDown-to-HTML tool can understand; volunteers are
    certainly welcome to help with this.

    for a quick start it could also be an option to scrape the existing
    HTML from http://incubator.apache.org/odftoolkit/ and replace the
    internal URLs for consistency...

3. the domain "odftoolkit.org" - this currently redirects to
    "http://incubator.apache.org/odftoolkit/"

    this domain would need to be transferred from ASF to TDF before it
    expires.

    (i don't know whether other domains related to ODF Toolkit exist;
    apparently "odftoolkit.com" was registered at some time but it's
    already expired/for sale)

4. mailing list: the "odf-dev@incubator.apache.org" will be retired;
    probably the amount of traffic is going to be quite small, hence
    suggest to just use "libreoffice@freedesktop.org" for now; if the
    traffic increases and becomes a problem a dedicated list can be
    set up later.

5. currently the ASF JIRA is used as bug tracker, with project
    "ODFTOOLKIT":

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ODFTOOLKIT-479?jql=project%20%3D%20ODFTOOLKIT

    there are currently 137 issues that are neither RESOLVED nor CLOSED.

    so there are 2 decisions to be made here:

    a) do we want a new component in "bugs.documentfoundation.org"
       Bugzilla,
       or use GitHub issues (only makes sense if GitHub is used for the
       repo, of course)

    b) should open issues be migrated? as long as they will be accessible
       read-only in ASF JIRA (and i don't see any reason why not), i
       don't see much value in it, since there aren't currently
       developers available with time to fix the issues; if anybody feels
       strongly about their issue they can re-create/copy it over
       manually.

another point that we should probably discuss after the migration is finished is whether the so-called "Simple API" should be removed from ODFDOM due to being duplicative and unmaintained for years.

regards,
  michael

PS: thanks to Svante for proofreading this, if any errors remain it's my fault

#2

Hi Michael,

  First - thanks for working on this, (and Svante too) - it looks
positive overall.

so i'll propose to migrate the ODF Toolkit to The Document Foundation.

  Seems like something the BoD should vote on, In general, subject to the
marketing concerns at the end, it seems like a good idea to me. I assume
there are no current contributors to be upset either way.

  From a licensing / contributor / compliance perspective - I'd expect
this to be adapted to fit with our existing policies & practice.

  Then some other random preferences that I'm not deeply wedded.

the obvious options are:
   a) move the git repository to gerrit.libreoffice.org

  Sounds sensible.

2. the web site, in SVN (will also be changed to read-only):

https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/odf/site/

the SVN repo contains some MarkDown files that are converted to

...

presumably there should be a way to preserve the (relatively small
   and simple) content of the repo to either Wiki markup, or something
   that some other MarkDown-to-HTML tool can understand; volunteers are
   certainly welcome to help with this.

  Sounds sensible - what is the scale of the problem: how many lines/tags
of markdown ?

3. the domain "odftoolkit.org" - this currently redirects to
   "http://incubator.apache.org/odftoolkit/"

this domain would need to be transferred from ASF to TDF before it
   expires.

  Sounds sensible, if the ASF is willing of course.

4. mailing list: the "odf-dev@incubator.apache.org" will be retired;
   probably the amount of traffic is going to be quite small, hence
   suggest to just use "libreoffice@freedesktop.org" for now; if the
   traffic increases and becomes a problem a dedicated list can be
   set up later.

  Sounds great.

5. currently the ASF JIRA is used as bug tracker, with project
   "ODFTOOLKIT":

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ODFTOOLKIT-479?jql=project%20%3D%20ODFTOOLKIT

there are currently 137 issues that are neither RESOLVED nor CLOSED.

so there are 2 decisions to be made here:

a) do we want a new component in "bugs.documentfoundation.org"
      Bugzilla,

  I'd say yes; but Xisco should make the call.

b) should open issues be migrated? as long as they will be accessible
      read-only in ASF JIRA (and i don't see any reason why not), i
      don't see much value in it, since there aren't currently
      developers available with time to fix the issues; if anybody feels
      strongly about their issue they can re-create/copy it over
      manually.

  Sounds very sensible.

another point that we should probably discuss after the migration is
finished is whether the so-called "Simple API" should be removed from
ODFDOM due to being duplicative and unmaintained for years.

  I like the idea of immediately sub-setting this - so if people want to
come along and resurrect the full project they can do so at Apache -
while we continue to maintain the bits that we need.

  I am slightly wary of how the LibreOffice / TDF support could be used
in a marketing context around whatever new stuff goes into odf-dom. I'm
not eager for this to become a distraction to our core mission around
LibreOffice.

  As such I think we should scope and frame this as "We are hosting and
maintaining a validation tool we use, while we use it" - rather than
creating an expectation that we're going to start a significant
evangelism effort around investing in, promoting, and improving a
Java-based ODF DOM implementation. Does that fit with your goal ?

  That may sound an odd request =) however there have been innumerable
proposals in the past by well meaning, but not terribly technically
competent people to "Re-write LibreOffice based on an ODF DOM" - and I
want to stop that (damaging) hot-air before it re-starts - it has the
potential to be quite harmful to our credibility.

  From a marketing perspective we should probably continue to emphasize
that LibreOffice has no Java dependency - and that this is not going to
change.

  Anyhow; I support the proposal, thanks Michael - waiting for other BoD
members' input.

  ATB,

    Michael.

#3

Hi *,

Michael Meeks wrote:

> so i'll propose to migrate the ODF Toolkit to The Document Foundation.

  Seems like something the BoD should vote on, In general, subject to the
marketing concerns at the end, it seems like a good idea to me. I assume
there are no current contributors to be upset either way.

Indeed, very supportive of that idea. I'd be quite happy if the ASF
would formally agree handing this over to TDF.

The functionality the code provides is rather important to the ODF
ecosystem, and LibreOffice in particular. Being able to maintain it
(if only occasionally), and having an official upstream that is not
read-only is crucial at least to me.

  From a licensing / contributor / compliance perspective - I'd expect
this to be adapted to fit with our existing policies & practice.

Yes. Though I think that is a 2nd or a 3rd step, after consensus has
emerged if/where to host this project (assuming that whoever commits
to hosting it, can then set policies).

  I like the idea of immediately sub-setting this - so if people want to
come along and resurrect the full project they can do so at Apache -
while we continue to maintain the bits that we need.

Agreed.

  As such I think we should scope and frame this as "We are hosting and
maintaining a validation tool we use, while we use it" - rather than
creating an expectation that we're going to start a significant
evangelism effort around investing in, promoting, and improving a
Java-based ODF DOM implementation. Does that fit with your goal ?

???

That is certainly nothing someone would want to do over here. But
perhaps worth stating the obvious. :wink:

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

#4

Hi!

Michael Meeks wrote:

so i’ll propose to migrate the ODF Toolkit to The Document Foundation.

Seems like something the BoD should vote on, In general, subject to the
marketing concerns at the end, it seems like a good idea to me. I assume
there are no current contributors to be upset either way.

Indeed, very supportive of that idea. I’d be quite happy if the ASF
would formally agree handing this over to TDF.

I agree. I would be very pleased for TDF to host this as a service, and would prefer that it happened with the co-operation of the ASF.

S.

#5

Hi *,

2. the web site, in SVN (will also be changed to read-only):

   https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/odf/site/

   the SVN repo contains some MarkDown files that are converted to

...

   presumably there should be a way to preserve the (relatively small
   and simple) content of the repo to either Wiki markup, or somethin

g

   that some other MarkDown-to-HTML tool can understand; volunteers a

re

   certainly welcome to help with this.

  Sounds sensible - what is the scale of the problem: how many lines/ta

gs

of markdown ?

there are converters (see
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/9824489/any-markdown-to-wikimarkup-c
onverter-available
) so especially pandoc.

I offer the help for the MWiki migration. :wink:

Best regards,

Dennis Roczek

#6

thanks Simon, Michael, Thorsten for the support!

i suppose we should wait for a formal decision of the TDF board before proceeding with the migration.

#7

hi Dennis,

2. the web site, in SVN (will also be changed to read-only):

    https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/odf/site/

    the SVN repo contains some MarkDown files that are converted to

...

    presumably there should be a way to preserve the (relatively small
    and simple) content of the repo to either Wiki markup, or something
    that some other MarkDown-to-HTML tool can understand; volunteers are
    certainly welcome to help with this.

Sounds sensible - what is the scale of the problem: how many lines/tags
of markdown ?

so most of the SVN repo is binary releases, and generated JavaDoc documentation.

there are 10570 lines worth of files with ".mdtext" suffix.

there are converters (see
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/9824489/any-markdown-to-wikimarkup-converter-available
) so especially pandoc.

sounds promising.

I offer the help for the MWiki migration. :wink:

thanks for the offer, much appreciated :slight_smile:

to maintain, except perhaps for the release download page.

regards,
  michael

#8

Dear board,

as the discussion seems to have calmed down, and also folks over at
Apache seem to be supportive - let me call a vote:

* TDF to formally offer the ASF to take over the ODF Toolkit project
* by copying the existing github repo (minus perhaps the simple API)
* taking the existing markdown documentation & website, and on a best-effort
  basis either importing that into MediaWiki, or keeping a static HTML
  copy available
* offer to take over ownership of the odftoolkit.org domain

Vote is open for the usual 72h.

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

#9

+1

    Michael.

#10

As they say at Apache, +1

S.

#11

Hi all,

as the discussion seems to have calmed down, and also folks over at
Apache seem to be supportive - let me call a vote:

* TDF to formally offer the ASF to take over the ODF Toolkit project
* by copying the existing github repo (minus perhaps the simple API)
* taking the existing markdown documentation & website, and on a best-effort
  basis either importing that into MediaWiki, or keeping a static HTML
  copy available
* offer to take over ownership of the odftoolkit.org domain

Supporting this - thanks for the initiative, michael

Cor

#12

Hi,

Thorsten Behrens <thb@documentfoundation.org> 於 2018年12月1日 週六 01:05寫道：

Dear board,

as the discussion seems to have calmed down, and also folks over at
Apache seem to be supportive - let me call a vote:

  • TDF to formally offer the ASF to take over the ODF Toolkit project
  • by copying the existing github repo (minus perhaps the simple API)
  • taking the existing markdown documentation & website, and on a best-effort
    basis either importing that into MediaWiki, or keeping a static HTML
    copy available
  • offer to take over ownership of the odftoolkit.org domain

Vote is open for the usual 72h.

Cheers,

– Thorsten

Absolutely support. +1.

Regards, Franklin

#13

Hi all,

Dear board,

as the discussion seems to have calmed down, and also folks over at
Apache seem to be supportive - let me call a vote:

* TDF to formally offer the ASF to take over the ODF Toolkit project
* by copying the existing github repo (minus perhaps the simple API)
* taking the existing markdown documentation & website, and on a best-effort
  basis either importing that into MediaWiki, or keeping a static HTML
  copy available
* offer to take over ownership of the odftoolkit.org domain

Vote is open for the usual 72h.

I approve the proposal.

ATB,
Marina

#14

Hi,
I support this great initiative.
–Osvaldo

#15

Hi Thorsten,

* TDF to formally offer the ASF to take over the ODF Toolkit project
* by copying the existing github repo (minus perhaps the simple API)
* taking the existing markdown documentation & website, and on a best-effort
  basis either importing that into MediaWiki, or keeping a static HTML
  copy available
* offer to take over ownership of the odftoolkit.org domain

Vote is open for the usual 72h.

Too late :wink: but yes.

  Eike

#16

I wrote:

as the discussion seems to have calmed down, and also folks over at
Apache seem to be supportive - let me call a vote:

* TDF to formally offer the ASF to take over the ODF Toolkit project
* by copying the existing github repo (minus perhaps the simple API)
* taking the existing markdown documentation & website, and on a best-effort
  basis either importing that into MediaWiki, or keeping a static HTML
  copy available
* offer to take over ownership of the odftoolkit.org domain

And of course +1 from me.

Best,

-- Thorsten

#17

Hello,

The Board of Directors at the time of voting consists of 7 seat
holders without deputies. In order to be quorate, the vote needs to
have 1/2 of the Board of Directors members, which gives 4.

A total of 6 Board of Directors members have participated in the vote.
The vote is quorate.

A quorum could be reached with a simple majority of 4 votes.

Result of vote: unanimous approval
Decision: The request has been accepted.

This message is to be archived by the BoD members and their deputies.

I wrote:

Impressum (Legal Info) | Datenschutzerklärung (Privacy Policy)   Content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 license.