On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Andy Singleton <andy_at_assembla.com> wrote:
> áThe proposed links are not duplicates.
If that is true, then I do not object.
When I looked at your page before, it seemed that it was linking
directly to WanDisco for the downloads. Are you saying that they are
making special client-only downloads for this page only? The files
being downloaded are not the same ones they already have links for?
That was not clear to me if that is the case. I have not installed
their downloads so do not know how it is packaged.
> 90% of users by count will want the client only,
I have 4+ years of download data that say that is not true. Did it
ever occur to you that as a SVN hosting provider the people you work
with would be more inclined to want a client than a server? Anyway,
it is irrelevant. We obviously want downloads for both client and
server on our page. If you only want to provide a client that is
totally fine with me.
> As an aside, users are also going to want update information for other
> clients, not just clients from Apache + one sponsoring vendor. The 1.7
> upgrade changes the working copy and requires that users upgrade all of the
> clients that act on one repository. áIdeally, they shouldn't need to hunt
> around for all the new versions. áIt's all part of the upgrade experience.
> An alternative is to negotiate with Collabnet and WANdisco to get an
> improved 1.7 upgrade experience. áI also pursued that route, but it is a
> slow process. áI determined that it would be more effective to gather
> together the client-only packages with proper attribution.
I do not know what you are talking about here so hard to comment. I
can say the project lives here and here alone. if you have
suggestions about the upgrade experience this is the one and only
place to talk about it.
Received on 2011-12-02 15:36:02 CET