Re: Proposal to shutdown pgFoundry

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 10:18, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?C=E9dric_Villemain?= <cedric(dot)villemain(dot)debian(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> 2011/5/25 Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>:
>>> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> wrote:
>>>> The proposal was to put up a static copy.  That hardly has any security
>>>> issues, I think.
>
>>> Actually generating a static copy may be a non-trivial amount of work
>>> though. It's easy enough to spider the site and store it as a static
>>> HTML, but we'd also need to ensure we remove any links or forms to
>>> non-static features of course.
>
>> I believe we don't care :)
>> We can just add a disclaimer at top of each page : "this site is only
>> for archive, do not expect each link to work. Thank you."
>
> Or, just replace the server with something that serves out the same
> static page for any pgfoundry URL: "pgfoundry has been retired.  Please
> see <list of useful resources> to search for the new location of the
> project you are looking for."
>
> The main point in my mind is that we'll never get rid of all the
> references to pgfoundry.  Having those URLs go 404 will not look good
> nor be helpful to visitors.

I think the reasonable thing is a combination.

For a number of the high-profile, high-traffic projects (like odbc for
example), we can specifically put in a forward. Or maybe a
project-specific page telling the visitor to update their bookmarks.

For the rest, a generic page along the line of what Tom suggests
should be enough.

Just 404'ing things is mean :-)

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/