399 lines
27 KiB
Plaintext
399 lines
27 KiB
Plaintext
19:59:45 <dg> str4d: thoughts wrt IPv6 in mtg?
|
||
20:01:00 <str4d> Bring it up if you want. I know there are real issues that are holding that back, but it could be a good idea to verify what they currently are.
|
||
20:01:03 <str4d> I'll also be bringing up the website revamp.
|
||
20:01:14 <dg> Sweet.
|
||
20:01:22 <str4d> (So poke that in somewhere ^_^)
|
||
20:01:33 <dg> Will do :)
|
||
20:01:36 <dg> We'll put crypto last, if at all
|
||
20:01:44 <dg> I don't want to kill the movement but I don't know where we are going wit hit
|
||
20:01:55 <dg> I don't know enough about it to try .. push for it
|
||
20:05:01 <str4d> Yeah, last is a good idea, as long as the earlier sections of the meeting stay on track.
|
||
20:05:28 <str4d> And we already are in a much better place - the crypto review page has some interesting data (provided by "guest" so I have no idea who ^_^)
|
||
20:05:41 <dg> I was thinkign about that
|
||
20:14:16 <str4d> dg: ain't it meeting time now?
|
||
20:14:48 <dg> oh yeah
|
||
20:14:55 <dg> okay then
|
||
20:14:58 <darrob> i was going to ask that. i'm confused to see you *plan* a meeting at 08:05.
|
||
20:15:36 <dg> the agenda today is:
|
||
20:15:36 <dg> (0) - Hi!
|
||
20:15:36 <dg> (1) - Primary domain
|
||
20:15:36 <dg> (2) - IPv6 progress, blockers
|
||
20:15:39 <dg> (3) - Site revamp
|
||
20:15:42 <dg> (4) - Crypto
|
||
20:15:57 <dg> didn't realize the time
|
||
20:16:20 * str4d sends a CTCP TIME message to dg
|
||
20:16:34 * str4d watches it bounce off the I2P IRC tunnel.
|
||
20:16:41 <hottuna> Hello everybody!
|
||
20:16:48 <str4d> Hi!
|
||
20:16:55 <dg> We'll start off then?
|
||
20:17:25 <dg> So, (1) - primary domain
|
||
20:17:28 <dg> (also, hi)
|
||
20:17:46 <dg> The current primary domain (used in most places) is i2p2.de
|
||
20:17:49 <dg> There's a few problems with it
|
||
20:17:53 <str4d> www.i2p2.de
|
||
20:18:00 <str4d> (not i2p2.de)
|
||
20:18:00 <dg> (1) - It's not attractive or memorable.
|
||
20:18:11 <dg> (2) - SEO issues due to the country based TLD
|
||
20:18:29 <dg> (3) - Conflicts with other domains (we use geti2p.net on stickers, for example)
|
||
20:19:03 <eche|on> I do use www.i2p2.de on I2P stickers
|
||
20:19:06 <hottuna> (3) was my fault, it's just a more memorable domain
|
||
20:19:13 <dg> I'm proposing we use geti2p.net for all matters from now on but keep the old sites up with a redirect or some SEO magic to tell sites that we've moved without a full redirect
|
||
20:19:16 <str4d> (2) isn't a direct problem for Google at least.
|
||
20:19:54 <dg> i2p2.net is the better out of the pick though, there's ones like i2p-projekt.de that IMHO are too obscure for project usage
|
||
20:20:01 <dg> geti2p.net is kind of motivational too
|
||
20:20:16 <str4d> Their support page on geolocation says that geotargeting doesn't specifically affect page rank unless the search is limited by country.
|
||
20:20:40 <str4d> But then they also say that they use the geotargeting along with a heap of other things they look at to decide on regionalization.
|
||
20:20:43 <hottuna> I prefer geti2p.net, but I think we would need to have an official vote to change it
|
||
20:20:49 <KillYourTV> iRelay: web title i2p2.net
|
||
20:20:52 <dg> I concur, hottuna
|
||
20:20:55 <iRelay> Home - Contractor Safety Program Manuals - Downloadable and Turn-Key Custom-Written
|
||
20:21:23 <dg> i2p.net would be ideal, simple & the original domain but we can't have that for years. No promise we'll get it when it expires, either.
|
||
20:21:34 * KillYourTV was curious what was there, typo or not
|
||
20:22:01 <str4d> What about i2p.com and i2p.org?
|
||
20:22:16 <str4d> (Or one of the other generic TLDs?
|
||
20:22:16 <str4d> )
|
||
20:22:35 <str4d> Were they long-time registered?
|
||
20:23:10 <dg> Believe so. AFAIK, we were lucky to get .net when the project started but I'm not sure.
|
||
20:23:10 <eche|on> 1. i2p.net is registered til 2016 and will be grabbed by some machines after wards
|
||
20:23:21 <eche|on> 2. do NOT change the domain again. Thats a pain in the ass. really.
|
||
20:23:39 <eche|on> user credability is not to be raised with a domain change
|
||
20:23:42 <dg> It's not going to be an emergency change this time.
|
||
20:23:50 <dg> We already have 5 or so domains floating about
|
||
20:23:57 <eche|on> it was a looong 3 year phase to get www.i2p2.de into the game after i2p.net was dead
|
||
20:24:08 <str4d> eche|on: that's because you didn't have access to i2p.net
|
||
20:24:15 <dg> totally different circumstances
|
||
20:24:27 <dg> (and a totally different process)
|
||
20:24:30 <str4d> With access to both the old and new domains, either leave the content at the old one, or (better) do a 301 redirect.
|
||
20:24:45 <dg> it's not like we're recovering from such a major blow this time, just changing the default domain we refer to
|
||
20:25:50 <zzz> Back in the day, com/net/org were the best. But not true now, plus the whole issue of the U.S. can and does shut those down as they please. You really want to go back to a .net?
|
||
20:26:24 <dg> It's not like the U.S. can't get .de. If keeping things safe was as simple as being foreign, we wouldn't need I2P.
|
||
20:26:49 <hottuna> i2p.{aero|af|ag|ai|am|asia|bz|cat|cm|coop|cx|gg|gr|gs|gy.|hk|hn|ht|im|io|je|ki|la|lc|li|lt|lv|me|mg|mn|ms|mx|name|nf|nu|pt|re|tel|tv} are available
|
||
20:27:07 <dg> the "2" makes it unclean which bugs me
|
||
20:27:26 <dg> hottuna: i2p.io sounds groovy
|
||
20:27:41 <eche|on> I want i2p.xxx
|
||
20:27:44 <hottuna> the 2 is nonsensical for any newbie
|
||
20:28:11 <str4d> i2p.coop
|
||
20:28:14 <dg> I believe in the CCC talk, the guy speaking actually called i2p "i2p2"
|
||
20:28:17 <str4d> i2p.coup? ^_^
|
||
20:28:18 <christoph3> the list gets probably a lot shorter by removing inacceptably expensive domains ;-)
|
||
20:28:24 <zzz> dg you're greatly underestimating the difference in US-shutdown-ability of .de vs .net
|
||
20:28:24 <dg> "to i2p or not to i2p" (or something)
|
||
20:28:55 <str4d> zzz: i2p.net is out of the question anyway =)
|
||
20:29:09 <dg> zzz: really? I'm not so sure. If the US wanted it down, they could surely exercise their US-shutdown-abilities.
|
||
20:29:09 <hottuna> zzz, agreed. Also a valid point.
|
||
20:29:24 <dg> str4d: but geti2p.net is the alternative I proposed at least, so I guess he is referring to that
|
||
20:29:27 <hottuna> until now only us domestic domains have been taken down
|
||
20:29:57 <eche|on> even .at domains were not taken down though being spam and virus spreading domains
|
||
20:30:17 <christoph3> zzz is probably not talking about worst-case where the US really really really wants to shut it down
|
||
20:30:28 <christoph3> but just would like to
|
||
20:30:31 <str4d> Since this was started off by geotargeting issues: what are the actual generic TLDs?
|
||
20:30:31 <dg> Pretty sure if the US started shouting it was terrorist related, it could be taken down too
|
||
20:31:12 <hottuna> how are .org domains controlled?
|
||
20:31:12 <str4d> Ooh, just found a list.
|
||
20:31:12 <eche|on> str4d: a lot of them,also including some local russian, asian, chinese... one
|
||
20:31:19 <str4d> https://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1347922
|
||
20:31:34 <str4d> Google treats all of those ^ as gTLDs.
|
||
20:31:38 <eche|on> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-Level-Domain
|
||
20:31:41 <iRelay> Title: Top-Level-Domain – Wikipedia (at de.wikipedia.org)
|
||
20:31:49 <christoph3> .org was verizon just like .com and .net wasn't it?
|
||
20:31:52 <eche|on> i2p.int would be nice.
|
||
20:31:59 <eche|on> and it would be possible.
|
||
20:32:18 <eche|on> or a .nato?
|
||
20:33:05 <hottuna> int sounds nice, but is controlled by IANA which is us government
|
||
20:33:27 <str4d> hottuna: aren't all TLDs eventually controlled by IANA?
|
||
20:33:46 <str4d> (excluding the new raft of TLDs that companies are allowed to buy now)
|
||
20:34:04 <dg> new proposal: we buy .i2p
|
||
20:34:11 <hottuna> more or less directly? .int being directly?
|
||
20:34:11 <hottuna> :P
|
||
20:34:14 <hottuna> i2p.i2p?
|
||
20:34:21 <dg> project.i2p
|
||
20:34:36 <dg> download.i2p
|
||
20:34:39 <darrob> hottuna: obviously the main page would have to be www.i2p2.i2p. :)
|
||
20:34:54 <hottuna> :P
|
||
20:35:12 <str4d> But I just went to all this effort of double-tagging the entire website revamp >_<
|
||
20:35:59 <hottuna> str4d, I did some translations. About 70k words left though.
|
||
20:37:10 <str4d> There were about 70k words to start with =P
|
||
20:37:13 <darrob> how immediate is this US shutdown threat though? instead of worrying about it we could just wait and see. worst case: we'd have to go piratebay-crazy with proxies and media attention and all.
|
||
20:37:36 <eche|on> so far it is a no brainer, as tor is still alive.
|
||
20:37:47 <dg> oh. yeah. Tor, of course.
|
||
20:38:19 <darrob> dg: go on?
|
||
20:38:38 <hottuna> realistically we will still have the mirrors, so a specific tld being lost isnt much of an issue
|
||
20:38:53 <dg> darrob: about Tor??
|
||
20:38:56 <dg> darrob: as for the discussion, I think we're still talking
|
||
20:39:03 <dg> So, do we want to put this down to a vote?
|
||
20:39:18 <dg> If so, what would be the options?
|
||
20:39:18 <dg> (and when?)
|
||
20:39:22 <hottuna> i would like geti2p.net to be an option
|
||
20:39:28 <dg> We could do it now if you guys wanted, I don't know if we have enough people
|
||
20:39:35 <KillYourTV> +1 for new TLD. Often they're a steal at $185,000 for registration then $6,250 each quarter. Surely we have enough funds available for that.
|
||
20:39:35 <hottuna> next meeting?
|
||
20:39:50 <dg> Hell yeah!
|
||
20:39:53 <dg> hottuna: sure
|
||
20:39:53 <hottuna> and announce it on the forums
|
||
20:39:53 <darrob> dg: sorry, never mind. your tor comment was not clear to me but it's irrelevant now.
|
||
20:40:04 <eche|on> KillYourTV: ^^ oerfect solution, but hosting is another topic.
|
||
20:40:35 <hottuna> would anyone like to propose a change to a domain other than geti2p.net?
|
||
20:40:38 <darrob> KillYourTV: we'd just need to sell our bitcoins at the right time.
|
||
20:41:00 <dg> hottuna: I have none but then again, I don't know the other ones we have.
|
||
20:41:55 <str4d> i2p.io sounded quite good, but .io is still country-specific
|
||
20:42:42 <dg> ideal world: we would have i2p.org
|
||
20:43:34 <hottuna> ok, then we have 2 alternatives. i2p.io and geti2p.net
|
||
20:43:45 <str4d> i2p.int?
|
||
20:43:48 <str4d> i2p.info?
|
||
20:43:56 <str4d> i2p.jobs =P
|
||
20:43:59 <dg> is i2p.info available?
|
||
20:44:18 <dg> i2p.transformers?
|
||
20:44:30 <eche|on> i2p.onion
|
||
20:44:45 <hottuna> i2p.info is taken
|
||
20:45:00 <str4d> i2p.co - that's a country one that is treated (by Google at least) as generic.
|
||
20:45:23 <hottuna> i2p.co is taken
|
||
20:45:30 <str4d> i2p.me?
|
||
20:45:37 <dg> i2p.me is cool.
|
||
20:45:58 <str4d> (another gccTLD)
|
||
20:46:09 <darrob> and cool is gimmicky if i may say so. i'd rather see i2p2.org or something.
|
||
20:46:09 <hottuna> suggestions: i2p.io i2p.int i2p.me geti2p.net
|
||
20:46:28 <dg> I want to drop the "2".
|
||
20:46:31 <str4d> darrob: I'd rather see i2p.something
|
||
20:46:53 <str4d> Why wasn't i2p.de chosen originally? Taken?
|
||
20:47:01 <str4d> s/originally/at the time/
|
||
20:47:04 <iRelay> str4d meant: Why wasn't i2p.de chosen at the time? Taken?
|
||
20:47:12 <hottuna> i2p2.org taken
|
||
20:47:16 <hottuna> i2p.de taken
|
||
20:47:31 <str4d> Mmm.
|
||
20:47:50 <KillYourTV> i2p.ispent185000dollarsandalligotwasthisstupidtld
|
||
20:48:00 <str4d> I agree that we don't want something gimmicky.
|
||
20:48:07 <str4d> It needs to make sense.
|
||
20:48:22 <dg> cool == workable in this context
|
||
20:48:24 <dg> (too)
|
||
20:49:13 <hottuna> i2p.int is available btw
|
||
20:50:52 <hottuna> dg, will you add i2p.io i2p.int i2p.me geti2p.net to the alternatives of the vote?
|
||
20:51:18 <dg> hottuna: Yup. Making a note of it now.
|
||
20:51:27 <hottuna> danke
|
||
20:54:10 <str4d> Anything else here, or next topic dg?
|
||
20:54:40 <dg> was writing up the topic
|
||
20:54:40 <dg> yeah, next
|
||
20:54:43 <dg> Alright, IPv6!
|
||
20:54:53 <dg> From what I understand, welt* was working on this and then.. ??? happened
|
||
20:55:04 <dg> I don't know the blanks, maybe someone can fill them in
|
||
20:55:21 <dg> There's a bounty right now for IPv6 support in I2P
|
||
20:55:42 <dg> It's 100 EUR
|
||
20:55:45 <hottuna> http://zzz.i2p/topics/109
|
||
20:55:48 <dg> http://www.i2p2.i2p/bounty_ipv6
|
||
20:55:55 <iRelay> Title: zzz.i2p: IPV6 TODO (at zzz.i2p)
|
||
20:55:56 <iRelay> Title: Bounty I2P IPv6 native - I2P (at www.i2p2.i2p)
|
||
20:56:04 <dg> I think after/alongside the crypto doup, this is important
|
||
20:56:43 <dg> I could do with zzz or welt*
|
||
20:56:57 <dg> It'd be fantastic if welt* took it up again
|
||
20:59:01 <dg> Meeh is seemingly OK with helping
|
||
20:59:12 <dg> If zzz is going to, he needs SSH
|
||
20:59:42 <Meeh> I can provide zzz with SSH
|
||
20:59:45 <Meeh> to a dev server
|
||
21:00:09 <Meeh> we should also start using mailing lists now that it's up :)
|
||
21:00:20 * dg nods
|
||
21:00:44 <dg> I'm not aware of mailing list etiquette but I can start posting there
|
||
21:00:51 * dg crickets
|
||
21:01:54 <str4d> Meeh: is it I2P-internal as well, or should we use @i2pmail.org?
|
||
21:02:17 <dg> i2p-internal I assumed but..
|
||
21:02:20 <Meeh> @i2pmail.org for now... haven't figured out howto bring it inside i2p yet
|
||
21:03:16 <str4d> Meeh: you'd need some sort of rewriting. Maybe talk to postman?
|
||
21:03:36 <Meeh> yepp, I will
|
||
21:04:34 <dg> Should we move on or wait?
|
||
21:04:49 <str4d> Back to IPv6, zzz provided a nice summary in the dev forum post
|
||
21:05:20 <str4d> It sounds like the next step is to compare and contrast the three possible options.
|
||
21:05:43 <str4d> Do we want to do that here/now? In the dev thread? On a Trac wiki page like the crypto one?
|
||
21:06:17 <dg> Trac, I say
|
||
21:06:52 <Meeh> dg, str4d :
|
||
21:06:52 <Meeh> 22:05:27 <postman> if the mailinglist server resides in the internet
|
||
21:06:52 <Meeh> 22:05:40 <postman> all people use their @i2pmail.org adress for signup
|
||
21:06:52 <Meeh> 22:06:14 <postman> teh mails will be automatically rewritten when transferred to / from internet
|
||
21:06:52 <Meeh> and i2p
|
||
21:07:34 <Meeh> 22:07:02 <postman> ( i think it would be best to have a ml server public)
|
||
21:07:56 <Meeh> 22:07:16 <postman> so people without mail.i2p adresses can subscribe
|
||
21:08:12 <Meeh> so I suggest current setup, since many that's not on i2p can join the list
|
||
21:08:37 <str4d> Meeh: alright.
|
||
21:08:54 <dg> <+dg> Should we move on or wait?
|
||
21:08:54 <str4d> Oh, and also, if the domain name changes, what happens to the list email?
|
||
21:09:04 <dg> CNAME the MX?
|
||
21:09:14 <str4d> Ah, true.
|
||
21:09:25 <str4d> dg: move on, I think. I don't think we are going to have in-depth IPv6 discussions today,.
|
||
21:09:40 <dg> Yeah.. seems that way. I'm dubious about crypto too? :|
|
||
21:09:51 <dg> Okay, website revamp!
|
||
21:10:07 <dg> str4d has been chugging away at tagging and eliminatin the blockers
|
||
21:10:14 <dg> I think we're getting closer to being able to put it live
|
||
21:10:17 * dg hands mic to str4d
|
||
21:10:50 <str4d> Okay, the site is edging closer and closer to being ready.
|
||
21:11:02 <str4d> I've nearly tagged the entirety of docs/
|
||
21:11:36 <str4d> I'm just working on docs/spec/* now, and then docs/discussion/* (though I'm not sure if that one is needed?)
|
||
21:12:03 <str4d> docs/spec/ is somewhat hard to fully tag though, as there is a lot of <pre>-formatted stuff which translating will just break.
|
||
21:12:36 <str4d> URL-wise, aside from docs/spec/* and docs/discussion/* the entire site should have working URLs.
|
||
21:12:51 <str4d> If someone wants to test that (manually or automated) that would be good.
|
||
21:13:37 <str4d> Structurally, I don't think there is much more needed for the site - can anyone think of anything?
|
||
21:14:55 <hottuna> No
|
||
21:15:06 <hottuna> and if flaws are found they can be fixed
|
||
21:15:24 <dg> I don't think there's any.. let alone critical
|
||
21:15:31 <str4d> Design-wise, I'm still not entirely happy, but that's not critical.
|
||
21:15:53 <str4d> The mobile CSS I added *does* have flaws, but it is far easier to use/read than the desktop CSS.
|
||
21:16:27 <str4d> So I think the only thing left is to wait for the translations to start coming in.
|
||
21:17:10 <str4d> (I'd like to at least have some of the main pages translated before launch, so that Google doesn't think I'm lying to it in the sitemap.xml)
|
||
21:19:52 <str4d> And here's an idea: If/when we decide on a new domain, we launch the new site there, so we can test it live, and then inform Google/users via 301 redirect that the new site is the new domain?
|
||
21:21:03 <hottuna> the translation is a very big job
|
||
21:21:03 <hottuna> one that will take a lot of time
|
||
21:21:03 <hottuna> why not update sitemap.xml when translations are available?
|
||
21:22:56 <str4d> hottuna: the sitemap is somewhat recursively generated.
|
||
21:22:59 <hottuna> Would that be better?
|
||
21:23:02 <hottuna> ok
|
||
21:23:28 <str4d> It's to do with the whole reflang thing that Google requires.
|
||
21:23:51 <str4d> Every page in the sitemap has to list as a lang link every other language page, including itself.
|
||
21:24:06 <str4d> And that has to be repeated for each lang variant of a page.
|
||
21:24:25 <str4d> I've already split it up into a /sitemapindex.xml and /lang/sitemap.xml pages.
|
||
21:24:41 <dg> Would Google really care?
|
||
21:24:41 <hottuna> but we're always going to lack translations for some languages?
|
||
21:24:45 <str4d> But we also have a Language dropdown, which Google is going to find.
|
||
21:25:23 <str4d> hottuna: the list of Languages on the revamp is taken from the current site - there are partial translations for all of them.
|
||
21:25:26 <str4d> dg: no idea really.
|
||
21:25:59 <dg> It could take a long time to get us translations
|
||
21:26:06 <str4d> The sitemap language thing is there so that Google doesn't use the pages themselves to determine language (as in that case, every language variant would be called "English" currently)
|
||
21:26:33 <str4d> Hmm... I'll go check whether Google defers to the sitemap entirely, or if it still uses its own observations.
|
||
21:26:39 <str4d> I could just be needlessly worrying.
|
||
21:26:47 <hottuna> dg: I think it will, historically that has been the case for most languages.
|
||
21:27:02 <hottuna> maybe str4d, but ultimately this is your call
|
||
21:27:06 <str4d> And if having "lang-specific" pages which aren't translated isn't going to affect our pagerank, then it's not a blocker.
|
||
21:29:44 <dg> Hm, ok
|
||
21:31:22 * dg waits
|
||
21:32:56 <str4d> Okay, just did some reading, and it looks like Google defers to the sitemap
|
||
21:33:25 <str4d> Since one usage is translating only the template of the page, and leaving the content in a single language (like forum posts).
|
||
21:33:44 <str4d> So, translations are not a blocker, and can be updated as we go.
|
||
21:33:51 <str4d> In which case, the site could go live, now.
|
||
21:33:51 <dg> Any other bugs?
|
||
21:33:58 <dg> Oh. Sweet.
|
||
21:34:01 <str4d> (Well, now + time it takes to check all remaining URLs)
|
||
21:34:04 <dg> Anyone got any views on putting it live?
|
||
21:37:48 <hottuna> alright. if now is an option, i would vote for now
|
||
21:37:59 <dg> me too
|
||
21:38:34 <str4d> Putting it live requires some help from whoever is running the server (welterde IIRC)
|
||
21:38:45 <str4d> And the mirrors.
|
||
21:39:20 <hottuna> alright, at next sighting of the welterde/weltende, let's ask?
|
||
21:39:34 <str4d> Propagating back to i2p.www is simple. But the server ops need to run the setup script and then configure their WSGI setup to use the virtualenv.
|
||
21:40:15 * str4d will prop i2p.www onto the revamp now so that merges etc. can be handled now.
|
||
21:42:53 <dg> Huzzah
|
||
21:43:12 <hottuna> Yep
|
||
21:46:43 <str4d> Okay, so that's the revamp done. dg?
|
||
21:46:50 <dg> str4d: Yup.
|
||
21:47:21 <dg> I was avoiding moving on
|
||
21:47:22 <dg> due to the IPv6 discussion (or lack of..)
|
||
21:47:25 <dg> Wanna call it a night?
|
||
21:47:25 <dg> I think it's the best choice
|
||
21:47:33 <hottuna> Sure
|
||
21:47:59 <str4d> Yeah, 1.75 hours can be enough for today
|
||
21:48:10 <dg> Heh.
|
||
21:48:10 <dg> Alright,
|
||
21:48:13 * dg bamfs the meeting closed
|
||
21:49:21 <dg> http://zzz.i2p/topics/1343
|
||
21:49:28 <iRelay> Title: zzz.i2p: Meeting [6th February] (at zzz.i2p)
|
||
21:50:31 <hottuna> the next meeting is the 12/2 not 6/2
|
||
21:50:42 <hottuna> wut
|
||
21:50:42 <hottuna> ok
|
||
21:50:49 <hottuna> or am I confused
|
||
21:51:47 <dg> my mistake
|
||
21:52:10 <dg> ;_;
|
||
21:55:01 <iRelay> <str4d@freenode> ping weltende
|
||
23:39:54 <zzz> um, was it just me, or did the meeting totally skip the final decision that changing our URL was definitely a good idea?
|
||
23:40:30 <zzz> I saw some pros and cons on changing and then 'lets post a vote for which new one to pick'
|
||
23:40:50 <iRelay> <jenkins@kytv> Project Syndie HSQLDB2 build #9:SUCCESS in 15 sec: http://eotfca7qexthbireor6ae7g4hbj5hwuhe4gkzxdx3l3g2t5gzn7q.b32.i2p/job/Syndie%20HSQLDB2/9/
|
||
23:41:54 <zzz> nor did I see anybody volunteer to do all the work req'd to implement such a change
|
||
23:45:25 <zzz> or is the (unstated) plan to vote on the best name first, and only then decide whether to do it and how?
|
||
23:45:29 <zzz> ^^ dg
|
||
23:45:55 <dg> Correct, sorry if it wasn't clear
|
||
23:46:03 <dg> I'll outline more next time
|
||
23:46:49 <zzz> might be me, I was just skimming.
|
||
23:46:55 <zzz> so was there a decision made or not?
|
||
23:47:37 <dg> We're having a vote next week
|
||
23:48:03 <zzz> a vote on what? whether to change, or what to change it to?
|
||
23:48:33 <dg> What to change it to
|
||
23:48:56 <zzz> so was there a decision made or not on whether to change it at all?
|
||
23:48:59 <dg> We could certainly have people abstain though
|
||
23:49:06 <dg> which would be a "no change"
|
||
23:49:42 <dg> We were in agreement that a change would be nice but unable to agree on what *to*
|
||
23:49:52 <zzz> is the decision to change at all a) already made or b) deferred until after the vote?
|
||
23:50:14 <dg> b)
|
||
23:50:54 <zzz> that wasnt clear to me either from the mtg or from http://zzz.i2p/topics/1343
|
||
23:51:01 <iRelay> Title: zzz.i2p: Meeting [12th February] (at zzz.i2p)
|
||
23:51:18 <str4d> zzz: What I gathered is that, of the people present at the meeting, the majority were for a change.
|
||
23:51:25 <zzz> and to me, imho "would be nice" is far far short of "it's definitely a good idea AND we have volunteers to do the work"
|
||
23:51:28 <str4d> But, not all relevant people were at the meeting.
|
||
23:51:38 <dg> (e.g. you)
|
||
23:52:04 <dg> welt wasn't there either, I may be forgetting someone but was anyone else missing?
|
||
23:52:37 <zzz> sure, I was in and out, my bad. But my review of the logs is the pros were saying 'would be nice' and the cons had significant objections.
|
||
23:53:04 <str4d> zzz: I don't recall significant objections. Care to elaborate?
|
||
23:53:07 <zzz> but dg says it hasn't been decided yet,
|
||
23:53:25 <str4d> The only major one was eche's about linkage loss, but that is easily solved with a 301 redirect
|
||
23:53:28 <dg> The big one was from ech, saying it would cause big issues
|
||
23:53:31 <dg> and that was't true
|
||
23:53:45 <dg> s/was't true/debunked
|
||
23:53:52 <str4d> (So can't really be fairly compared to the i2p.net -> i2p2.de migration, which *was* an issue)
|
||
23:53:58 <zzz> <eche|on> 2. do NOT change the domain again. Thats a pain in the ass. really.
|
||
23:53:58 <zzz> <eche|on> user credability is not to be raised with a domain change
|
||
23:54:09 <zzz> there's the US-controlled issue I raised
|
||
23:54:19 <zzz> there's the amount of work required, which nobody raised
|
||
23:54:30 <str4d> "pain-in-the-ass" was referring to above.
|
||
23:54:46 <dg> There's links on the main site (how much of that can be done with regex?), some in the source code (same again?)
|
||
23:54:46 <dg> What else?
|
||
23:54:53 <zzz> there's the SEO issue, which you apparently think is managable, but I'm not so sure
|
||
23:55:16 <str4d> User credability - that is rather wishy-washy and IMHO changing from i2p2.* to i2p.* is going to make it easier for users.
|
||
23:55:16 <zzz> there's links in our docs and code
|
||
23:55:35 <str4d> Links on the site are all relative, so no issues there.
|
||
23:55:35 <dg> s/http://www.i2p2.de/http://geti2p.net/
|
||
23:55:38 <iRelay> Title: Not found - I2P (at www.i2p2.de)
|
||
23:55:38 <dg> s/http://www.i2p2.de/http://geti2p.net/g
|
||
23:55:41 <iRelay> Title: Not found - I2P (at www.i2p2.de)
|
||
23:55:50 <str4d> Docs and code and SEO - again, a 301 redirect solves all that.
|
||
23:56:05 <dg> 301 is perm redirect, yeah?
|
||
23:56:08 <str4d> (The docs and code of course should be updated, but the links would not break)
|
||
23:56:11 <str4d> Yes.
|
||
23:56:21 <dg> If so, I'd assume that's what it was created for - that kind of thing anyway.
|
||
23:56:21 <str4d> It's what the revamp has for all the old page locaions
|
||
23:56:24 <zzz> if it's not decided yet, (and dg says it isn't) then we can talk about it next week. my reading from the logs and zzz post was that it was decided, but apparently not
|
||
23:56:42 <str4d> e.g. /debian.html --[301]--> /en/download/debian
|
||
23:56:57 <str4d> zzz: yep, not decided yet, this was just getting the ball rolling.
|
||
23:57:04 <zzz> ok
|
||
23:57:19 <zzz> also a lot of this requires welt's tme which is in short supply
|
||
23:57:24 <str4d> Nothing is going to happen without informed consensus.
|
||
23:57:44 <zzz> ok great. guess I misread the logs
|
||
23:57:55 <str4d> Yeah, which is why I'd like to sort out the revamp and push it live at the same time.
|
||
23:58:29 <str4d> Or rather, I'll keep on working on site stuff and whenever welt turns up we can push it live.
|
||
23:59:15 <dg> I'll edit the post to make it clear
|
||
23:59:18 <zzz> maybe. trying to change 6 things at once increases the risk too. I'd recommend incrementalism
|
||
00:00:16 <zzz> also beware of becoming overly google-focused as there are other search engines too, who may behave differently
|
||
00:00:31 <zzz> or at least more slowly
|
||
00:00:34 <str4d> zzz: mmm, which is why I suggested putting the revamp on the "new" url to test it.
|
||
00:00:42 <str4d> And then apply the 301.
|
||
00:00:53 <str4d> (Assuming the url is changed)
|
||
00:01:30 <str4d> Yeah, I'll do some checking up of other search engines, but Google seems to use reasonably standard technology (e.g. the sitemap stuff)
|
||
00:02:05 * str4d is currently checking and fixing old/broken URLs.
|
||
00:03:24 <dg> Edited my post. http://zzz.i2p/topics/1343
|
||
00:03:31 <iRelay> Title: zzz.i2p: Meeting [12th February] (at zzz.i2p)
|
||
00:05:36 * dg waits for ech to come back
|
||
00:05:43 <dg> That'll be tomorrow, right?
|
||
00:08:17 <zzz> re: incrementalism, e.g. you may wish to consider using 302s for a few days on the live site until you're sure it's all good before switching to 301s, as you really don't want to mess up 301s
|
||
00:08:28 <str4d> Mmm, yep.
|
||
00:08:40 <str4d> Do you mean for the legacy pages as well?
|
||
00:09:16 <zzz> maybe. something to think about
|
||
00:09:43 <str4d> I'm pretty sure all the old pages are good (I manually checked most of them)
|
||
00:09:53 <dg> As for domains, https://twitter.com/i2p/status/298485275053666304 - I can't be the only one who thinks that's messy
|
||
00:10:00 <str4d> But probably worth checking again at some stage.
|
||
00:10:28 <dg> str4d: No reply from zab.
|
||
00:12:36 <iRelay> <jenkins@kytv> Starting build #43 for job Cobertura Coverage Reports
|
||
00:13:41 <zzz> not saying it's a bad idea to switch (and if we do, geti2p.net is the only choice). Just that we do it purposefully if we do. You made a proposal and held discussion but never called for a decision, or even identified how or when a decision would be made.
|
||
00:14:59 <dg> <+hottuna> I prefer geti2p.net, but I think we would need to have an official vote to change it
|
||
00:15:02 <dg> <+dg> I concur, hottuna
|
||
00:15:13 <dg> only geti2p.net?
|
||
00:15:20 <dg> So fuck the vote and just have a y/n?
|
||
00:15:27 <dg> that's fine but tell me now :p
|
||
00:16:10 <zzz> so the vote to change it and the vote on what to change it to got conflated
|
||
00:17:01 <zzz> "only choice" just imho
|
||
00:17:12 <dg> Everyone attending was up for changing it (ech was the only one who disagreed and he.. went quiet.. I don't know what that means, no?) so I skipped that step
|
||
00:20:04 <zzz> well, run the meeting how you want, but not sure you want to discount people who only object once, especially if you don't have an obvious call for the end of discussion and a decision
|
||
00:20:13 <dg> no, i see your opint
|
||
00:20:16 <dg> point*
|
||
00:20:26 <dg> i do need to outline things more
|