New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Handling MSDN data source shutdown, potentially using VS subscription data #1

mauricew opened this Issue Sep 23, 2018 · 0 comments


None yet
1 participant

mauricew commented Sep 23, 2018

People visiting the site may have noticed that there's not many updates in the past few months. That's because even though the winding down of the "MSDN" brand has been in place for 2 years, the MSDN data itself had still been accessible through Microsoft up until June/July 2018.
With the next version of Windows 10 being released soon (and beyond), it may be a good idea to continue the project to use this new data source. However, the data provided by MSDN was more robust in its organization (e.g. overall product categories, no double-nesting of product families, no duplication of multi-arch files, etc.) and may not fit in well with how the site works currently

Since the MSDN portal is now 100% gone there are two options:

  1. Leave the site as-is and keep the project in maintenance mode
    This would mean that not much work would continue on it, but would still continue to host my version of it for the foreseeable future.
    If this happens, I would want to have a way to export the data currently on the site so others can use it.

  2. Work on a way to import the VS Subscription data to allow new products to be posted
    This would be preferable for those who use it as a reference for the latest releases.
    However, if this were to be done there should ideally be ways to interlink the old and new data to make things familiar with the MSDN categorization structure. This could be difficult if the IDs and/or product names used between the portals were highly different.
    If this were done and the data couldn't interlink, then the site would have to section itself off into two parts, and it could be more confusing then keeping it as-is with no updates.

I'd like to hear a few opinions on what people want to see - if I have time to go with option 2 that would be great, but even if option 1 is selected I would be ok with forks that work on this addition.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment