Add sponsor attributions and architecture descriptions to downloads page

[MarkEWaite]

Describe your use-case which is not covered by existing documentation.

A friend of Jenkins from JFrog has asked that we add an attribution section to the downloads page to note that we are using JFrog Artifactory as the artifact repository for the Jenkins project and that it is donated by JFrog.

Reference any relevant documentation, other materials or issues/pull requests that can be used for inspiration.

JFrog isn't the download source for the files linked on that page, but it is the host of authoritative Jenkins artifacts used by Jenkins developers. I think that we should also add an attribution to that page for the organizations that host the mirrors that serve the downloads for files referenced on the page.

The artifacts that are downloaded from that page are not downloaded from Artifactory. Donated mirrors spread around the world provide those artifacts. Donors include Oregon State University Open Source Lab (two servers in the U.S.), XMission (U.S.), Tsinghua University (China), Servana (Singapore), Yamagata University (Japan), Belnet (Belgium), and Aachen University (Germany). When a new release of Jenkins core is pushed to Artifactory, we push a copy of the new release to a separate archive server donated by DigitalOcean (https://archives.jenkins.io/) and to two other mirrors that are donated by the Oregon State University Open Source Laboratory. The other mirrors around the world grab their copies from one of those mirrors using the rsync protocol. Download sites are assigned by the https://get.jenkins.io/ service based on the geographic location of the IP address that makes the request. The mirrorbits service hosted by Jenkins infrastructure is used for https://get.jenkins.io/

I think that we should display the logos of our download sponsors on that page. When we begin using Cloudflare R2 to host the content from https://updates.jenkins.io , we should place an attribution for Cloudflare at the bottom of the https://updates.jenkins.io page as well.

[dduportal]

Note (as part of today's meeting): also add DigitalOcean (archives.jenkins.io)

[basil]

Should GitHub be included as well? They seem analogous to JFrog in the sense that although users do not download directly from them, they provide a repository hosting service that is part of the production hosting pipeline. The only difference is that unlike JFrog, they provide a source repository hosting service rather than a binary repository hosting service. I could, however, see the argument that the downloads page should only mention sponsors of binary artifacts.

[basil]

Perhaps we should create a dedicated top-level sponsors page listing all sponsors (public clouds, JFrog, GitHub, Atlassian, Linux Foundation, and all other sponsors) like https://adoptium.net/sponsors/ and leave https://www.jenkins.io/download/ free of sponsorship information. This raises the question of whether part of the motivation behind this request is to be featured on the download page in particular (presumably because of its popularity) or just to be featured on the site in general. My sense is that while it may be appropriate to list some sponsors on the download page (i.e., the ones that have a clear relationship to downloads), it may not be appropriate to list every single sponsor on the download page. Even the JFrog sponsorship is of questionable relevance to the download page, as indicated earlier in this thread:

JFrog isn't the download source for the files linked on that page, but it is the host of authoritative Jenkins artifacts used by Jenkins developers.

Based on this reasoning, my initial preference would be for us to create a dedicated sponsors page and to leave https://www.jenkins.io/download/ free of sponsorship information. If sponsor information is also required on the download page, then I think we should clearly define the criteria for inclusion on the download page, which should have some direct relationship to downloads.

[MarkEWaite]

I like the idea of a dedicated sponsors page like the Eclipse Adoptium Working Group provides. We could structure it similar to their sponsor page with levels that correspond roughly to the membership levels in the Continuous Delivery Foundation.

I think that we should also include sponsors at end of specific pages like the downloads page and the root page. I agree that we need to define the criteria for inclusion on those pages. For the downloads page, I think the criteria should be "provides binary downloads". For the root page, I think that the criteria to have an image should be "provides value to the Jenkins project comparable to a CDF premier membership". I think that the criteria for a link on the root page should be "provides value to the Jenkins project comparable to a CDF general membership".