Re: [tdf-discuss] Automatic Updates

Totally agree on an diff-update mechanism through
distribution package managers. (See more below)

Þann fös  8.okt 2010 06:37, skrifaði Eric Hoch:
> Hi Scott,
> Am Thu, 07 Oct 2010 17:49:48 -0600 schrieb Scott Furry:
> >   On 07/10/10 05:00 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
> > > On 2010-10-07 6:05 PM, Scott Furry wrote:
> > > >    On 07/10/10 03:04 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
>
> > > > > Maybe what is needed is some simple communication to the major
> > > > > distros to see what form would be best. I cannot imagine this
> > > > > would be that difficult - they should all be able to work with
> > > > > standard tarballs and do whatever is needed on their end to make it

> > > > > work.
> > > > Not all of them. Case in point is the person who put together the
> > > > Debian packages (Nikola Yanev - great work BTW :D ). There are other
s
> > > > out there in the community. It would be great if they (and their
> > > > skills) could be be brought together allowing for a one-stop-downloa
d
> > > > location of packages for the different OS distributions.
> > > >
> > > > This would then be considered the "upstream repository" from which
> > > > the various OS distribution teams could then mirror/pull down LibO
> > > > for distribution to users of that OS.
>
> +1 This is a really good idea and some from german community were
> and are still working on getting the major distro package
> maintainers of OOo to one table and according to Mechtilde she had
> quite some success during FrosCon or was it OOoCon?
>
> > > I do not think that LibO should be in the business of providing
> > > individual distro packages - let the distro package managers do that.
It
> > > will free up lots of developer resources to focus on programming, not

> > > building/providing packages.
>
> Agreed.

Anyway LibO needs to build its own distribution packages;
milestones for testing, langpacks etc. Many translators and
testers do not know how to compile from source. So far OOo
testing packages have been slightly different from the final
'distro-patched' ones (not using native dialogs etc).
I think its never going to be viable to distribute those
testing packages through the distro channels, mostly due to
time constraints.

> Most, if not all, of the major distributions build the packages
> from source. Mostly because they add additional patches to either
> remove functions that don't match their policies and/or are
> possibly patent protected, are not 100% legal, not 100% free in the
> way the distribution understands it, etc.

Correct, and in enterprise environment there may also be
additional patches/branding.

Being an OOo/LibO translator, I'd love if such an update
mechanism would take into account the 'normal' workflow in
development of the software. Very simplified progress below:

- devs plot their new exploits ;-)
- devs+translators work towards milestones -> testing*
- devs+translators work towards a release -> testing*
 ---release---
 (everyone dumps their OOo/LibO issued packages for the
distro versions)
- devs work on bugfixes -> security/bugfix upgrades
- translators work on l10n-fixes -> language upgrades**

* would be nice if those testing packages could be upgraded
by diff instead of pulling the whole install, many testers
have bandwidth restrictions.

** post-release language upgrades should be scheduled quite
soon after release (say 3 weeks + 4 months later), there's
always some errors that slip through and user feedback is
always most active just after a release. Such upgrades
should be tiny diffs.

Other things mentioned in this thread have been informative,
I'm not going to comment on the one-user-setup vs
system-wide, your mileage may vary...

Just thoughts,

Sveinn í Felli

--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscribe@documentfoundation.org
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted.
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/