Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2010 Archives by date, by thread · List index

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

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
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
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.
will free up lots of developer resources to focus on programming, not

building/providing packages.


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*
 (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
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted.
List archives are available at


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.