Re: [tdf-discuss] Survey|Opinion - LibreOffice Install and Update

On 2010-10-09 5:23 PM, Scott Furry wrote:
> How do you expect LibreOffice to be updated?

I'll treat all questions as if you had asked not what I 'expect', but
what I would *like* to see...

Mac and Windows should have auto-updaters, Linux should have an
auto-updater available only when installed from source (if it is
practical), otherwise updates should be handled by the distros package
management system.

That said, if it isn't much trouble and doesn't take away from the LibO
developers resources, I see no reason that LibO couldn't offer up an
official repository for selected packages for the major distros.

> How do you Install/Update LibreOffice?

Download new version, uninstall old version, install new version.

I also install from a custom shortcut I have created that uses the
/msoreg=1 flag to force assign all of the file associations.

> What do you expect when Installing/Updating LibreOffice?

This should have been asked as two separate questions...

> What do you expect when Installing LibreOffice?

1. Please bring back the ability to associate Microsoft Office files
   in the GUI part of the installer

At install, I want to be able to select which file types to associate
with LibO. The installer should show what program they are currently
associated with, with a checkbox to associate them with LibO. The only
time that this checkbox should be automatically enabled by the installer
is if a) it is currently unassociated, or if it is associated with a
system app (ie, .doc files associated with wordpad).

This means at least 6 separate file associations (.doc, .docx, .xls,
.xlsx, .ppt, and .pptx). The template versions of these should
automatically be included (ie, .dot, .xlt, etc).

I'd like to see these able to be scripted, so I can have a network
installer set up to do silent installs with selected file associations
enabled.

2. Delete the unpacked installation files after successful install

3. Installer should always make *detailed* record of *everything* it
   does - files it put, where it put them, registry changes it made
   (for Windows), etc - this info to be used for repairing an existing
   install, or just uninstalling (should return the system to the state
   it was in prior to installing LibO - including but not limited to
   restoring any/all file associations, etc to their original state
   they were in prior to installing LibO

> What do you expect when Updating LibreOffice?

1. For Windows/Mac/Source-based Linux installs, I'd really like to
   see an incremental auto-updater with options to 'notify only',
   'download+notify', 'download+prompt-to-install+restart LibO', or
   'download+silent-install+restart LibO'

Restarting LibO after an applied update should *always* save all unsaved
work in open documents - probably safer to handle this part first before
applying update in case there is a problem auto-closing+saving anything.

2. LibO sorely needs a File Association Manager/Repair utility

 a) This utility should be a separate 'wizard' like utility that can
    only be run when the user who tries to run it has Admin/root
    privileges

 b) Since it is only dealing with File Associations, its operation
    should be extremely fast - ie, much faster than a repair install

 c) It should be capable of changing/repairing all file associations
    LibO is capable of handling, as well as repair any permission
    problems, including registry permission problems, a problem I
    have personally experienced more than once

3. As I said above, for *nix installs done using the systems package
   manager should use the package manager for updates as well. LibO
   documentation for package managers should make it loud and clear
   that the auto-updater function should be disabled in their packages
   (is there a way to force this?)

> Other programs have separate updating programs (iTunes being an
> example), if it was technically feasible, would having a separate
> install program for LibreOffice (with updating features) be useful to you?

Whether or not the auto-updater is a separate executable file is
irrelevant, but no, it should not be a separate 'program' that needs to
be installed separately, it should be integrated into the LibO core
code. It should be intelligent, meaning, it should know when it has the
correct permissions it needs to be able to successfully run, and under
what circumstances it should be enabled - ie, it needs both admin/root
permissions *and* (in the case of *nix) it should have been installed
from source (although I'm not sure how easy/reliably this could be
detected).

> Would having a download and update site, as well as a Unix|Linux package
> repository site, be of value to you?

Depends on how it was implemented... but if implemented similar to the
Windows Update site, yes, that might be an interesting option. It would
need to be able to reliably detect the visitors OS, the current
installed version, and whether or not the visitor is currently logged on
with the same credentials it was installed with (ie, if it will be able
to successfully update itself with the current logged on user
credentials)... but it seems like a lot of/too much work, unless it was
*instead* of the auto-updater.

So, that's my .02 clad coins worth...

-- 

Best regards,

Charles

-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+help@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/