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

Þann þri 23.nóv 2010 02:17, skrifaði Michael Wheatland:
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Robert Holtzman<>  wrote:
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 10:31:58PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 02:28:54PM -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
open to learning a *few* new things, it is extremely user friendly.
There is, however, a segment of the population that actively resists
learning *anything*.

And that's a problem.

I would say that's *the* problem.
Bob Holtzman

The message does not seem to be getting through here.
Simply: This type of personal criticism is unacceptable in the
LibreOffice community.

Maybe this can serve as a warning; we should carefully hurry to put up more specialised communication channels (avoiding group isolation but still minimizing similar clashes). I see the argument made by Rene as somewhat valid - but only in a certain context. Which it is not on the [tdf-discuss] list but might be on an [tdf-devel-discuss] list (although some manners could be useful).

It's quite surreal to see some power users/developers not seeing or refusing to see that the whole concept of the software in question IS a big metaphor: Office. And its users are using GUIs and other metaphors for handling the software; for even the most capable of them the CLI is at best scary.

As a translation coordinator of LibO/OOo and other things, I can confirm that the best translators are not necessarily capable of learning basic command-line commands. They want an easy way to see their translations in action. And the sysadmins I've been working with are normally too overloaded to remember upgrading manually the LibO/OOo packages on their systems (my language is not yet in the official distribution channels). They want their software to come through official and reliable repositories. So it took about 30 minutes of searching and fiddling to create a Packages.gz file and publishing the packages as our localised .deb repository. Think it's similar for other flavors like yum .rpm. Still I'd like a primary metapackage so we could install/deinstall ONE package instead of the whole bunch.

Anyway, I presume LibO will not be distributed this way in the future, 'dpkg -i *.deb' or 'rpm -ivh *.rpm' will be reserved for testing/development/adventurous people. Linux users will get their LibreOffice through their package managers, probably via distribution specific repositories. I think I saw another thread a while ago where it was discussed whether LibreOffice should maintain their own repo. Maybe one for testing/QA/translations would be useful.

Just my 2 centimes,

Sveinn í Felli

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


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.