On 2010-10-17 10:05 PM, Paul A Norman wrote:
Re early discussion on Wondpws install and unpacked install files...
Would they need to be present for the Windows Control Panel/ Add
remove Programs/ Support Info -
- Repair button to work?
Yes. This is why I always store these on a shared
Re early discussion on Wondpws install and unpacked install files...
Would they need to be present for the Windows Control Panel/ Add
remove Programs/ Support Info -
- Repair button to work?
Paul
--
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to
unsubscribe
List
On 10/08/2010 10:50 PM, Marc Paré wrote:
You are probably right there too. It wouldn't hurt though to try it and
see what kind of response the LibO community got from such a service.
Maybe from a dependencies point of view it would be too hard to manage
still. IMHO, it would be nice if the LibO
Hi Todd,
Am Tue, 12 Oct 2010 16:27:47 -0400 schrieb todd rme:
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Eric Hoch eric_openoff...@gmx.de wrote:
Hi Todd,
Am Tue, 12 Oct 2010 13:14:49 -0400 schrieb todd rme:
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Charles Marcus
cmar...@media-brokers.com wrote:
On 2010-10-10
On 2010-10-12 4:27 PM, todd rme wrote:
So yes, they are less than the core components, but I wouldn't say
they are insignificant. You could cut out about 40% of the download
size if you just wanted some of the smaller components.
But they are designed to work together, and as has been
Hi Todd, Scott,
Am Sun, 10 Oct 2010 00:48:23 -0400 schrieb todd rme:
On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 9:35 PM, Marc Paré m...@marcpare.com wrote:
Le 2010-10-09 16:50, Scott Furry a écrit :
On 09/10/10 02:11 PM, Marc Paré wrote:
snip
I agree, direction from the whole community on this, now that we
Le 2010-10-12 02:32, Eric Hoch a écrit :
Hi Todd, Scott,
Am Sun, 10 Oct 2010 00:48:23 -0400 schrieb todd rme:
There is another, somewhat independent issue that has occurred to me.
What about how the components are split up? The issues are somewhat
different for windows and mac than they are
On 2010-10-10 12:48 AM, todd rme wrote:
There is another, somewhat independent issue that has occurred to me.
What about how the components are split up? The issues are somewhat
different for windows and mac than they are for linux.
The bottom line reality is, they are not split up now, and
On 2010-10-12 1:14 PM, todd rme wrote:
In a sense, they are split up. In Linux most distributions seem to
split them up, at least all the ones I have used do, and in windows it
is possible to only install the components you want. I have never
tried it on Mac so I don't know for certain.
The
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Eric Hoch eric_openoff...@gmx.de wrote:
Hi Todd,
Am Tue, 12 Oct 2010 13:14:49 -0400 schrieb todd rme:
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Charles Marcus
cmar...@media-brokers.com wrote:
On 2010-10-10 12:48 AM, todd rme wrote:
There is another, somewhat
In data venerdì 08 ottobre 2010 23:15:18, todd rme ha scritto:
Is the opendesktop.org type proposal for the entire program, or just for
the extensions, dictionaries, galleries, extensions, language packs,
grammar checkers, and other addons?
I am suggestion it be used for add-ons only.
On 09/10/10 10:48 PM, todd rme wrote:
There is another, somewhat independent issue that has occurred to me.
What about how the components are split up? The issues are somewhat
different for windows and mac than they are for linux.
For windows and mac, if someone, for instance, only wants a
On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 1:50 AM, Marc Paré m...@marcpare.com wrote:
KDE does not offer binaries as a rule. There are Mandriva binaries on
the KDE ftp server, but that is the only distribution that has
binaries on the KDE server. Further, I do not think that those are
actually produced by KDE
On 10/09/2010 06:23 PM, Scott Furry wrote:
And as suggested by the Go-OO site, the rationale for distribution was
to avoid some of the politics and interpretations of open source that
can occur. Packaging to me just makes sense.
+1
The current version of Thunderbird that is available in the
On 09/10/10 02:11 PM, Marc Paré wrote:
snip
I agree, direction from the whole community on this, now that we have
hashed it out a bit, would give clearer direction of expectations.
snip
This could then be put to the community as a new thread and the
results could be monitored/taken into note
2010/10/9 Scott Furry scott.wl.fu...@gmail.com:
And IMO that is the point. Distributions will only incorporate into the
releases what /they feel/ is appropriate.
And is that wrong? If you want the last on your computer as soon as
possible, then you need to change to a rolling release distro...
Le 2010-10-09 16:50, Scott Furry a écrit :
On 09/10/10 02:11 PM, Marc Paré wrote:
snip
I agree, direction from the whole community on this, now that we have
hashed it out a bit, would give clearer direction of expectations.
snip
This could then be put to the community as a new thread and the
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
Per Eriksson wrote:
Do we have skilled people here who are interested in beginning with
this effort, and maybe start planning for this feature?
I've always been interested in pushing things like this forward ;-)
Hi Per,
let me Cc two MSI packaging experts to comment on patchability
On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 09:23 +0200, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
Per Eriksson wrote:
Do we have skilled people here who are interested in beginning with
this effort, and maybe start planning for this feature?
I've always been interested in pushing things like this forward ;-)
Hi Per,
Hi
Am Fri, 8 Oct 2010 00:18:19 +0700 schrieb Nguyen Vu Hung:
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 4:27 AM, Michele Zarri m.za...@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/10/10 22:21, Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 14:21 -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2010-10-06 2:06 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Yes there
Hello all,
I'm thinking the its time to dig out of the weeds/details and make this
a more meaningful discussion for everyone.
I'll do my best to avoid excessive verbiage, as well as keep the my
soap box stances to a minimum.
Charles M (the Original Poster - OP) thought that a better install
On 8.10.2010 9:23, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
Per Eriksson wrote:
Do we have skilled people here who are interested in beginning with
this effort, and maybe start planning for this feature?
I've always been interested in pushing things like this forward ;-)
Hi Per,
let me Cc two MSI
On 2010-10-07 7:49 PM, Scott Furry wrote:
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:
I have seen an ActiveX plugin installed in Firefox (which I promptly
removed).
There was only one *3rd party* effort
On 2010-10-08 3:23 AM, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
Per Eriksson wrote:
Do we have skilled people here who are interested in beginning
with this effort, and maybe start planning for this feature?
I've always been interested in pushing things like this forward
;-)
let me Cc two MSI packaging
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 4:05 AM, Scott Furry scott.wl.fu...@gmail.com wrote:
- Package Maintainers (I like 'specialists' but let's use the term people
recognize) can build and distribute both installs and updates to different
OS users. We are respecting the OS and working on the OS in a way with
Charles Marcus wrote:
2. one use case that may occur more often than you think - those power
users that install from source, thus totally bypassing their package
management system.
Hi Charles,
users installing from source don't need no update management at all
- they can just git pull
2010/10/8 Marc Paré m...@marcpare.com:
So just to simplify it for those who are like me and who do not realize t
he
process behind the opendesktop.org update system (I'll use KDE4.5.X as an
example): *** please correct these if I am wrong ***
If you want to update your wallpaper, you can
As todd rme has suggested, there exists automated packaging tools. I
had not run across that in my readings. I don't use openSUSE, but good
to know.
My original suggestions regarding a separate repository had been meant
to avoid 'package purgatory' where the distributions would relegate LibO
On 2010-10-08 11:35 AM, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
users installing from source don't need no update management at all
- they can just git pull rebuild. Especially on Linux, this
gives you bleeding edge LibO everytime you like - e.g.:
Well... different users have different skill levels, but
Le 2010-10-08 15:07, Scott Furry a écrit :
As todd rme has suggested, there exists automated packaging tools. I had
not run across that in my readings. I don't use openSUSE, but good to know.
My original suggestions regarding a separate repository had been meant
to avoid 'package purgatory'
On 10/08/2010 06:53 PM, RGB ES wrote:
The kind of stuff you find on kde-look.org weights no more than some
hundreds of KiB (maybe, a bit more of a MiB but usually a lot less)
while a normal LibO install is near 170 MiB...
Is the opendesktop.org type proposal for the entire program, or just
Thanks. I am a little confused. So are you saying that packaging LibO in
such a way as to be able to use the opendesktop.org system is not possible?
Everything is possible... but that does not means it is desirable. You
always need to use the right tool for the job, and nothing beat a good
2010/10/8 jonathon jonathon.bl...@gmail.com:
Is the opendesktop.org type proposal for the entire program, or just for
the extensions, dictionaries, galleries, extensions, language packs,
grammar checkers, and other addons?
I think people here is talking about the upgrade process. On that case
Le 2010-10-08 15:59, RGB ES a écrit :
Thanks. I am a little confused. So are you saying that packaging LibO in
such a way as to be able to use the opendesktop.org system is not possible?
Everything is possible... but that does not means it is desirable. You
always need to use the right tool
2010/10/8 Marc Paré m...@marcpare.com:
Do you know what the reasons were for not using these? It would seem to m
ake
sense that you would want to free up dev work and try to unify an upgrade
process for everyone.
Because at the end of the day, they do not work. Just one word:
dependencies. If
Le 2010-10-08 16:47, RGB ES a écrit :
2010/10/8 Scott Furryscott.wl.fu...@gmail.com:
And that's why I was asking about whether it was possible to have
repositories on the documentfoundation.org servers.
Users of Debian (and its derivatives) could put apt.documentfoundation.o
rg
into their
On 08/10/10 03:06 PM, Marc Paré wrote:
I had not heard of Go-OO ( http://go-oo.org ) before until this
discussion thread.
Visiting their page, it seems like they have the kind of distribution
model that we could leverage.
Are you talking of the Universal Linux on this page?
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 4:53 PM, Marc Paré m...@marcpare.com wrote:
Le 2010-10-08 16:47, RGB ES a écrit :
2010/10/8 Scott Furryscott.wl.fu...@gmail.com:
And that's why I was asking about whether it was possible to have
repositories on the documentfoundation.org servers.
Users of Debian (and
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 5:46 PM, Marc Paré m...@marcpare.com wrote:
Le 2010-10-08 17:22, todd rme a écrit :
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 4:53 PM, Marc Parém...@marcpare.com wrote:
Le 2010-10-08 16:47, RGB ES a écrit :
2010/10/8 Scott Furryscott.wl.fu...@gmail.com:
And that's why I was asking
Would you then have any idea if this would cause a lot of devoted dev tim
e,
part-time, full-time attention. Would LibO then have to have a dedicated
dev
in charge of this?
Marc
I doubt it would require a full-time developer, since changes would
only need to be made when a new version of
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 10:50 PM, Marc Paré m...@marcpare.com wrote:
Would you then have any idea if this would cause a lot of devoted dev t
im
e,
part-time, full-time attention. Would LibO then have to have a dedicate
d
dev
in charge of this?
Marc
I doubt it would require a full-time
On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 12:42 AM, Marc Paré m...@marcpare.com wrote:
But it is important to keep in mind the distributions' own release
policies. Many distributions do not allow non-security-related
updates over the course of a single release cycle. This allows them
to thoroughly test a
On 2010-10-06 6:43 PM, Jon Hamkins wrote:
Then installations and updates can be as simple as
# yum install libreoffice
and
# yum update libreoffice
I like it... :)
--
Best regards,
Charles
--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to
discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
All
On 2010-10-06 7:00 PM, Jon Hamkins wrote:
The way this works is LibO would publish delta RPMs that contain all
the differences from the previous release, and then the users yum
package manager would download the delta RPM, build the full RPM from
it, and install.
Excellent points, and there's
On 2010-10-06 7:54 PM, Marc Paré wrote:
If there were a common method to do incremental updates (linux) to
avoid too much work from the devs, this would be great. Judging by
the discussions, it looks like it could be a challenge though.
I disagree... the way I see it working is:
1. The devs
Hi Scott,
Thanks for the insightful comments...
On 2010-10-06 5:21 PM, Scott Furry wrote:
a) AFAIK, MSIEXEC doesn't enforce any kind of standards/best
practices.
I'm not sure I see your point. That doesn't mean that whoever codes the
.msi installer cannot code it to work as I have described.
On 2010-10-07 9:15 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
I agree, but the problem here is that the individual package managers
should be *disabling* the internal updaters in their packages, so that
they can only be updated using the package management system.
And Mozilla should provide a simple compile
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Per Eriksson pereriks...@openoffice.orgw
rote:
I am not sure if Mozilla offer out-of-the-box updating for Firefox on
Linux?
Yes,
Firefox, ThunderBird has options (which are turned on by default)
that let you choose whether to set them automatically (or
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 4:27 AM, Michele Zarri m.za...@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/10/10 22:21, Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 14:21 -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2010-10-06 2:06 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Yes there is... use the MSI system, which will take care of things lik
Hi Per, *,
Per Eriksson schrieb:
[..]
I am not sure if Mozilla offer out-of-the-box updating for Firefox on
Linux?
You have to fetch the linux file from Mozilla and unpack it in a folder
where you have write permissions. Call it, use it, update it, - be happy
:o))
Gruß/regards
--
Friedrich
Hi,
Do we have skilled people here who are interested in beginning with this
effort, and maybe start planning for this feature?
I've always been interested in pushing things like this forward ;-)
Best
Per
Friedrich Strohmaier skrev 2010-10-07 21:29:
Hi Per, *,
Per Eriksson schrieb:
Op 6/10/2010 20:59, Per Eriksson schreef:
Hi,
Marc Paré skrev 2010-10-06 20:39:
Le 2010-10-06 14:30, Steven Shelton a écrit :
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/6/2010 2:21 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Oh - and one thing that I'd really like to see is a simple
'incremental
Quote attributions got messed up - sorry...
Again, I have to go back to my earlier posts - Mozilla is not the
shinning example.
Their incremental updater works very well on Windows - and with the
Update Notifier extension, all updates can be made pretty much silent
and automatic.
For any
On 07/10/10 03:04 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Again, I have to go back to my earlier posts - Mozilla is not the
shinning example.
Their incremental updater works very well on Windows - and with the
Update Notifier extension, all updates can be made pretty much silent
and automatic.
True enough.
On 2010-10-07 6:05 PM, Scott Furry wrote:
On 07/10/10 03:04 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Their incremental updater works very well on Windows - and with
the Update Notifier extension, all updates can be made pretty much
silent and automatic.
True enough. But this feature is not available to
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:
Their incremental updater works very well on Windows - and with
the Update Notifier extension, all updates can be made pretty much
silent and automatic.
True
On 2010-10-06 1:04 AM, Scott Furry wrote:
Any installation method that is deployed, in my mind, must 'respect'
the package management of the base operating system.
+1 - So, for most *nix's, this would mean that the built-in LibO updater
should be disabled, and let the systems package manager
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/6/2010 2:21 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Oh - and one thing that I'd really like to see is a simple 'incremental
updater' that just downloads a 'patch' file and patches itself, like
Firefox and Thunderbird and lots of other programs do now
+1
Le 2010-10-06 14:30, Steven Shelton a écrit :
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/6/2010 2:21 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Oh - and one thing that I'd really like to see is a simple 'incremental
updater' that just downloads a 'patch' file and patches itself, like
Firefox and
On 06/10/10 12:21 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2010-10-06 2:06 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Yes there is... use the MSI system, which will take care of things like
unpacking to the environments /tmp directory, launching the installer
after unpacking (like it does now), then - and here is the
On 06/10/10 22:21, Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 14:21 -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2010-10-06 2:06 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Yes there is... use the MSI system, which will take care of things like
unpacking to the environments /tmp directory, launching the
El 06/10/10 18:21, Scott Furry escribió:
Windows becomes the corner case...
There is no defined standard of where to install files, just suggestions.
And an update mechanism becomes an external program. There are 3rd
party apps for updating sources. I believe we should explore those
options.
On 10/06/2010 11:39 AM, Marc Paré wrote:
Le 2010-10-06 14:30, Steven Shelton a écrit :
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/6/2010 2:21 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Oh - and one thing that I'd really like to see is a simple 'incremental
updater' that just downloads a 'patch'
Le 2010-10-06 14:59, Per Eriksson a écrit :
Hi,
Marc Paré skrev 2010-10-06 20:39:
Le 2010-10-06 14:30, Steven Shelton a écrit :
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/6/2010 2:21 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Oh - and one thing that I'd really like to see is a simple 'incremental
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 7:21 PM, Scott Furry scott.wl.fu...@gmail.com wrot
e:
On 06/10/10 05:00 PM, Jon Hamkins wrote:
On 10/06/2010 11:39 AM, Marc Paré wrote:
Le 2010-10-06 14:30, Steven Shelton a écrit :
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/6/2010 2:21 PM, Charles
Not sure where thinking is on this for LiBO at the moment, but is it
concievable that updating even to each new version could, after a User
response, be automatic and if elected by the User - replace the
previous version automatically please?
Paul
--
To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to
У сре, 06. 10 2010. у 13:22 +1300, Paul A Norman пише:
Not sure where thinking is on this for LiBO at the moment, but is it
concievable that updating even to each new version could, after a User
response, be automatic and if elected by the User - replace the
previous version automatically
What I have found is that under OOO I have always been left with
install directories with Mbs of space used for previous installations,
the uninstall or new install doesn't seem to have removed them.
I have been thinking tha it would be neat to have as it were, one
install of LiBO and have it
On 05/10/10 07:36 PM, Paul A Norman wrote:
What I have found is that under OOO I have always been left with
install directories with Mbs of space used for previous installations,
the uninstall or new install doesn't seem to have removed them.
I have been thinking tha it would be neat to have
70 matches
Mail list logo
