Le samedi 29 septembre 2007 à 12:56 +0200, Marcin Miłkowski a écrit : > Couldn't we try to send some kind of official message from the > linguistic project to the package maintainers that DicOOo is an integral > part of the package and should always be bundled? That could solve a lot > of problems easily. Or at least we'd know why they didn't bundle DicOOo.
I can explain it easily enough: we don't want private app-specific installers. 1. We already have our own binary distribution pipeline we've worked hard to push up to our demanding technical standards : * good networking support, including proxies, mirroring infrastructure, support for local private mirrors, etc * good security (integration with system security rules, web of trust with digitally signed updates) * etc 2. compared to our update system DicOOo is a joke, and BTW teaching users to accept macro documents blindly is a security horror 3. users expect to find updates in the common update tools and complain when they have to hunt and learn app-specific updaters So instead of wasting energy pretending the linguistic project with its few spell-checkers knows better the distribution job that distros which have been at it for years and update systems from the kernel to the UI theme, if OO.o could focus on getting its material in a format that makes our distribution easy, we'd be grateful. And we know you need some sort of crutch for windows users, since Microsoft is not sharing its update pipes, but you know, we're *really* not interested in sharing this crutch. If I've failed to convey the deep loathing DicOOo triggers in distribution people, I can try again. [ And please don't even think of asking how DicOOo could be made more palatable. It can't. Unless you want to give it the smarts to manage the whole system, and it's good enough we can dump our system updater for it. ] -- Nicolas Mailhot
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
