Le samedi 29 septembre 2007 à 19:07 +0200, Marcin Miłkowski a écrit : > Nicolas Mailhot pisze: > > > 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. > > Currently, the only option to install dictionaries that do not come with > OOo itself
The set of dictionaries available on a Linux system is not what OO.o chooses to bundle or not > in distros that have such an exquisite system is to do it > manually. If you think this is better than using DicOOo, you should > probably consult your therapist. And what you don't understand is a distribution an open system and the solution to get something to users is to work with distributions not workaround them. > As far as I know, nobody from this experienced group of distribution > gurus has ever contacted the linguistic project. That's a funny argument, it seems I've made the effort to locate your list not the reverse. And there are a lot *more* apps distributions are interested in than distributions for apps to worry about. > We'd probably could > help you a lot but we never knew that you needed such help. You cannot > expect OOo NL project maintainers to inspect every possible Linux distro > on the planet and to try to fix the situation. Read what I wrote again. We *don't* need help from you on the distribution front. We *do* need you to help yourselves by making good releases distributions can pick up and distribute. > I've seen distros that > simply install all possible dictionaries. And that's definitely a > performance hog for OOo. And that's an OO.o bug plain and simple so don't expect us to build our system around your bugs. "Install everything" is a valid distribution mode, other apps are smart enough to only load the resources they actually use. We do allow language selection but at the system level, because someone who wants russian support usually wants it in all its apps, not just the office suite. Anyway, to stop the mutual ranting, what distributions expect from a component provider is : A. an authoritative download source (ftp or http directory) B. raw material in nice versionned archives C. including licencing statements (in the archives), using well-known licenses that don't need analysis D. with if possible detached digital signatures or checksums to verify we're distributing the right stuff E. feedback channels (mailing list, irc channel, bug tracker) F. update announce channels (RSS, announce list, whatever) G. instructions to install your stuff via CLI scripts automatically H. some roadmap info so we know how your release schedule fits in ours F. all this on a nice easy-to-find webpage not something lost in a website maze To take a non-software example the DejaVu project (dejavu.sf.net) has all this right and it got itself distributed by pretty much everyone in a short span of time (one of the stragglers being OO.o BTW which still has not realised Vera development stopped years ago) OTOH lingucomponent makes it awfully hard to find raw dictionary archives, check their version, their legal status, script their install, etc. So distributions don't bother, or only for the main languages. -- Nicolas Mailhot
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
