I see several issues in the discussion about installers - and I only just joined the list! Let's list 'em...
1. You are assuming everyone will be running Linux. They won't. 2. You assume they all have a packaged Linux distro. They won't. 3. You presume they can all grab tar's themselves. They can't. 4. You assume they will all download the package. They won't. Installers are needed because (1) you can adapt an installer to manage installation on all the systems people *will* be using, such as Windows XP, Vista, Win7 and - for some - either 32-bit or 64-bit versions; Linux using Debian-based or other installers and (2) those who have no standard installer system included; Android users and even Apple users (3) who want something that installs like an app does; even, despite the undoubted acrimony, Solaris users. Finally (4), there will be those users who buy a preconfigured or even standard virtualised system from a supplier and want both the supplier provided system and the discs to fix any problems - and for that you want a packaged product with installer and repair system to put on disc. While an installer may not be the top priority, it is undoubtedly a very important feature that needs to be present to reach the widest number of users. Mark On 03/12/2010 04:13, Sophie Gautier wrote: > > For years I only had a connexion in cyber cafes, so I dowloaded the > tars on an external device (or sometimes several) and installed at > home on my computer. I don't see what you're talking about, your > distro has all what you need to install the downloaded archives and > manage dependencies. > > The only issue that I see still existing currently is the size of the > download. When you have a very slow and expensive connexion, it makes > LibO very difficult to get and distribute. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
