Shoshannah Forbes wrote: > On 25/04/2005, at 15:01, Mathias Bauer wrote: >> Do you really want that >> *everything* on your system must be installed through the same >> installer/packager? Every script, every macro, every configuration >> file? > >> If yes: then I understand your goal; but I doubt that this is what >> people want and what you will achieve. > > That is *exactly* what I want, and the same goes with every Linux user > that I know. Once you get used to how easy it is to > find/download/install/upgrade software and software add-ons using your > central package manage, it is very hard to go back.
If really every Linux user wants to do it that way then I don't understand why people complain about an OOo extension installer, because it surely wouldn't be used anyway, right? I see the point in having this, but as long as not all Linux distros use the same files for installation I don't see it as a practical solution. IMHO the ball is in the field of the Linux distributors: standardize on a single format and so make it possible to use it. Why should I care for complaints against using an "own" package format from people that just do the same? Yes, every Linux package format is an "own" format as long as there is no common standard that is respected by all distros. Best regards, Mathias -- Mathias Bauer - OpenOffice.org Application Framework Project Lead Please reply to the list only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a spam sink. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
