On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <[email protected]> wrote: > It is one thing to encourage users to remove their older versions. > > It is another thing to automatically remove them and, along with that, > features that they are relying upon. > > I don't think the ability of OO.o to replace versions in the same line (i.e., > 3.* -- and 3.* did not remove 2.* and 1.* as far as I know) is the proper > precedent. I think how LibreOffice endeavored not to do that with their > first and subsequent releases is the proper precedent. This is not about > wearing the crown, it is about serving the user community. >
Again, your opinion carries as far as your willingness to code an alternative install approach. -Rob > - Dennis > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rob Weir [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 10:09 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [EXTENSIONS][RELEASE] (was RE: Calling all volunteers: It is > time to test) > > On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton > <[email protected]> wrote: >> If there is no solution for extensions, Apache OpenOffice 3.4 early >> incubator releases should not overload prior versions of OO.o. I recommend >> that AOO 3.4 install in its own locations and not do anything that would >> prevent side-by-side functioning. (My recommendation would be that it do >> that anyhow. But with known breaking of an important down-level feature, >> that becomes imperative.) >> > > In general, it is important for OOo 3.3 and earlier installs on > desktops to go away. Old releases increasingly become security > hazards, especially if they are no longer being actively maintained. > We do a great service to the community in general if we overwrite them > with the AOO 3.4. This is true even given the inconvenience the user > experiences from the need to reinstall extensions. > > In any case, I think the overwrite is fine. It is what OOo 3.3 and > OOo 3.2 did as well by default. We can document in the install > intructions how this can be overridden. > >> I think there should be OOo-dev releases only until this is handled as well. >> It is now clear that integration has problems and there is no reason to >> provoke more of it. >> > > If you are volunteering to re-write the extension manager client > database support, please speak up and let us know your plan. > >> I also suspect that it is not a good idea to rebrand the Extensions and >> Templates pages at SourceForge quite so strongly, since the only extensions >> that are there now are for OO.o (and perhaps LibreOffice). >> >> - Dennis >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 02:06 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: Calling all volunteers: It is time to test >> >> On 3/2/12 6:38 PM, Larry Gusaas wrote: >>> On 2012-02-29 8:18 AM Rob Weir wrote: >>>> Once you have installed, launch OpenOffice and look at the Help/About >>>> box. If the revision shown there matches the build you installed >>>> (e..g, "r1293550") then the install was a success. Please send a short >>>> note to [email protected] telling us what platform and >>>> scenario you installed (fresh install, upgrade, install next to >>>> LibreOffice, etc.). This will help us understand what scenarios have >>>> already been attempted and which have not. >>> >>> Using MacBook with OS X version 10.6.8 >>> >>> Downloaded OOo_3.4.0_MacOS_x86_install_en-US.dmg >>> Successfully installed replacing installation of OOo 3.3 >>> >>> Installation deleted all of the extensions in my user profile. Quit OOo >>> and replaced extension folder in my profile from my backup copy. >>> Restarted OOo 3.4 and extensions deleted again. Will try installed >>> individual extensions later today. >> >> Hi Larry, >> >> unfortunately extensions get lost because of the dropped Berkeley DB >> which was used to manage installed extensions. We haven't found a simple >> solution to migrate it. This will be documented in the release notes. >> >> Sorry >> >> Juergen >> >> >>> >>> All .odt files I opened worked. Was able to work with and save in >>> Writer. The one database I have works. Will do further testing later. >>> >> >
