Hi Kay; I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime ago:
http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/ The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site though. I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the release announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the FreeBSD port. Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the port is fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's available on FreeBSD releases. Pedro. >________________________________ > From: Kay Schenk <[email protected]> >To: [email protected] >Sent: Wednesday, August 1, 2012 10:47 AM >Subject: Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports? >(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)? > >On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 2:04 PM, drew <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 14:36 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: >> > I'm drafting the 3.4.1 release announcement blog post. I have a >> > bullet list where I highlight what is in 3.4.1. I list what platforms >> > are supported, mention the Windows 8 compatibility improvements, and >> > then follow with this bullet item: >> > >> > "Community members are also working on BSD, Solaris and OS/2 ports, >> > with plans to release these outside of Apache." >> > >> >> Howdy Rob, >> >> > Is this accurate and worth saying? >> >> Yes IIRC and yes IMO. >> >> >> >> > Would it make sense to also >> > include links for each of these ports, where the reader can go for >> > more information? >> >> I would think a better return if instead of putting direct links for >> each, create a fixed address (wiki page?) for 'other ports' (or more >> appropriate for a title). >> > >Hi Drew-- > >We have a page -- actually a former "project" at -- > >http://www.openoffice.org/porting/ > >that needs a LOT of cleanup. > >Any volunteers to take the lead on cleaning this up and just highlighting >what we're dealing with now? FreeBSD, OS/2, and Solaris? > > > >> Link to that from the announcement/blog and would make that a precedent >> for future announcements. >> >> > >> > Although these are not Apache releases, they are part of the close >> > ecosystem, with developers working directly in our project to support >> > these ports. So I think there is some logic to mentioning them in the >> > release announcement. But work that happens entirely outside of the >> > project, like portable applications versions, would not get a mention. >> >> I would disagree, somewhat, in that personal preference would be to >> include the 2 or 3 portable 'wrapper' distributors as this has seemed to >> be of interest to quite a few folks in the past. >> >> Just my .02 >> >> //drew >> > >> > Does this seem fair and appropriate? >> > >> > If we agree to do this, I'll need a link for each of BSD, Solaris and >> > OS/2, for more information. >> > >> > The alternative would be to not mention the ports at all. >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > -Rob >> > >> >> >> >> >> > > >-- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >MzK > >"I'm just a normal jerk who happens to make music. >As long as my brain and fingers work, I'm cool." > -- Eddie Van Halen > > >
