On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew jensen <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote: >> >> 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. >> >> >> > Hi Pedro, >> > >> > Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you updated, >> > yes? >> > >> >> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one page. >> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the announcement, but >> also a single place we can link to from other places in the future. >> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the porting >> page from the download page. >> >> -Rob > > hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for this > evening. > > Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*.. > > This might not be the right place for what I thought was the task - a > list of existing known ports which are not part of the official AOO > release regiment. > > The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the act of > creating a port, with > > http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html > > and > http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html > > which starts off by pointing to this page: > http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts > > and that offers links to places such as > http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html > > > So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official ports that > are known, a simple information service for our users without and > explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a resource > for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the > announcement(s) that is. >
Yes. ;-) Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused page? It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent. Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe that could be a new page in the /download directory? For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most appropriate, yes? -Rob > //drew > > >
