On 2/18/14 9:19 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: > Am 02/18/2014 08:44 AM, schrieb Andre Fischer: >> On 17.02.2014 20:44, Marcus (OOo) wrote: >>> Am 02/17/2014 09:37 AM, schrieb Andre Fischer: >>>> On 14.02.2014 22:32, Rob Weir wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Marcus (OOo) <marcus.m...@wtnet.de> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> As this is our first beta release at Apache, I would like to clarify >>>>>> some >>>>>> things before it's maybe too late to change the facts and to prepare >>>>>> webpages: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Target group >>>>>> >>>>>> It is intended to be downloaded for the general public, right? >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. Hosting >>>>>> >>>>>> We are planning to host the files at Sourceforge, right? >>>>>> >>>>>> 3. File names: >>>>>> >>>>>> Of course the file names of the install files have to show a >>>>>> difference >>>>>> compared to the general release files. Suggestion: >>>>>> >>>>>> Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.0_Beta_Win_x86_install.exe >>>>>> >>>>>> *If* there is a need to publish another round, it could be extended >>>>>> with a >>>>>> number like: >>>>>> >>>>>> Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.0_Beta2_Win_x86_install.exe >>>>>> >>>>>> 4. Directory structure: >>>>>> >>>>>> Is it OK to expect to use the same dir structure like we have >>>>>> currently for >>>>>> 4.0.1? >>>> >>>> In general, yes, but please keep in mind that our Mac builds are now >>>> 64bit. I assume that the directories that contain the Mac downloads got >>>> renamed (Servers are currently down so I can not check). >>> >>> This is currently the complete path to the AOO 4.0.1 install files, >>> example for English US: >>> >>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/4.0.1/binaries/en-US/ >>> >>> >>> >>> There is no part included to reflect the OS and I don't know of an >>> idea to do so. Or have I misunderstood you? >> >> Looks like I assumed wrong. I had the directory structure of the >> snapshot builds in mind, which obviously differ from that of the release. >> So we only keep in mind that the names of the Mac binaries change (not >> sure if that is relevant). > > That's true. Will keep in mind.
It's nice that we talk about names and how to download but nobody took care about the technical realization. Which entries do we have to change to add a "Beta" string in the product name, about box, download files, etc. in way that we can install it in parallel and that everything works as expected. The whole process is once again not really intuitive and we have to figure it out. Many entries with more or less the same value and we have to check which one is used when and where ... Juergen > > Marcus > > > >>>>> The above makes sense to me. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> 5. Download webpage: >>>>>> >>>>>> Is it OK to expect to offer the download on our main download >>>>>> webpage? >>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/ >>>>>> >>>>>> If yes, I can build up a download offer like we have for the green >>>>>> box. To >>>>>> ease the download as best as possible. >>>>>> >>>>> I would not make this the default download option for users. We still >>>>> want most users to download AOO 4.0.1. So keep the first box on >>>>> /download.html as it is now. >>>>> >>>>> Maybe a yellow box (yellow == caution) with language that makes it >>>>> clear that this is beta and gives the URL for reporting bugs. >>>>> >>>>> Were you thinking of a language/platform switch logic for the beta? >>>>> Or just a link to a "beta_other.html" page with a table of links? If >>>>> we do the table, then we would have room on the same page to give a >>>>> prominent warning, a link to BZ, Release Notes, etc. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> >>>>> -Rob >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Thanks >>>>>> >>>>>> Marcus > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
