Le 19/04/2014 01:53, Kay Schenk a écrit :
Ok, maybe the subject is bit melodramatic but after some of the twisted
things we read about, basically how non-supportive either AOO is of Linux,
or Linux is non-supportive of AOO, here's what I'm thinking.
1) We do a blog whose main subject is AOO and Linux and interview some of
our Linux volunteers/users (hopefully a nice dstro cross section --
Fedora, Ubuntu. openSUSE, Mint?) and ask them why they're using AOO and how
did they find the installation given that it isn't available in their
existing repositories.
-- or --
2) We do a Linux centered blog on what support we provide for Linux, what
Linux packages AOO provides wtih additional distribution details, and why
they're not in repositories for distributions. On the latter point, I'm
thinking talk about whose job this is, etc.
I think we really should do something a bit more visible on this topic, and
hopefully some of the open source press can pick it up.
Thoughts?
IMHO, most users just take what's provided by default. Unless it is too buggy.
So I think that basically, we are back to the question: why AOO is still not
available in the standard packages?
As long as it is not easily available, users won't bother removing another
application to install AOO. Especially if it involves command line (to install
but also sometimes to remove the default suite).
So I don't really see the point for first question. And second question is the
project's job, not sure any press would be interested in that.
I've not followed all the post of the dev list from some time but I don't
remember any discussion about that for a long time ago.
What do need the distros and have we the manpower to do that?
Once we can make sure that we can do it, let's talk about the technical problem
with the distros (who can use soffice).
Hagar
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
