Jan Holesovsky wrote: > Hi Martin, > > On Monday 15 October 2007 14:11, Martin Hollmichel wrote: > >> > But for the Win32 builders, searching for the dependencies >> > could be too expensive - that's why I propose the 'super-source-package' >> > ;-) Of course, we can go the way of ooo-3rdparty-dictionaries, >> > ooo-3rdparty-epm, ooo-3rdparty-hsqldb, etc. but I'm not sure if it helps >> > in the end... >> >> this was what I was thinking about, just redistributing the 3rdparty >> packages as single one to achive maximum modularity at that level. > > But the maximum modularity is achieved if the developers use the versions > from > their distros. I understand ooo-libs-3rdparty as a fallback for the > developers that don't want to install the pieces; the ./configure would > detect if there are 'system' versions of this or that, and build just the > pieces that are not there. The advantage of one single "3rdparty" package is that you either can use it as a "make yourself happy with one click" package or you don't use it at all and use each library as part of the already available 3rd party packages that can be installed separately.
Problem is that we can't cope with permanently updating OOo to the "latest and greatest" versions of these libraries and so it must be possible to install older versions of them at times. In case that isn't possible individual "oo3rdparty" packages for each single 3rd party library might come in handy. Are there any other advantages or disadvantages of either concept that I forgot to mention here? Ciao, Mathias -- Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS Please don't reply to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". I use it for the OOo lists and only rarely read other mails sent to it. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
