On 2010-10-08 3:23 AM, Thorsten Behrens wrote: > Per Eriksson wrote: >> Do we have skilled people here who are interested in beginning >> with this effort, and maybe start planning for this feature? >> >> I've always been interested in pushing things like this forward >> ;-)
> let me Cc two MSI packaging experts to comment on patchability > experiences. Thanks... :) > Regarding Linux - I skipped most of the discussion, but really - you > do *not* want to bypass the distro update mechanism. You really > don't. It's duplicating effort, will likely not result in any better > user experience - and, conversely, will annoy distro people, while we > actually want to encourage them to actively participate in LibO > development. While I agree totally as far as packages installed by the distro's package management system, you (and others) seem to be forgetting two things: 1. it would be the package maintainers responsibility to disable the native auto-updater, thus preventing the user from accessing the native auto-updater in the first place, and 2. one use case that may occur more often than you think - those power users that install from source, thus totally bypassing their package management system. Inmho, #2 should be the deciding factor. If a user does this, then the native updater should be enabled by default (but could be disabled by the user with a compile time switch). -- Best regards, Charles -- To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
