> I see that it's an installer that includes all the languages but i > wonder if it is really necessary and if the languages are the only cause.
Well, there certainly isn't hundreds (or even tens) of megabytes of new code, as far as I know, so yes, it must be the languages. > Even if the installed size is about 500 MB, isn't the installer too big? > I wonder what's the planned direction about it. The "plan" is what the community consensus is. (Or what somebody is brave enough to just do, or is told to do.) Feel free to provide explicit suggestions how to package LibreOffice for Windows, and take part in discussion in the relevant forum. (This list? Or a Document Foundation list, or audio/IRC meeting? I don't know.) Of course, this is supposed to be a meritocracy, I think, so if you have actual experience in building and packaging OOo or LO installers, that gives you more clout. > To me were more smart the go-oo approach: an english installer + the > interested language pack. Sorry, but I think that is against the Document Foundation's "Next Decade Manifesto", which says: "WE REJECT: [...] the creeping domination of computer desktops by a single language forcing people to learn a foreign language before they can express themselves electronically" OK, so if an *installer* could be multi-lingual even if it installs just the English UI, what you say could be a viable approach. Currently that is not possible, as far as I know, but it should be possible to do it that way using some amount of work on the Perl code that directs the installer generation. Something to discuss, sure. --tml _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
