On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 18:53 +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote: > Am 08/18/2012 06:34 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo): > > Am 08/18/2012 04:38 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo): > >> Am 08/18/2012 04:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: > >>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Marcus (OOo)<marcus.m...@wtnet.de> > >>> wrote: > >>>> Am 08/18/2012 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: > >>>> > >>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo)<marcus.m...@wtnet.de> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Marcus (OOo) wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<d...@baseanswers.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew > >>>>>>>>>>> jensen<drewjensen.in...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kay; > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ago: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/ > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site > >>>>>>>>>>>>> though. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the > >>>>>>>>>>>>> release > >>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the > >>>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD > >>>>>>>>>>>>> port. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>> port is > >>>>>>>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's > >>>>>>>>>>>>> available > >>>>>>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Pedro. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Pedro, > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you > >>>>>>>>>>>> updated, > >>>>>>>>>>>> yes? > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one > >>>>>>>>>>> page. > >>>>>>>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the > >>>>>>>>>>> announcement, > >>>>>>>>>>> but > >>>>>>>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the > >>>>>>>>>>> future. > >>>>>>>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the > >>>>>>>>>>> porting > >>>>>>>>>>> page from the download page. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> -Rob > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for > >>>>>>>>>> this > >>>>>>>>>> evening. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*.. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the > >>>>>>>>>> task - a > >>>>>>>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official > >>>>>>>>>> AOO > >>>>>>>>>> release regiment. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the > >>>>>>>>>> act of > >>>>>>>>>> creating a port, with > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page: > >>>>>>>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> and that offers links to places such as > >>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official > >>>>>>>>>> ports > >>>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and > >>>>>>>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a > >>>>>>>>>> resource > >>>>>>>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the > >>>>>>>>>> announcement(s) that is. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Yes. ;-) > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused > >>>>>>>>> page? > >>>>>>>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe > >>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>> could be a new page in the /download directory? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software / > >>>>>>>> packages: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage > >>>>>>>> which > >>>>>>>> was totally outdated. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from > >>>>>>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most > >>>>>>>>> appropriate, yes? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I think so. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Marcus > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Morning All; > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any > >>>>>>> consensus > >>>>>>> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching > >>>>>>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the > >>>>>>> information > >>>>>>> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache > >>>>>>> OpenOffice is available. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a > >>>>>> statement to > >>>>>> the > >>>>>> "non_ASF.html" webpage. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/ > >>>>> > >>>>> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone > >>>>> searches Google for "openoffice ports. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Maybe not wrong but IMHO totally oudated since months and years and > >>>> needs > >>>> also a clean-up. ;-) > >>>> > >>> > >>> IMHO, It is almost always better to clean up (or replace) an existing > >>> page at a well-known URL than to create an entirely new page at a new > >>> URL. Why? Because the existing page is already linked to, both > >>> internally and externally. So if we think the new content is relevant > >>> to the purpose of the old webpage, e.g., information on ports, then we > >>> should keep the old URL for it. > >> > >> Sure. > >> > >> Maybe we can make a deal, so that everybody has a little task: > >> > >> - I'll clean-up the porting homepage (at least the starting page) > >> - Drew is adding text for the ports to the other webpage > >> - I'll add this text also to the porting homepage > >> - and you just need to keep the link in the announcement ;-) > > > > I've updated the starting webpage at > > "http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html": > > Ahm, it's still in the stageing area: > http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html > > Marcus
Howdy, Great - updated the page at http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html with the winpenpack info also. //drew > > > > @Maho,Pedro,Yuri,Nicolas: > > > > Like stated with the other ports I would like to list your name and mail > > address (if available, the Apache addresses): > > > > - OpenSolaris by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener) > > - Solaris (Sparc and x86) by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener) > > - FreeBSD by Pedro Giffuni / Maho Nakata > > - OS/2 by Yuri Dario > > > > Is this OK for you? > > > > Thanks > > > > Marcus >
