Hi Marcus, - FreeBSD by Maho Nakata / Pedro Giffuni thanks Nakata Maho From: "Marcus (OOo)" <marcus.m...@wtnet.de> Subject: Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports? (BSD, Solaris, OS/2)? Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2012 18:34:53 +0200
> 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": > > @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 >
