[tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Craig A. Eddy]

Recently (like 4:00 AM local time, November 20, 2010) I downloaded the
.tar.gz of the .deb files from TDF
(http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/testing/3.3.0-beta3/deb/).
 On unpacking the archived files I discovered that LO is subjecting poor
unsuspecting users to the same problem that OOo has been famous for:
there is no obvious way to start to install the files.  Dependencies for
each .deb have to be met, but nothing indicates the order with which to
install them.  When dealing with 52 .deb files it's like trying to do a
jigsaw puzzle where all distinguishing marks have been filed off.

It would be much easier if there were a single meta-package that would
act as the start point.  Failing that, at least an ordered list that an
individual could refer to.

The object of LibreOffice, as with any other program, is to be used.
But if one has to try to map the labyrinth in order to do so, one won't.
 Would you please consider making it easier for the end user?

Thank you.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Alexandro Colorado]

On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 08:51:00 -0600, Craig A. Eddy  wrote:


Recently (like 4:00 AM local time, November 20, 2010) I downloaded the
.tar.gz of the .deb files from TDF
(http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/testing/3.3.0-beta3/deb/).
 On unpacking the archived files I discovered that LO is subjecting poor
unsuspecting users to the same problem that OOo has been famous for:
there is no obvious way to start to install the files.  Dependencies for
each .deb have to be met, but nothing indicates the order with which to
install them.  When dealing with 52 .deb files it's like trying to do a
jigsaw puzzle where all distinguishing marks have been filed off.

It would be much easier if there were a single meta-package that would
act as the start point.  Failing that, at least an ordered list that an
individual could refer to.

The object of LibreOffice, as with any other program, is to be used.
But if one has to try to map the labyrinth in order to do so, one won't.
 Would you please consider making it easier for the end user?

Thank you.



Usually that's what make files are for, but any bash file could also do  
the trick.


--
Alexandro Colorado

--
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Stefan Weigel]

Hi,

Am 20.11.2010 15:51, schrieb Craig A. Eddy:

> there is no obvious way to start to install the files.  Dependencies for
> each .deb have to be met, but nothing indicates the order with which to
> install them.  When dealing with 52 .deb files it's like trying to do a
> jigsaw puzzle where all distinguishing marks have been filed off.
> 
> It would be much easier if there were a single meta-package that would
> act as the start point.  Failing that, at least an ordered list that an
> individual could refer to.

I can not confirm your problem.

dpgk -i *.deb

does the job for me without trouble.

Stefan


-- 
LibreOffice - Die Freiheit nehm' ich mir!

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Craig A. Eddy]

On 11/20/2010 07:59 AM, Stefan Weigel wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Am 20.11.2010 15:51, schrieb Craig A. Eddy:
> 
>> there is no obvious way to start to install the files.  Dependencies for
>> each .deb have to be met, but nothing indicates the order with which to
>> install them.  When dealing with 52 .deb files it's like trying to do a
>> jigsaw puzzle where all distinguishing marks have been filed off.
>>
>> It would be much easier if there were a single meta-package that would
>> act as the start point.  Failing that, at least an ordered list that an
>> individual could refer to.
> 
> I can not confirm your problem.
> 
> dpgk -i *.deb
> 
> does the job for me without trouble.
> 
> Stefan
> 
> 

Stefan,

Thanks, I'll try that.  However, it would have been nice if that was
listed in the README_en-US file.  I'm not familiar with dpgk, though I
am able to follow directions.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Craig A. Eddy]

On 11/20/2010 08:04 AM, Craig A. Eddy wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/20/2010 07:59 AM, Stefan Weigel wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Am 20.11.2010 15:51, schrieb Craig A. Eddy:
>>
>>> there is no obvious way to start to install the files.  Dependencies for
>>> each .deb have to be met, but nothing indicates the order with which to
>>> install them.  When dealing with 52 .deb files it's like trying to do a
>>> jigsaw puzzle where all distinguishing marks have been filed off.
>>>
>>> It would be much easier if there were a single meta-package that would
>>> act as the start point.  Failing that, at least an ordered list that an
>>> individual could refer to.
>>
>> I can not confirm your problem.
>>
>> dpgk -i *.deb
>>
>> does the job for me without trouble.
>>
>> Stefan
>>
>>
> 
> Stefan,
> 
> Thanks, I'll try that.  However, it would have been nice if that was
> listed in the README_en-US file.  I'm not familiar with dpgk, though I
> am able to follow directions.
> 
> 

OK, that worked, with a little coaxing (it's dpgk -i *.deb .  Minor
transposition).  Thanks for your help.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Jeremy Cartwright]

>> I can not confirm your problem.
>>
>> dpgk -i *.deb
>>
>> does the job for me without trouble.
>>
>> Stefan
>>
>>
>
> Stefan,
>
> Thanks, I'll try that.  However, it would have been nice if that was
> listed in the README_en-US file.  I'm not familiar with dpgk, though I
> am able to follow directions.
>
>

I second this. The README_en-US file does seem to need attention, and 
not just re: installation concerns. I've posted 
http://www.libreofficeaustralia.org/forum/community/documentation-development/readmeen-us 
as an attempt to address some of my perceived issues, however as I have 
not been involved in the project previously, am not familiar with the 
work flow, and am not knowledgeable in many of the technical aspects of 
the document I am content to leave it at that until I've received 
further direction.


--
jdc

--
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Friedrich Strohmaier]

Hi Craig, *,

Craig A. Eddy schrieb:

>On 11/20/2010 07:59 AM, Stefan Weigel wrote:
>> Am 20.11.2010 15:51, schrieb Craig A. Eddy:

>>> there is no obvious way to start to install the files. 
>>> Dependencies for each .deb have to be met, but nothing indicates
>>> the order with which to install them.  When dealing with 52 .deb
>>> files it's like trying to do a jigsaw puzzle where all
>>> distinguishing marks have been filed off.

>>> It would be much easier if there were a single meta-package that
>>> would act as the start point. 

Even if knowing how to proceed as mentioned by Stefan, I support your
Request. Axel Reimer set up such a meta-package for our (german)
PrOOo-Box approach, which made it by far easier to install and to
*deinstall* all related packages.

[..]

Gruß/regards
-- 
Friedrich
Libreoffice-Box http://libreofficebox.org/
LibreOffice and more on CD/DVD images
(german version already started)


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Craig A. Eddy]

On 11/20/2010 03:24 PM, Friedrich Strohmaier wrote:
> Hi Craig, *,
> 
> Craig A. Eddy schrieb:
> 
>> On 11/20/2010 07:59 AM, Stefan Weigel wrote:
>>> Am 20.11.2010 15:51, schrieb Craig A. Eddy:
> 
 there is no obvious way to start to install the files. 
 Dependencies for each .deb have to be met, but nothing indicates
 the order with which to install them.  When dealing with 52 .deb
 files it's like trying to do a jigsaw puzzle where all
 distinguishing marks have been filed off.
> 
 It would be much easier if there were a single meta-package that
 would act as the start point. 
> 
> Even if knowing how to proceed as mentioned by Stefan, I support your
> Request. Axel Reimer set up such a meta-package for our (german)
> PrOOo-Box approach, which made it by far easier to install and to
> *deinstall* all related packages.
> 
> [..]
> 
> Gruß/regards

Thank you,

Craig A. Eddy (Tyche)

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Sonic4Spuds]

On 11/20/2010 09:03 AM, Alexandro Colorado wrote:

On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 08:51:00 -0600, Craig A. Eddy  wrote:


Recently (like 4:00 AM local time, November 20, 2010) I downloaded the
.tar.gz of the .deb files from TDF
(http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/testing/3.3.0-beta3/deb/). 


 On unpacking the archived files I discovered that LO is subjecting poor
unsuspecting users to the same problem that OOo has been famous for:
there is no obvious way to start to install the files.  Dependencies for
each .deb have to be met, but nothing indicates the order with which to
install them.  When dealing with 52 .deb files it's like trying to do a
jigsaw puzzle where all distinguishing marks have been filed off.

It would be much easier if there were a single meta-package that would
act as the start point.  Failing that, at least an ordered list that an
individual could refer to.

The object of LibreOffice, as with any other program, is to be used.
But if one has to try to map the labyrinth in order to do so, one won't.
 Would you please consider making it easier for the end user?

Thank you.



Usually that's what make files are for, but any bash file could also 
do the trick.


Make files are only useful if you are building from source. I am 
personally not good at doing this, and I don't have a powerful enough 
computer (Asus 1201T).


-Sonic4Spuds

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Rene Engelhard]

On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 08:04:29AM -0700, Craig A. Eddy wrote:
> listed in the README_en-US file.  I'm not familiar with dpgk, though I

Then get. You administer a Debian-based system without knowing dpkg? Oh my.

(Besides that, http://packages.debian.org/libreoffice has a metapackage -
you need at least squeeze for it, though)

Grüße/Regards,

René

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Rene Engelhard]

Hi,

On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 09:03:35AM -0600, Alexandro Colorado wrote:
> >unsuspecting users to the same problem that OOo has been famous for:
> >there is no obvious way to start to install the files.  Dependencies for

dpkg -i *.deb?

> >each .deb have to be met, but nothing indicates the order with which to
> >install them.  When dealing with 52 .deb files it's like trying to do a
> >jigsaw puzzle where all distinguishing marks have been filed off.

Nope. Really, I expect anybody having root on a Debian-based system to know
dpkg. Seriously.

> >It would be much easier if there were a single meta-package that would
> >act as the start point.  Failing that, at least an ordered list that an

http://packages.debian.org/libreoffice FTR.

Grüße/Regards,

René

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Friedrich Strohmaier]

Hi René, *,

René Engelhard schrieb:

[.. depency question ..]

>Nope. Really, I expect anybody having root on a Debian-based system to
> know dpkg. Seriously.

So you'd recommend everybody just running a desktop machine and not
wanting to get a full featured serveradmin to abhore debian?

>> >It would be much easier if there were a single meta-package that
>> > would act as the start point.  Failing that, at least an ordered
>> > list that an

>http://packages.debian.org/libreoffice FTR.

I can't see this hint an useful answer to the OP's question regarding
his aparent debian knowledge.

Gruß/regards
-- 
Friedrich
Libreoffice-Box http://libreofficebox.org/
LibreOffice and more on CD/DVD images
(german version already started)




-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Michael Wheatland]

> René Engelhard schrieb:
>>Nope. Really, I expect anybody having root on a Debian-based system to
>> know dpkg. Seriously.

I think it is very important from the very start that the community
does not have an unrealistic expectation of the end user.
Linux is a system which is gaining rapidly in popularity and there are
many end users who have never used the command line (gasp).

Regardless of the question, or the system on which LibreOffice is
intended to run I suggest we answer all questions with patience and
never with vitriol or belittlement.

Anybody working with deb package files and not knowing what to do will
find the following link useful:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1585017

Thanks, I hope this helps.
Michael Wheatland
LibreOffice Drupal Website Development Team
blog.wheatland.com.au

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[David Nelson]

Hi, :-)

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 20:31, Rene Engelhard
 wrote:
> Nope. Really, I expect anybody having root on a Debian-based system to know
> dpkg. Seriously.

Oh, Wow! What if you're an end user who needs a computer just to do
work on? Does every Linux user have to be a hard-core geek? And if you
own a Windows system, should one study for Microsoft certification
before shelling out you money? :-D

OK, don't answer that! Please! I was just kidding! :-)

Someone helped me solve this same problem for an Ubuntu system. I'll
draft a how-to over the next few days, file a bug and suggest it for
inclusion in the Linux downloads.

HTH.

David Nelson

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Craig A. Eddy]

On 11/22/2010 05:33 AM, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 08:04:29AM -0700, Craig A. Eddy wrote:
>> listed in the README_en-US file.  I'm not familiar with dpgk, though I
> 
> Then get. You administer a Debian-based system without knowing dpkg? Oh my.
> 
> (Besides that, http://packages.debian.org/libreoffice has a metapackage -
> you need at least squeeze for it, though)
> 
> Grüße/Regards,
> 
> René
> 

René

It isn't so much that I administer a Debian release as that I USE a
Debian release and do what I can.  What I do is what I have managed to
learn to do over time, but without any formal training in UNIX, Linux,
administration, coding, or anything else.  That causes gaps in my
education that I freely admit.  I feel no shame for what I have learned
OR for what I haven't learned.  Not everyone can be as experienced as
you, nor can everyone feel as comfortable using CLI as you.  It is,
however why I feel comfortable asking questions or asking for help even
from complete strangers who might think less of me for my asking.

However, thank you for your concern.  :-D

Craig
Tyche

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Craig A. Eddy]

On 11/22/2010 07:28 AM, David Nelson wrote:
> Hi, :-)
> 
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 20:31, Rene Engelhard
>  wrote:
>> Nope. Really, I expect anybody having root on a Debian-based system to know
>> dpkg. Seriously.
> 
> Oh, Wow! What if you're an end user who needs a computer just to do
> work on? Does every Linux user have to be a hard-core geek? And if you
> own a Windows system, should one study for Microsoft certification
> before shelling out you money? :-D
> 
> OK, don't answer that! Please! I was just kidding! :-)
> 
> Someone helped me solve this same problem for an Ubuntu system. I'll
> draft a how-to over the next few days, file a bug and suggest it for
> inclusion in the Linux downloads.
> 
> HTH.
> 
> David Nelson
> 

Mr. Nelson,

Thank you, on behalf of myself and all the unknown nameless people who
will benefit in the future.

Craig A. Eddy
Tyche

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Rene Engelhard]

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 10:28:43PM +0800, David Nelson wrote:
> Oh, Wow! What if you're an end user who needs a computer just to do
> work on? Does every Linux user have to be a hard-core geek? And if you
> own a Windows system, should one study for Microsoft certification
> before shelling out you money? :-D
> 
> OK, don't answer that! Please! I was just kidding! :-)

I do.

Because dpkg -i *.deb is esssentialy setup.exe. Don't tell me anyone using
Windows must not know setup.exe to install software?

> Someone helped me solve this same problem for an Ubuntu system. I'll
> draft a how-to over the next few days, file a bug and suggest it for
> inclusion in the Linux downloads.

There is no goddamn need for it. (That Ubuntu people in 90% of cases have
no clue how they do basic system tasks doesn't make it more needed)

Grüße/Regards,

René

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Friedrich Strohmaier]

Hi Michael, *,

Michael Wheatland schrieb:

>> René Engelhard schrieb:
>>>Nope. Really, I expect anybody having root on a Debian-based system
>>> to know dpkg. Seriously.

[..]

You were responding *my* mail not referring to my contents.

Please take care for clear communication.

Gruß/regards
-- 
Friedrich
Libreoffice-Box http://libreofficebox.org/
LibreOffice and more on CD/DVD images
(german version already started)



-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Rene Engelhard]

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 03:15:25PM +0100, Friedrich Strohmaier wrote:
> So you'd recommend everybody just running a desktop machine and not
> wanting to get a full featured serveradmin to abhore debian?

No, I want desktop users to know how to use their system. And if they
also administer it they should know basics about dpkg.

> >http://packages.debian.org/libreoffice FTR.
> 
> I can't see this hint an useful answer to the OP's question regarding
> his aparent debian knowledge.

True, but those are debs he can install if he used squeeze or sid :)

Grüße/Regards,

René

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Lee Hyde]

On 22/11/10 15:07, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> I do.
> 
> Because dpkg -i *.deb is esssentialy setup.exe. Don't tell me anyone using
> Windows must not know setup.exe to install software?

'dpkg -i *.deb' is most assuredly NOT the equivalent of setup.exe.
However .deb files are equivalent, this is precisely the point the
original poster is making. Windows users are presented with a single
setup.exe while debian/ubuntu users are presented with a multitude of
individual .deb files. This is not user friendly!

On 22/11/10 15:07, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> There is no goddamn need for it. (That Ubuntu people in 90% of cases have
> no clue how they do basic system tasks doesn't make it more needed)

This is a rather hostile attitude to show towards end users and an
attitude, might I add, which has served to hinder wider uptake of linux
based operating systems in the past. If your position were to be taken
to its logical conclusion we should scrap LibreOffice, which afterall is
pandering to the masses with its use of GUI and WYSIWYG, in favour of TeX.

Kind Regards,

Lee Hyde.


-- 
"Crime is naught but misdirected energy. So long as every institution of
today, economic, political, social, and moral, conspires to misdirect
human energy into wrong channels; so long as most people are out of
place doing the things they hate to do, living a life they loathe to
live, crime will be inevitable, and all the laws on the statutes can
only increase, but never do away with, crime."

-- Emma Goldman, Anarchism: What it Really Stands For (1910)


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Michael Wheatland]

> You were responding *my* mail not referring to my contents.
> Friedrich

I am new to this mailing list thing. I use Gmail and I reply by
clicking the 'reply' space at the very bottom of the conversation
list.
How are you able to tell which message I reply to? And what should I
be doing to ensure that the message gets to it's intended target?
But thanks for the tip.

Yes I was most defininately referring to Rene's comments.
I have experienced a similar type of arrogance amongst 2 other open
source projects, one of which was resolved quickly and resolutely by
it's members actively denouncing such attitudes within the community.

Thanks again,
Michael Wheatland

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Italo Vignoli]

Rene Engelhard wrote:


There is no goddamn need for it. (That Ubuntu people in 90% of cases have
no clue how they do basic system tasks doesn't make it more needed)


Please do consider that Ubuntu has allowed people like me to switch to 
Linux, although I still feel I have to use the terminal too frequently 
(being the ideal frequence equal to never).


I do not even think about installing a software if I have to open the 
terminal, and I am considered a geek in my professional environment of 
marketers.


So, I think that any user guide that makes it easier for computer 
illiterates to install a software is always welcome, provided that I 
will not install LibreOffice until is available in a repository that I 
can access via Ubuntu Tweak (but there are computer illiterates which 
are less illiterate than me, and they accept to use the terminal).


Please do remember that developers are not representing the average 
LibreOffice user, and user requests are usually important because they 
give us very important informations on how the software is perceived and 
used.


So, as a Steering Committee member, and as one of TDF spokepersons, I 
would really like to see these installation instructions for the basic 
illiterate Linux user. I might even end up installing LibreOffice even 
if it is not in a repository.


--
Italo Vignoli - The Document Foundation
E-mail: italo.vign...@documentfoundation.org
Mobile +39.348.5653829 - VoIP: +39.02.320621813
Skype: italovignoli - GTalk: italo.vign...@gmail.com

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[jonathon]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 11/22/2010 03:07 PM, Rene Engelhard wrote:

> Because dpkg -i *.deb is esssentialy setup.exe.

That would be true if, and only if there was _one_ deb to install, in
which gdeb would by used, not dpkg.

>Don't tell me anyone using Windows must not know setup.exe to install
software?

Out in the world of Joe Sixpack, autoexec.run on the CD/DVD/BluRay is
the program that installs software.

> There is no goddamn need for it.

By that token, there in no need for _any_ program, on any os, other than
emacs.

>(That Ubuntu people in 90% of cases have no clue how they do basic
system tasks doesn't make it more needed)

That lack of knowledge makes it imperative that that how to install the
files be included.  If that includes an explanation of how to use dpkg,
so be it.

To do otherwise is to alienate the program from those that are dipping
in the world of FLOSS.


jonathon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJM6qD/AAoJEOpnmQXT8Ln/FvAH/jVvHm75AWpD3C+fvR+r8v9X
fqENJXfEwvZI6GnSWoO6HUPkuL2QT+CG1ga1PlPJl2uhZRijstQYw3EmlSGLpWCY
pKCrdxz+i9cLXodelJXZApbOD95OYVX+xnffAA6MhPTiKuoudR0K6NhGquUHaAoY
XH445+Nvk4CEjdug/0QcLO8Yle69AcbYRSlYCcGfH5vvoyvIBJJZAKLyCPQBMPFS
9VRp8w1iGC2K82x5w1lcVt88+iazILWxQHcKiTjtF8QEs6iBsNqsgEBYy2Dfkitb
ylkRv70WdXP31EkZPapwpGXuw82qyICNxnxoTKB0Y1QUk575AKHIJcRlz1R9aSQ=
=+Roi
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Rene Engelhard]

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 03:52:41PM +, Lee Hyde wrote:
> original poster is making. Windows users are presented with a single
> setup.exe while debian/ubuntu users are presented with a multitude of
> individual .deb files. This is not user friendly!

Nonsense. dpkg -i *.deb is user friendly, despite what you want to claim.
That graphical tools might make it difficult is no argument.

> On 22/11/10 15:07, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > There is no goddamn need for it. (That Ubuntu people in 90% of cases have
> > no clue how they do basic system tasks doesn't make it more needed)
> 
> This is a rather hostile attitude to show towards end users and an

If those end users don't think, yes, you're right.

> based operating systems in the past. If your position were to be taken
> to its logical conclusion we should scrap LibreOffice, which afterall is
> pandering to the masses with its use of GUI and WYSIWYG, in favour of TeX.

No, my position taken to the logical conclusion would not be that (as I think
there's use cases for GUIs - I didn't say anything against them here but just
mentioned that dpkg is basics - we don't need GUIs but that we need a "drivers 
license"
for computers. Mandatory for everyone who wants to use PCs.

The same as if you would not be allowed to drive a car if you don't know where
the steering wheel or the gas pedal is, neither would you be allowed to use a 
gear car
when you only know automatic.

Learn basics, or live with people telling you that you need to look at basics 
before
you do stuff.

Grüße/Regards,

René

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Rene Engelhard]

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 06:50:36PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 03:52:41PM +, Lee Hyde wrote:
> > original poster is making. Windows users are presented with a single
> > setup.exe while debian/ubuntu users are presented with a multitude of
> > individual .deb files. This is not user friendly!
> 
> Nonsense. dpkg -i *.deb is user friendly, despite what you want to claim.
> That graphical tools might make it difficult is no argument.

Beisde that, you agree that .deb is what users should know. How on earth are 
they
then NOT to know how to install them? (And install all of debs one program 
consists
of?)

If we follow your thinking, there would be NO dependencies at all allowed and 
every
app needs to include every possible piece of software it needs - be it 
(security-)buggsy,
grossly oudated, unstable or whatever) just to please users.

[ Disclaimer: The packages which get out of the installer and are in that 
.tar.gz DO suck.
I don't deny that. I wholeheartly agree with you that THEY are user-unfriendly. 
dpkg is not. ]

Grüße/Regards,

René

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Rene Engelhard]

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 04:56:40PM +0100, Italo Vignoli wrote:
> So, I think that any user guide that makes it easier for computer
> illiterates to install a software is always welcome, provided that I
> will not install LibreOffice until is available in a repository that
> I can access via Ubuntu Tweak (but there are computer illiterates
> which are less illiterate than me, and they accept to use the
> terminal).

WTF is Ubuntu Tweak? *looking* omg. Annd that super-duper usable Ubuntu
doesn't have a tool equivalent to dpkg -i *.deb? Don't believe so really
(or they failed their goal more than I ever thought)

(Besides that, it is already in a Debian repository)

> basic illiterate Linux user. I might even end up installing
> LibreOffice even if it is not in a repository.

True. That doesn't contradict knowing basics of the OS you use, though.

I didn't claim people installing LibO need to know every detail of  their
system.

Grüße/Regards,

René

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Friedrich Strohmaier]

Hi René, *,

René Engelhard schrieb:

>On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 03:15:25PM +0100, Friedrich Strohmaier wrote:

>> So you'd recommend everybody just running a desktop machine and not
>> wanting to get a full featured serveradmin to abhore debian?

>No, I want desktop users to know how to use their system. And if they
>also administer it they should know basics about dpkg.

>> >http://packages.debian.org/libreoffice FTR.

>> I can't see this hint an useful answer to the OP's question
>> regarding his aparent debian knowledge.

>True, but those are debs he can install if he used squeeze or sid :)

From a geeks point of view You are right. But I'm shure that it is not a
good idea to make all people out there geeks before using a computer or
using office software ;o)).

So I heavily hope, that LibreOffice will leave it's past behind and
will grow from a developer driven software to a community driven one.

:o)))

Gruß/regards
-- 
Friedrich
Libreoffice-Box http://libreofficebox.org/
LibreOffice and more on CD/DVD images
(german version already started)




--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Lee Hyde]

On 22/11/10 17:50, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 03:52:41PM +, Lee Hyde wrote:
> Nonsense. dpkg -i *.deb is user friendly, despite what you want to claim.
> That graphical tools might make it difficult is no argument.
> 
It is obvious that the dpkg method described is a more involved
proceedure than a meta-package or installation script. Like it or not
Rene the icon metaphor is the predominant UI paradigm in modern
operating systems. That may one day change, but I cannot see the command
line supplanting it.

On 22/11/10 17:50, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> If those end users don't think, yes, you're right.
> 

I was not aware of the aforementioned dpkg method myself, and trust me
I'm no fool I'm simply not familiar with all of the ins and outs of the
linux command line. Nor do I have the time and/or inclination to do so
for such a trivial use-case as software installation.

On 22/11/10 17:50, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> No, my position taken to the logical conclusion would not be that (as I think
> there's use cases for GUIs - I didn't say anything against them here but just
> mentioned that dpkg is basics - we don't need GUIs but that we need a 
> "drivers license"
> for computers. Mandatory for everyone who wants to use PCs.
> 
> The same as if you would not be allowed to drive a car if you don't know where
> the steering wheel or the gas pedal is, neither would you be allowed to use a 
> gear car
> when you only know automatic.
> 
> Learn basics, or live with people telling you that you need to look at basics 
> before
> you do stuff.

This is an absolutely horrendous view to hold! Such patronising views
only serve to hold back the FOSS community. Strange as it may seem to
you Rene, many are intimedated by the command line. They shouldn't be,
but they are, and your above comments will do nothing to assuage such
end-users. In fact there more likely to turn back to Windows or MacOSX
than adapt to your way of thinking/doing. Some of us like our icon
metaphors and prefer our double-click > install to your open terminal >
navigate to directory > dpkg -i *.deb.

Also, The reason that people are required to qualify for a driving
license before driving a car is that behind the wheel of a car a bad
driver can easily kill a fellow road-user/cyclist/pedestrian. Now unless
the 1980s film 'War Games' was an accurate representation of computing
the same cannot be said of a technophobic office worker, in fact if
anything they be better off staying well clear of the command line.

I'm afraid that your patronizing 'get orf my land you idiot' mentality
will serve only to exclude the vast majority of end-users, as it has in
the past, and without a significant user base LibreOffice will
degenerate into little more than a hobby project and rightly so (if it
chooses to alienate the majority of computer users instead of embrace them).

-- 
"Cruel leaders are replaced only to have new leaders turn cruel."

-- Ernesto 'Che' Guevara


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[David Nelson]

Hi, :-)

I am ROFL reading this thread. :-D

Rene, I'll write that how-to this week, notably for Ubuntu users, and
then - if it's OK with you - I'll send you the draft with any
questions I have regarding Debian.

We could also include instructions about how to *de-install* an
already-installed beta 2.

Would that be OK with you?

David Nelson

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Rene Engelhard]

Hi,

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 07:34:13PM +0100, Friedrich Strohmaier wrote:
> From a geeks point of view You are right. But I'm shure that it is not a
> good idea to make all people out there geeks before using a computer or
> using office software ;o)).

Ah, so we should let people not care about their PCs, how to use it, keep it 
safe
etc. and thus affecting all, spreading viruses, spam and having botnets active?

> So I heavily hope, that LibreOffice will leave it's past behind and
> will grow from a developer driven software to a community driven one.

What the hell does that have to do with people using PCs getting their basics 
straight?
Correctly, it doesn't.
(Otherwise I agree with you, we can argue about marketing and I agree for some 
deeper
features you need docs, but come on, are you also going to tell people on how 
to use their
mouse?)

Grüße/Regards,

René

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Lee Hyde]

On 22/11/10 17:58, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> 
> Beisde that, you agree that .deb is what users should know. How on earth are 
> they
> then NOT to know how to install them? (And install all of debs one program 
> consists
> of?)
> 
I'm but a lowly Ubuntu user Rene, and I usually favour the use of
repositories which should nominally include all dependencies. But when
no repository is forth coming, as is the case with LibO (x86-64) I am
forced to slum it and use .deb files. The usual behavior when
double-clicking a .deb file is for the software centre to launch and
offer me the oppertunity to install (almost identical to setup.exe and
installer in windows) but since LibO consists of multiple dependencies
software centre throws a bit of a hissy fit regarding unresolvable
dependencies; it seems to me that a meta package and/or a script that
installs the whole suite would be preferable to directing the user to
open a terminal, navigate to the directory containing the .deb files and
type 'dpkg -i *.deb'.

But then again, I am but a humble Ubuntu user!


On 22/11/10 17:58, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> If we follow your thinking, there would be NO dependencies at all allowed and 
> every
> app needs to include every possible piece of software it needs - be it 
> (security-)buggsy,
> grossly oudated, unstable or whatever) just to please users.
> 
> [ Disclaimer: The packages which get out of the installer and are in that 
> .tar.gz DO suck.
> I don't deny that. I wholeheartly agree with you that THEY are 
> user-unfriendly. dpkg is not. ]
> 
I have no problem with dpkg at all, and I will likely use it to install
LibO whenever I get around to it. But most end users are not as
inquisitive as I when presented with what, to the uninitiated, looks
like dozens of separate installers and will either try to install each
package one by one (and be thwarted by errors) or give up. Now we can
either accept that reality and provide a simpler means of installing
LibO (a repository, a meta-package, an install script, etc...) or we can
edit the ReadMe to reflect the dpkg method for installation (and hope
the average end user will look to the ReadMe) or we can do both. I
favour the latter myself.


-- 
"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel"

-- Dr. Samuel Johnson (April 7th, 1775)


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Carl Symons]

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Lee Hyde  wrote:
>
>


>
> On 22/11/10 17:50, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>> No, my position taken to the logical conclusion would not be that (as I think
>> there's use cases for GUIs - I didn't say anything against them here but just
>> mentioned that dpkg is basics - we don't need GUIs but that we need a 
>> "drivers license"
>> for computers. Mandatory for everyone who wants to use PCs.
>>
>> The same as if you would not be allowed to drive a car if you don't know 
>> where
>> the steering wheel or the gas pedal is, neither would you be allowed to use 
>> a gear car
>> when you only know automatic.
>>
>> Learn basics, or live with people telling you that you need to look at 
>> basics before
>> you do stuff.
>
> This is an absolutely horrendous view to hold! Such patronising views
> only serve to hold back the FOSS community. Strange as it may seem to
> you Rene, many are intimedated by the command line. They shouldn't be,
> but they are, and your above comments will do nothing to assuage such
> end-users. In fact there more likely to turn back to Windows or MacOSX
> than adapt to your way of thinking/doing. Some of us like our icon
> metaphors and prefer our double-click > install to your open terminal >
> navigate to directory > dpkg -i *.deb.
>
> Also, The reason that people are required to qualify for a driving
> license before driving a car is that behind the wheel of a car a bad
> driver can easily kill a fellow road-user/cyclist/pedestrian. Now unless
> the 1980s film 'War Games' was an accurate representation of computing
> the same cannot be said of a technophobic office worker, in fact if
> anything they be better off staying well clear of the command line.
>
> I'm afraid that your patronizing 'get orf my land you idiot' mentality
> will serve only to exclude the vast majority of end-users, as it has in
> the past, and without a significant user base LibreOffice will
> degenerate into little more than a hobby project and rightly so (if it
> chooses to alienate the majority of computer users instead of embrace them).
>
> --

+1, Lee.

It would be good if people understood the tools that they use. But
they don't. And they won't. And they shouldn't have to in order to use
basic communication tools such as LibreOffice.

Expecting people to have a "license to compute" is quixotic. It is
simply not going to happen. There is no good reason to make
LibreOffice installation any more difficult than other run-of-the-mill
applications, whatever platform is involved.

Rene, (cordially) Your attitude seems more appropriate to a radical
LUGr or a Microsoft plant than to a group that is trying to get some
liftoff force for a F/OSS project that has a lot of potential. How is
it part of the DocumentFoundation mission to change people's basic
software installation habit?

There are plenty enough hurdles without trying to force behavior
changes artificially. What could you do to help the project succeed?

Carl

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Rene Engelhard]

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 02:55:22AM +0800, David Nelson wrote:
> I am ROFL reading this thread. :-D

You obviously are not thinking about the big picture, otherwise you wouldn't
laugh.

> Rene, I'll write that how-to this week, notably for Ubuntu users, and
> then - if it's OK with you - I'll send you the draft with any
> questions I have regarding Debian.
> 
> We could also include instructions about how to *de-install* an
> already-installed beta 2.
> 
> Would that be OK with you?

No, because both of those docs are unneeded. Do whatever you want for the distro
which should be died - not for this reason, though but others - but disconnect
me please from thoose propagdandists. Thanks.

Grüße/Regards,

René

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Lee Hyde]

On 22/11/10 18:18, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Annd that super-duper usable Ubuntu
> doesn't have a tool equivalent to dpkg -i *.deb? Don't believe so really
> (or they failed their goal more than I ever thought)
>

FWI To the best of my knowledge Ubuntu used to use dpkg to handle .deb
files but this is now handled by the software centre. It does seem that
the software centre is not set up to handle a multi-package installation
but it is a young application.

I may file a bug on this, it would be preferable for the software centre
to search the original directory for dependencies and/or allow the end
user to manually locate any dependencies that are not resolvable.

On 22/11/10 18:18, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> (Besides that, it is already in a Debian repository)
>

Is this Debian repository a dedicated LibO repository or does it contain
other packages? Does it include 64-bit builds of LibO?

-- 
"There is no patent. Could you patent the sun?"

-- Dr. Jonas Stalk, on being asked who owned the patent for his polio
vaccine



--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[David Nelson]

Hi, :-)

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 03:07, Rene Engelhard
 wrote:
> No, because both of those docs are unneeded. Do whatever you want for the 
> distro
> which should be died - not for this reason, though but others - but disconnect
> me please from thoose propagdandists. Thanks.

OK, sure, no worries. I'll figure it. ;-)

David Nelson

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Rene Engelhard]

Hi,

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 07:12:52PM +, Lee Hyde wrote:
> Is this Debian repository a dedicated LibO repository or does it contain
> other packages? Does it include 64-bit builds of LibO?

Other packages, too, but it also is priorized that way that you need to 
explicitly
select what you want. And yes, it does contain almost all archs OOo runs on:

 libreoffice | 1:3.3.0~beta3-2 | experimental | source, amd64, i386, 
kfreebsd-amd64, kfreebsd-i386, powerpc, sparc

ARM building right now, S390 failing because of perl, MIPS not yet built.

Besides that, there's also the publically announced 
http://people.debian.org/~rene/libreoffice/3.3.0.

64bit builds will ~always be the first to be there, since that is my work 
machine.

Grüße/Regards,

René

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Charles Marcus]

On 2010-11-22 10:07 AM, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> There is no goddamn need for it.

And there's no need for profanity either...

-- 

Best regards,

Charles Marcus

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Robert Holtzman]

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 06:50:36PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 03:52:41PM +, Lee Hyde wrote:
> > original poster is making. Windows users are presented with a single
> > setup.exe while debian/ubuntu users are presented with a multitude of
> > individual .deb files. This is not user friendly!
> 
> Nonsense. dpkg -i *.deb is user friendly, despite what you want to claim.
> That graphical tools might make it difficult is no argument.

   ..snip.

Whether it's user friendly or not depends on the user. If he/she/it is 
open to learning a *few* new things, it is extremely user friendly. 
There is, however, a segment of the population that actively resists
learning *anything*.


-- 
Bob Holtzman
Key ID: 8D549279
"If you think you're getting free lunch,
 check the price of the beer"

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Rene Engelhard]

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 02:28:54PM -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> open to learning a *few* new things, it is extremely user friendly. 
> There is, however, a segment of the population that actively resists
> learning *anything*.

And that's a problem.

Grüße/Regards,

René

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Sigrid Carrera]

Hello Michael, 

Am Tue, 23 Nov 2010 01:30:19 +0930
schrieb Michael Wheatland :

> > You were responding *my* mail not referring to my contents.
> > Friedrich
> 
> I am new to this mailing list thing. I use Gmail and I reply by
> clicking the 'reply' space at the very bottom of the conversation
> list.

Don't worry, everyone here was once new to this "mailing list
thing". :) 

> How are you able to tell which message I reply to? And what should I
> be doing to ensure that the message gets to it's intended target?
> But thanks for the tip.

Every email contains a header like this: 
In-Reply-To: <201011221623.03013.damokles4-lis...@bits-fritz.de>
(this is copied from your mail). :) So if you use a "proper" email
client, the client can sort the emails where they belong and you can
see who replied to which comment of another user. 

If you want to reply to a specific mail (that isn't the last email in
the conversation list), then use the other reply button that is on the
top right corner of that specific email. 

You will then see, that gmail quotes the correct mail content and you
can comment to the specific paragraphs. 
 
> Yes I was most defininately referring to Rene's comments.
> I have experienced a similar type of arrogance amongst 2 other open
> source projects, one of which was resolved quickly and resolutely by
> it's members actively denouncing such attitudes within the community.

Yes, I agree with you, arrogance doesn't help this project. But I
guess, René (btw, he is (was?) the Debian maintainer for OOo, and I
guess, he will maintain LibO for Debian too) has seen similar questions
too much and many people aren't willing to learn something new. So I can
understand, that he lost patience. But this is no excuse, since I've
seen this question only once here. 

Sigrid

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Italo Vignoli]

Sigrid Carrera wrote:


Yes, I agree with you, arrogance doesn't help this project. But I
guess, René (btw, he is (was?) the Debian maintainer for OOo, and I
guess, he will maintain LibO for Debian too) has seen similar questions
too much and many people aren't willing to learn something new. So I can
understand, that he lost patience. But this is no excuse, since I've
seen this question only once here.


I think that every individual has the right to decide what he want to 
learn and what he does not want to learn. I do not want to learn to use 
the Terminal. Full stop. It is my right, and I simply ignore software if 
I have to use the Terminal.


Each one of us is good at something, and bad at something. I am bad at 
technology, but good at marketing and communications. I have never told 
to people unable to speak in public that they MUST learn to speak in 
public (also because the majority is not able to learn the skills which 
are necessary for that task, either because they are not interested or 
because - being humans - lack the basic ability).


I lack the ability of learning to use technology beyond a certain level 
of complexity, because I am not interested, exactly as other people are 
not able to speak in public because they lack the basic ability. What 
should I tell them: speaking in public is SOOO easy, why are you so DUMB?


Unfortunately, reading this thread I have realized that TDF is too much 
developer oriented, exactly as OOo was too much developer oriented (and 
missed many objectives because of this bias).


As a founding member and a Steering Committee member of TDF, I am not 
happy at all. Users must be respected, and if a user asks for an easier 
installation procedure, he is probably right (and the easier procedure 
has to be provided, sooner or later according to resources).


--
Italo Vignoli
italo.vign...@gmail.com
Mobile +39.348.5653829
VoIP: +39.02.320621813
Skype: italovignoli

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Robert Holtzman]

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 03:06:27PM -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-11-22 10:07 AM, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > There is no goddamn need for it.
> 
> And there's no need for profanity either...

Sometimes it's required.

-- 
Bob Holtzman
Key ID: 8D549279
"If you think you're getting free lunch,
 check the price of the beer"

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Robert Holtzman]

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 01:30:19AM +0930, Michael Wheatland wrote:
> > You were responding *my* mail not referring to my contents.
> > Friedrich
> 
> I am new to this mailing list thing. I use Gmail and I reply by
> clicking the 'reply' space at the very bottom of the conversation
> list.
> How are you able to tell which message I reply to? And what should I
> be doing to ensure that the message gets to it's intended target?
> But thanks for the tip.
> 
> Yes I was most defininately referring to Rene's comments.
> I have experienced a similar type of arrogance amongst 2 other open
> source projects, one of which was resolved quickly and resolutely by
> it's members actively denouncing such attitudes within the community.

A little gratuitous advice (not criticism). If you are new to mailing
lists be aware that you should develop a thick skin. You're dealing
with people and some people have shorter fuses than others. If they come
across to you as arrogant you have several options. Ignore them, dig
through the perceived arrogance to see what they are trying to convey,
or filter their posts. The last runs the risk of missing out on
important information.

FWIW my attitude toward people learning at least the rudiments of their
OS, beyond merely where to point and click, is quite similar to Rene's.
> 
> Thanks again,
> Michael Wheatland
> 
> -- 
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
> Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
> *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

-- 
Bob Holtzman
Key ID: 8D549279
"If you think you're getting free lunch,
 check the price of the beer"

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Carl Symons]

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Robert Holtzman  wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 01:30:19AM +0930, Michael Wheatland wrote:

>> Yes I was most defininately referring to Rene's comments.
>> I have experienced a similar type of arrogance amongst 2 other open
>> source projects, one of which was resolved quickly and resolutely by
>> it's members actively denouncing such attitudes within the community.
>
> A little gratuitous advice (not criticism). If you are new to mailing
> lists be aware that you should develop a thick skin. You're dealing
> with people and some people have shorter fuses than others. If they come
> across to you as arrogant you have several options. Ignore them, dig
> through the perceived arrogance to see what they are trying to convey,
> or filter their posts. The last runs the risk of missing out on
> important information.
>
> FWIW my attitude toward people learning at least the rudiments of their
> OS, beyond merely where to point and click, is quite similar to Rene's.
>>

In like fashion, people who don't want to put up with gratuitous
profanity have the same right to speak up about it. The person who
acts in ways that others perceive as arrogant and uses language that
detracts from conversations runs the risk of being dismissed. This
train runs both ways. The idea that profanity is sometimes required is
laughable. Why is that? To make a point more forcefully. To derail a
conversation. Whatever. The Document Foundation is a community
offering valuable software. Profanity IMO is unnecessary.

It is not anywhere written in the mission of the Document Foundation
that users have to learn anything about installation. However, there
is this on the LibreOffice page, "...improving how to make the
software available to our users." It would seem that Italo's position
is more in keeping with the apparent tech-elite proposed by Rene and
Robert Holtzman. You are certainly free to hold the opinion and impose
it on people that you support. It appears as though the requirement
that people have to know their OS before they can use LibO is going
down in defeat. Time for more swearing!!!

Italo, I work on several open source projects. Almost everyone else
involved is a developer (I'm more in your camp, although the dpkg -i
x86_64 .deb issue is well within my ability). In every case, there is
shared emphasis on users. What benefits the users? There's a whole lot
to that of course. But in no case is there the attitude that people
need to learn some level of the OS before they are considered worthy
of the product. Thank you for your work in making the Document
Foundation happen. I believe that you are on the right side of this
issue.

Carl

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Italo Vignoli]

Carl Symons wrote:


Italo, I work on several open source projects. Almost everyone else
involved is a developer (I'm more in your camp, although the dpkg -i
x86_64 .deb issue is well within my ability). In every case, there is
shared emphasis on users. What benefits the users? There's a whole lot
to that of course. But in no case is there the attitude that people
need to learn some level of the OS before they are considered worthy
of the product. Thank you for your work in making the Document
Foundation happen. I believe that you are on the right side of this
issue.


Thanks.

I can, of course, try to use the Terminal to install a software, and I 
have done it in the past when Ubuntu Tweak was not there.


I have a netbook with the infamous Poulsbo graphic card, and I have to 
run a script to make it usable (and I have to use the damned Terminal). 
But I do not like it, and it makes me nervous as I do not understand 
what is happening.


The fact that I am technically illiterate (and I like being so) does not 
make me a worse user, or one with less rights. Communities around the 
world have made OOo a better product because they have cared about 
users, although the project was clearly driven by developers not able to 
show any respect for users (and where the community was not there the 
project has been marginally successful).


TDF should not reproduce the same mistakes. The success of the project 
cannot be built on a group prevailing on others.


--
Italo Vignoli
italo.vign...@gmail.com
Mobile +39.348.5653829
VoIP: +39.02.320621813
Skype: italovignoli

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Michael Wheatland]

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Italo Vignoli  wrote:
> TDF should not reproduce the same mistakes. The success of the project
> cannot be built on a group prevailing on others.

> Italo Vignoli

Italo,
Thanks for all of the hard work with the foundation. I am sure this
will be a great project, we just need to get things right early.

In response to this thread I would like to propose that the steering
committee move a motion with respect to supportive, positive
communication while using all official LibreOffice communication
methods.
This could be in the form of a code of conduct like:
http://www.ubuntu.com/community/conduct

I know the by-laws are a little way off, but as a community it is very
important to address and quash any aggressive or vitriolic attitudes
and establish a community culture that is supportive nurturing.
IMHO we need a mechanism to deal with this earlier rather than later,
even if that means loosing (or in extreme cases kicking) some
technically talented people due to their attitude.

Rene and Robert,
How can the community help you to change your attitude or approach and
take on the widely accepted etiquette, patience and manners open
source project culture.

Thanks,
Michael Wheatland

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Robert Holtzman]

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 10:31:58PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 02:28:54PM -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> > open to learning a *few* new things, it is extremely user friendly. 
> > There is, however, a segment of the population that actively resists
> > learning *anything*.
> 
> And that's a problem.

I would say that's *the* problem.

-- 
Bob Holtzman
Key ID: 8D549279
"If you think you're getting free lunch,
 check the price of the beer"

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Michael Wheatland]

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Robert Holtzman  wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 10:31:58PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 02:28:54PM -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
>> > open to learning a *few* new things, it is extremely user friendly.
>> > There is, however, a segment of the population that actively resists
>> > learning *anything*.
>>
>> And that's a problem.
>
> I would say that's *the* problem.
> Bob Holtzman

The message does not seem to be getting through here.
Simply: This type of personal criticism is unacceptable in the
LibreOffice community.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Sveinn í Felli]

Þann þri 23.nóv 2010 02:17, skrifaði Michael Wheatland:

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Robert Holtzman  wrote:

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 10:31:58PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 02:28:54PM -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:

open to learning a *few* new things, it is extremely user friendly.
There is, however, a segment of the population that actively resists
learning *anything*.


And that's a problem.


I would say that's *the* problem.
Bob Holtzman


The message does not seem to be getting through here.
Simply: This type of personal criticism is unacceptable in the
LibreOffice community.



Maybe this can serve as a warning; we should carefully hurry 
to put up more specialised communication channels (avoiding 
group isolation but still minimizing similar clashes). I see 
the argument made by Rene as somewhat valid - but only in a 
certain context.
Which it is not on the [tdf-discuss] list but might be on an 
[tdf-devel-discuss] list (although some manners could be 
useful).


It's quite surreal to see some power users/developers not 
seeing or refusing to see that the whole concept of the 
software in question IS a big metaphor: Office.
And its users are using GUIs and other metaphors for 
handling the software; for even the most capable of them the 
CLI is at best scary.


As a translation coordinator of LibO/OOo and other things, I 
can confirm that the best translators are not necessarily 
capable of learning basic command-line commands. They want 
an easy way to see their translations in action.
And the sysadmins I've been working with are normally too 
overloaded to remember upgrading manually the LibO/OOo 
packages on their systems (my language is not yet in the 
official distribution channels). They want their software to 
come through official and reliable repositories.
So it took about 30 minutes of searching and fiddling to 
create a Packages.gz file and publishing the packages as our 
localised .deb repository. Think it's similar for other 
flavors like yum .rpm.
Still I'd like a primary metapackage so we could 
install/deinstall ONE package instead of the whole bunch.


Anyway, I presume LibO will not be distributed this way in 
the future, 'dpkg -i *.deb' or 'rpm -ivh *.rpm' will be 
reserved for testing/development/adventurous people.
Linux users will get their LibreOffice through their package 
managers, probably via distribution specific repositories. I 
think I saw another thread a while ago where it was 
discussed whether LibreOffice should maintain their own 
repo. Maybe one for testing/QA/translations would be useful.


Just my 2 centimes,

Sveinn í Felli


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Sonic4Spuds]

On 11/22/2010 06:31 AM, Rene Engelhard wrote:

Hi,

On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 09:03:35AM -0600, Alexandro Colorado wrote:

unsuspecting users to the same problem that OOo has been famous for:
there is no obvious way to start to install the files.  Dependencies for

dpkg -i *.deb?


each .deb have to be met, but nothing indicates the order with which to
install them.  When dealing with 52 .deb files it's like trying to do a
jigsaw puzzle where all distinguishing marks have been filed off.

Nope. Really, I expect anybody having root on a Debian-based system to know
dpkg. Seriously.

This is not the case, many people on debian based systems are new to 
linux. Linux Mint and Ubuntu both use debian as their base. These are 
some of the best distros for new users, who usually have a fear of the 
terminal and typing command arguments.


It would make sense for LibreOffice to make it an easy for new and 
inexperienced users to both use and test the suite:-) .

It would be much easier if there were a single meta-package that would
act as the start point.  Failing that, at least an ordered list that an

http://packages.debian.org/libreoffice FTR.

Grüße/Regards,

René




--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Charles Marcus]

On 2010-11-22 9:11 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 10:31:58PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 02:28:54PM -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
>>> There is, however, a segment of the population that actively resists
>>> learning *anything*.

>> And that's a problem.

> I would say that's *the* problem.

Why? People like this will *always* have a problem with *any* software
updates that change *anything* - so, why worry about it?

Just keep improving the software (e.g., I was really happy to see the
prompt for making the file associations for the Microsoft formats back
in the GUI in the LibO 3.3b3 installer), improve the FAQ's and Help
files and Installation instructions based on feedback from the user
community, and don't worry about 'problems' that you have no control over.

-- 

Best regards,

Charles

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Charles Marcus]

On 2010-11-22 5:50 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 03:06:27PM -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
>> On 2010-11-22 10:07 AM, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>>> There is no goddamn need for it.

>> And there's no need for profanity either...

> Sometimes it's required.

That is absurd. I have no problem with profanity on private mail lists
or in private personal discussions if the creators/owners of such lists
choose to allow it, but it should never be tolerated on public support
mail lists like this one.

I certainly hope the moderators will enforce bans on such behavior,
otherwise your and my Grandmothers will likely not hang around very long.

-- 

Best regards,

Charles

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Sonic4Spuds]

On 11/22/2010 11:50 AM, Rene Engelhard wrote:

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 03:52:41PM +, Lee Hyde wrote:

original poster is making. Windows users are presented with a single
setup.exe while debian/ubuntu users are presented with a multitude of
individual .deb files. This is not user friendly!

Nonsense. dpkg -i *.deb is user friendly, despite what you want to claim.
That graphical tools might make it difficult is no argument.


On 22/11/10 15:07, Rene Engelhard wrote:

There is no goddamn need for it. (That Ubuntu people in 90% of cases have
no clue how they do basic system tasks doesn't make it more needed)

This is a rather hostile attitude to show towards end users and an

If those end users don't think, yes, you're right.


based operating systems in the past. If your position were to be taken
to its logical conclusion we should scrap LibreOffice, which afterall is
pandering to the masses with its use of GUI and WYSIWYG, in favour of TeX.

No, my position taken to the logical conclusion would not be that (as I think
there's use cases for GUIs - I didn't say anything against them here but just
mentioned that dpkg is basics - we don't need GUIs but that we need a "drivers 
license"
for computers. Mandatory for everyone who wants to use PCs.

The same as if you would not be allowed to drive a car if you don't know where
the steering wheel or the gas pedal is, neither would you be allowed to use a 
gear car
when you only know automatic.

Learn basics, or live with people telling you that you need to look at basics 
before
you do stuff.

Grüße/Regards,

René

Personally I think that the mailing list admin needs to message these 
people. Libre and FLOSS by definition are for the "ignorant" masses and 
not for the select few who don't care for a visual experience. It is sad 
to see people flaming new users so soon after this project was started.


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Sonic4Spuds]

On 11/22/2010 02:06 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:

On 2010-11-22 10:07 AM, Rene Engelhard wrote:

There is no goddamn need for it.

And there's no need for profanity either...


+2:-)

I agree with this suggestion.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Friedrich Strohmaier]

Hi René, *,

René Engelhard schrieb:
>On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 07:34:13PM +0100, Friedrich Strohmaier wrote:

>> From a geeks point of view You are right. But I'm shure that it is
>> not a good idea to make all people out there geeks before using a
>> computer or using office software ;o)).

>Ah, so we should let people not care about their PCs, how to use it,
> keep it safe etc. and thus affecting all, spreading viruses, spam and
> having botnets active?

No, it's never a good idea to replace one evel with another one and I
can't remember having advocated that. :o))

>> So I heavily hope, that LibreOffice will leave it's past behind and
>> will grow from a developer driven software to a community driven
>> one.

> What the hell does that have to do with people using PCs getting their
> basics straight? Correctly, it doesn't.

Yes, You are right. It was the attitude carried by Your advice which
made me writing that statement. I missed the respect regarding the OP's
work, deciding to install Libreoffice, getting wired, and *writing a
report* about that. We definitly *want* that information.

> (Otherwise I agree with you, we can argue about marketing and I agree
> for some deeper features you need docs, but come on, are you also
> going to tell people on how to use their mouse?)

Using a mouse (I learned that 36 years old in five minutes) and
installing deb based software *not hold by a repo*, are incomparably
different levels of technical practice :o)).


Gruß/regards
-- 
Friedrich
Libreoffice-Box http://libreofficebox.org/
LibreOffice and more on CD/DVD images
(german version already started)


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Robert Holtzman]

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:47:38AM +0930, Michael Wheatland wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Robert Holtzman  wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 10:31:58PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> >> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 02:28:54PM -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> >> > open to learning a *few* new things, it is extremely user friendly.
> >> > There is, however, a segment of the population that actively resists
> >> > learning *anything*.
> >>
> >> And that's a problem.
> >
> > I would say that's *the* problem.
> > Bob Holtzman
> 
> The message does not seem to be getting through here.
> Simply: This type of personal criticism is unacceptable in the
> LibreOffice community.

Let's try getting my message through: It's not personal criticism when
it's not directed at an individual! It's an observation. End of
discussion!

-- 
Bob Holtzman
Key ID: 8D549279
"If you think you're getting free lunch,
 check the price of the beer"

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Robert Holtzman]

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 09:13:16AM -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-11-22 9:11 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 10:31:58PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> >> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 02:28:54PM -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> >>> There is, however, a segment of the population that actively resists
> >>> learning *anything*.
> 
> >> And that's a problem.
> 
> > I would say that's *the* problem.
> 
> Why? People like this will *always* have a problem with *any* software
> updates that change *anything* - so, why worry about it?

Not worrried. Just an observation.

> 
> Just keep improving the software (e.g., I was really happy to see the
> prompt for making the file associations for the Microsoft formats back
> in the GUI in the LibO 3.3b3 installer), improve the FAQ's and Help
> files and Installation instructions based on feedback from the user
> community, and don't worry about 'problems' that you have no control over.

Where in my post did I indicate that I was worried?

-- 
Bob Holtzman
Key ID: 8D549279
"If you think you're getting free lunch,
 check the price of the beer"

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Bernhard Dippold]

Hi Rene, all,

it seems that your mail started an evolution in this thread leading to 
negative feelings and reproaches that should be avoided.


The Steering Committee asked me and Cor Nouws to have a eye on this (and 
the other lists we're subscribed to) in order to keep discussions on 
topic and avoid misbehavior.


Sorry for stepping in so late, but I'm unable to be present 24 hours a 
day...


Rene Engelhard schrieb:

Hi,

On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 09:03:35AM -0600, Alexandro Colorado wrote:

unsuspecting users to the same problem that OOo has been famous for:
there is no obvious way to start to install the files.  Dependencies for


dpkg -i *.deb?


each .deb have to be met, but nothing indicates the order with which to
install them.  When dealing with 52 .deb files it's like trying to do a
jigsaw puzzle where all distinguishing marks have been filed off.


Nope. Really, I expect anybody having root on a Debian-based system to know
dpkg. Seriously.


This is your personal opinion, you didn't blame anybody - nothing to say 
against it.


But as the follow-up turned out to become more personal, I want to add 
my comments here (dedicated to all posters here in this thread):


Your expectation is only valid for yourself - you can't tell anybody 
else to follow your opinion.


People with different experience and opinions should never be treated as 
fools or idiots.


In a volunteer community nobody has the right to force anybody to do 
something. If it might be a bug-fix, an addition to the readme, a piece 
of documentation, artwork or (really necessary at the moment) work on 
the LibreOffice website.


But on the other hand nobody is allowed to exclude a contribution just 
because of his or her opinion, political or other interests. If there 
are valid reasons they have to be discussed and decided - but this 
should never be done by any individual.


I don't know if René's position not to include additional installation 
instructions is shared by the majority of developers. It only shows that 
we should have a closer look at the Community Bylaws.


The board deciding on including or excluding features and code 
contributions is *not* the Engineering Steering Committee [ESC]. Their 
task is "to provide technical guidance, settle technical disputes ..."


The Board of Directors [BoD] - elected by all approved members of 
community - has to provide (among others) "strategic planning, dispute 
settlement and community guidance", so it's their duty to find our 
community's way if there are oppositional interests in different groups 
of our community.


But normally our intentions are not controversial at all: We want to 
improve our office suite, get more people to install and use it and find 
new contributor and more high quality contributions.


So - to come back to the very topic here:

Thanks to David [1] there will be a bug filed to include his how-to 
(might be based on NoOp's posting[2]) in the Linux version of LibreOffice.


I don't see a reason why René would have to be the one to do this 
inclusion, if there is anybody else able to do so.


If there are more than personal reasons not to include it, this should 
be mentioned in the bug report and brought back to this list for further 
consideration. I think here on this list is the best mixture of "just" 
users and people with profound knowledge of our product. I'd love to see 
some input by our UX expert(s), but this seems to me a basic political 
question: Do we want to make it as easy as possible to install and use 
our product on every supported platform?


Only in case there is no common agreement on this topic the SC (being in 
the position of the BoD until the first election) should be involved.


So please let's keep on the good work and avoid insulting each other 
just because we're individual people with different opinions on one or 
another topic.


Best regards

Bernhard

[1]: 
[2]: 

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Rene Engelhard]

Hi,

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 09:21:08AM +, Sveinn í Felli wrote:
> It's quite surreal to see some power users/developers not seeing or
> refusing to see that the whole concept of the software in question
> IS a big metaphor: Office.

Wrong, I do see it.

> And its users are using GUIs and other metaphors for handling the
> software; for even the most capable of them the CLI is at best
> scary.

Correct, they are *users* _of the office_. For that I agree, they don't
need to worry. For people *installing* the office and thus effectively
*asministering* their system it *does* matter.

> And the sysadmins I've been working with are normally too overloaded
> to remember upgrading manually the LibO/OOo packages on their
> systems (my language is not yet in the official distribution
> channels). They want their software to come through official and
> reliable repositories.
> So it took about 30 minutes of searching and fiddling to create a
> Packages.gz file and publishing the packages as our localised .deb
> repository. Think it's similar for other flavors like yum .rpm.
> Still I'd like a primary metapackage so we could install/deinstall
> ONE package instead of the whole bunch.

You can trivially create one if you have the above in a Packages.gz
anyways.

> Anyway, I presume LibO will not be distributed this way in the
> future, 'dpkg -i *.deb' or 'rpm -ivh *.rpm' will be reserved for
> testing/development/adventurous people.
> Linux users will get their LibreOffice through their package
> managers, probably via distribution specific repositories. I think I

Exactly.

Grüße/Regards,

René

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Rene Engelhard]

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 07:50:59AM -0600, Sonic4Spuds wrote:
> This is not the case, many people on debian based systems are new to
> linux. Linux Mint and Ubuntu both use debian as their base. These

And those still have to know basics.

Even totally nonsensical beginner documents I find printed in random
bookstores mention on how you do essential stuff on the console.

> are some of the best distros for new users, who usually have a fear
> of the terminal and typing command arguments.

And their quality is bad. Mentioning Ubuntu as an example here disqualifies
you already.

Grüße/Regards,

René

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Michael Wheatland]

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:49 PM, Rene Engelhard
 wrote:

> And their quality is bad. Mentioning Ubuntu as an example here disqualifies
> you already.

In Your Humble Opinion.

Again please avoid attacks on individuals or groups of users. This
risks alienating a large group of users.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Valter Mura]

In data lunedì 22 novembre 2010 17:57:46, jonathon ha scritto:

> On 11/22/2010 03:07 PM, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Because dpkg -i *.deb is esssentialy setup.exe.
> 
> That would be true if, and only if there was _one_ deb to install, in
> which gdeb would by used, not dpkg.
> 
> >Don't tell me anyone using Windows must not know setup.exe to install
> 
> software?
> 
> Out in the world of Joe Sixpack, autoexec.run on the CD/DVD/BluRay is
> the program that installs software.
> 
> > There is no goddamn need for it.
> 
> By that token, there in no need for _any_ program, on any os, other than
> emacs.
> 
> >(That Ubuntu people in 90% of cases have no clue how they do basic
> 
> system tasks doesn't make it more needed)
> 
> That lack of knowledge makes it imperative that that how to install the
> files be included.  If that includes an explanation of how to use dpkg,
> so be it.

IMHO, everything must be explained for novices/newbies in Linux.

Regarding the Ubuntu system, a simple double click on a .deb package should 
autorun the installation, but I also would ask the mantainers/developers of 
the Ubuntu project to add Libò in their repositories. This should lead to a 
quite smart installation for all people.

Ciao
-- 
Valter
Registered Linux User #466410  http://counter.li.org
Kubuntu Linux: www.kubuntu.org
OpenOffice.org: www.openoffice.org

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Valter Mura]

In data lunedì 22 novembre 2010 22:28:54, Robert Holtzman ha scritto:

> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 06:50:36PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 03:52:41PM +, Lee Hyde wrote:
> > > original poster is making. Windows users are presented with a single
> > > setup.exe while debian/ubuntu users are presented with a multitude of
> > > individual .deb files. This is not user friendly!
> > 
> > Nonsense. dpkg -i *.deb is user friendly, despite what you want to claim.
> > That graphical tools might make it difficult is no argument.
> 
>..snip.
> 
> Whether it's user friendly or not depends on the user. If he/she/it is
> open to learning a *few* new things, it is extremely user friendly.
> There is, however, a segment of the population that actively resists
> learning *anything*.

That's why: the more user-friendly, the more Libò will spread throughout the 
world...

-- 
Valter
Registered Linux User #466410  http://counter.li.org
Kubuntu Linux: www.kubuntu.org
OpenOffice.org: www.openoffice.org

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Valter Mura]

In data martedì 23 novembre 2010 10:21:08, Sveinn í Felli ha scritto:

> Þann þri 23.nóv 2010 02:17, skrifaði Michael Wheatland:
> > On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Robert Holtzman  wrote:
> >> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 10:31:58PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 02:28:54PM -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
>  open to learning a *few* new things, it is extremely user friendly.
>  There is, however, a segment of the population that actively resists
>  learning *anything*.
> >>> 
> >>> And that's a problem.
> >> 
> >> I would say that's *the* problem.
> >> Bob Holtzman
> > 
> > The message does not seem to be getting through here.
> > Simply: This type of personal criticism is unacceptable in the
> > LibreOffice community.
> 
> Maybe this can serve as a warning; we should carefully hurry
> to put up more specialised communication channels (avoiding
> group isolation but still minimizing similar clashes). I see
> the argument made by Rene as somewhat valid - but only in a
> certain context.
> Which it is not on the [tdf-discuss] list but might be on an
> [tdf-devel-discuss] list (although some manners could be
> useful).
> 
> It's quite surreal to see some power users/developers not
> seeing or refusing to see that the whole concept of the
> software in question IS a big metaphor: Office.
> And its users are using GUIs and other metaphors for
> handling the software; for even the most capable of them the
> CLI is at best scary.

+1

-- 
Valter
Registered Linux User #466410  http://counter.li.org
Kubuntu Linux: www.kubuntu.org
OpenOffice.org: www.openoffice.org

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Bernhard Dippold]

Hi René,

Rene Engelhard schrieb:

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 07:50:59AM -0600, Sonic4Spuds wrote:

This is not the case, many people on debian based systems are new
to linux. Linux Mint and Ubuntu both use debian as their base.
These

[...]

are some of the best distros for new users, who usually have a
fear of the terminal and typing command arguments.


And their quality is bad.


Even if it were - it depends on what you expect. Windows quality isn't
the best either, but this doesn't mean that Windows or Ubuntu
should be excluded from being a platform/distro where we invite people
to test and use LibreOffice.

LibreOffice is not the place to draw people to "true" Linux - it's about 
users and their needs. And if our Ubuntu users can be helped by 
providing a short "how-to install" this should definitely be considered 
as worth to be included in the product.



Mentioning Ubuntu as an example here disqualifies you already.


Please stop this kind of attitude immediately.

Insulting others can't be the way to discuss *any* topic on our lists.

You may have a strong opinion on Ubuntu quality, but this doesn't mean 
anything to your attitude against Sonic4Spuds (whatever his/her name 
might be).


On a developer list you might expect on a certain degree of developer's 
background information, even if I don't think you can insist on it. But 
we're here on the main discuss list of LibreOffice.


Our community doesn't consist of developers only, but of a great variety 
of different experts, supporters and people willing to help in one or 
another area.


Everybody should try to stay friendly in his/her postings, re-read them 
before sending and decide to modify them (or not to send them at all) if 
they might attack others personally.


Best regards

Bernhard


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Cor Nouws]

Hi Bernhard, René,

Thanks for giving some guidance and explanation here, Bernhard.

Bernhard Dippold wrote (24-11-10 21:24)


Mentioning Ubuntu as an example here disqualifies you already.


Please stop this kind of attitude immediately.

Insulting others can't be the way to discuss *any* topic on our lists.


I have the impression that René does mean this as a sort of technical 
determination, rather than a personal qualification.


Used in this way, it is rather unusual, I guess and possibly hard to 
understand for the average reader. So a bit different wording surely 
would help.


René, I would appreciate I you can give your view on this.

Regards,
Cor

--
 - giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation -


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Robert Holtzman]

On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 12:30:38PM +0100, Valter Mura wrote:
> In data lunedì 22 novembre 2010 22:28:54, Robert Holtzman ha scritto:
> 
> > On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 06:50:36PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 03:52:41PM +, Lee Hyde wrote:
> > > > original poster is making. Windows users are presented with a single
> > > > setup.exe while debian/ubuntu users are presented with a multitude of
> > > > individual .deb files. This is not user friendly!
> > > 
> > > Nonsense. dpkg -i *.deb is user friendly, despite what you want to claim.
> > > That graphical tools might make it difficult is no argument.
> > 
> >..snip.
> > 
> > Whether it's user friendly or not depends on the user. If he/she/it is
> > open to learning a *few* new things, it is extremely user friendly.
> > There is, however, a segment of the population that actively resists
> > learning *anything*.
> 
> That's why: the more user-friendly, the more Libò will spread throughout the 
> world...

I have a problem when it comes to rewarding people that refuse to make
an effort to learn. Notice, I said "refuse", not "incapable of"

-- 
Bob Holtzman
Key ID: 8D549279
"If you think you're getting free lunch,
 check the price of the beer"

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[David Nelson]

Hi, :-)

I've drafted an amended readme for the LibreOffice Linux downloads,
that contains:

- detailed instructions for installing LibreOffice on Debian/Ubuntu,
Fedora, Suse and Mandriva, with supporting notes for other Linux
distribs;

- detailed instructions for installing language packs on all the above distribs;

- detailed instructions for de-installing an existing LibreOffice
installation, covering all the above Linux distribs.

It would be useful to proofread what I've added, for technical
correctness and accuracy.

I've filed a bug report on the tracker [1], together with the updated
readme in ODT format. I've also uploaded the file to the wiki [2]. The
wiki would probably be the best version to proofread/correct? (I've
set a watch on the file, so I'll be notified about any updated version
that gets uploaded, and will update the bug report as necessary.)

Please feel free to add your technical comments to the bugtracker [1]
rather than here; I'll be watching that bug and will ensure that any
necessary corrections/amendments get applied.

Hopefully, these instructions be included with the next release, and
maybe the existing download will be updated.

Thanks if so. ;-)

HTH.

[1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31956
[2] 
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:Readme-for-libreoffice-beta3-linux.odt

David Nelson

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

[tdf-discuss] Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Dr. Bernhard Dippold]

Hi Jonathan, *'

Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
> I am not trying to hijack this list, but wouldn't it be better to have a 
> list for each language that we support, if we have users of particular 
> languages they can use that list and not have to struggle to use English 
> to get help?
> 
Every native-language team is invited to show their users the way to the 
users lists. 

At the moment mailing lists for quite a number of languages have been 
created:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Local_Mailing_Lists

Please have a look at the teams providing a us...@[iso].libreoffice.org for 
teams following this approach already

Best regards

Bernhard




-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***