Re: [Libreoffice] Comments on RC1

On 12/06/2010 05:15 PM, Jean-Baptiste Faure wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Le 06/12/2010 23:10, Michael Meeks a écrit :
>> Hi Sophie&  Wols,
>>
>> On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 20:57 +0300, Sophie Gautier wrote:
>>> - the Windows multilanguage installer is really a pain when you are 
on a
>>> slow connexion
>>        It took under five minutes for me to download; 8Mbit, I can imagine it
>> taking ten times longer on a 1Mbit link, from Madagascar - perhaps you
>> don't have a mirrorbrain mirror topologically close to you ?
>>
> Why not grouping all installation tasks in the language pack ?
> 1/ the user download the language pack he want
> 2/ he installs this language pack and its installer ask the user to
> provide the archive of the core application or to give the permission to
> download it.
> 3/ if the user want add another language pack to an existing
> installation, the installer must be sufficiently smart to detect it and
> just add the new language.
>
> Proceding this way, we need only one file for the core application
> without duplication through all localizations.
>
> Best regards
> JBF
>

First off, I have a 512 kbps(yes, kilobits per a second) link, and I am 
considered lucky in my neighborhood. Really, luck has nothing to do with 
it... I had to pay $300 for install and have to pay $60 a month for it. 
Most people in my area still have dial-up with ~28-56kbps. So yes, for 
us the multi-language installer is a pain. (luckily, I use linux 
anyways, I only keep windows around for testing).

In my opinion, installation should go like this:

1. Download a generic installer with a minimal selection of languages
2. Part of the installer asks if you want to install other languages and 
pulls a list from a mirror.
3. If you want one, you choose it and it is downloaded.
4. You get to choose where to install (pet peeve of mine that that is 
not currently offered[at least in beta 3, I haven't actually installed 
rc1 on windows yet])
5. Install continues as usual

If not, then the other way it -has- to be is to offer and installer in 
every language(shouldn't this be how it should be anyways?). Yes, it 
adds a lot of extra space for the mirrors, and is probably a pain for 
the developers. However, the users count, not the developers. Some users 
have to pay per a megabyte of bandwidth used, so even if they have a 
high speed connection we should be worrying about them.

I believe the second way is best as it is completely fair (no "why 
doesn't MY language get to be in the main installer?") and doesn't 
require large changes to the installer. I think it would be worth it to 
look into the first option after the release, though.

Anyways, my two cents.

Thanks,
Chris Carpenter