Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index


Hi Michael, *,

On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 10:33 PM, Michael Meeks <michael.meeks@novell.com> wrote:
On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 16:46 +0100, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Nguyen Vu Hung <vuhung16plus@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Michael Meeks <michael.meeks@novell.com> wrote:
[...]
The counter-question to that user at fosdem would have been "Would you
be OK with downloading more than twice of the current size in order to
only having to install one package?"

       So - I guess he would have said "yes", but he is perhaps an outlier;
then again - why do you think it would be more than twice the current
size ? [ clearly we would split the help packs as on windows ].

Yes, split the help-pack and then again it is not one single installer anymore.

I still regard help as a core component, and still dislike the rip-out
of the help-packages from the languagepacks.

So count at least 10MB of help for each language, and you cannot hold
your 20% increase in size.

       So - I agree; if it were double the size it would be bad :-) but are
you completely opposed to a 20% growth, for much greater convenience for
the common case ?

Well, there it comes in conflict with the change of installer, I don't
think a package installer is of greater convenience for the common
user, and just installing all languages would increase the required
disk-space quite a bit. So then it is not only about size of the
installer, but also size on disk.

And to changing the installer type:

       No idea about that - it sounds bad from your description :-)

yes. I initially tried to use it for the languagepacks and got
frustrated very quickly and resorted to the script that just extracts
a tarball method instead.
(even there with dirty tricks to bypass the artificial limitation of
not allowing user-interaction when creating an applescript/osascript
bundle, wrapping the same stuff in a shell-script that calls osascript
on the very same applescript works just fine)

But those technical issues aside, I'm against bundling all languages,
for the size reasons. I don't like it on windows, and I also do so on
other platforms...

       Heh - so; what I hear here is:

       "if you can fix the size, we should do it"

       is that fair ? if so, it sounds like an issue to fix in 3.4.

Well - if you can do it....

Having one big installer would be more favorable for BitTorrent, so
from this POV I'm in favor of getting rid of the small languagepacks
:-) (thankfully help is still included in the langaugepacks for mac)

So I don't veto it, but the size has to go down.
Splitting Mac in installer and seperate languagepack and seperate
helppack would be much, much worse, so having a huge installer is the
lesser of two evils...

ciao
Christian

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to l10n+help@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/l10n/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.