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


Rimas Kudelis a écrit :
Hello all,

2011.08.23 13:49, Javier Sola rašė:
On 8/20/11 2:32 AM, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
Hi Javier, *,
Will single language packages not be made available, as was the case
with
OpenOffice before?
Yes, it was a deliberate decision to only provide one single installer
with all languages for Windows.
I am trying to understand the logic of this.

1.- Single package for all languages + separate packs for help:

- They occupy less in the servers, because there are no complete
installers for each language.
- The installer is in English (a foreign language in most cases).
- Users must install all least two packages.
- Requires post-handling of language settings (in English, most
usually a foreign language).
- Requires understanding how to do this. Definitely not what beginners
want.
2.- Single packages for each language:

- They occupy more space in servers.
- They use the standard practice in most software of one installer for
the application.
  - They are in the local language in most cases.
- If well done, they do not require post-handling of language settings.
- A beginner can install the application in her/his own language
without much fuzz.

Some users, in developed countries, download installers from the web.
In developing countries, they do not have the bandwith to do this,
distribution is through CDs.
For large installations, it is always done through CDs or network.

Would it not be interesting to facilitate the labor of distribution by
producing packages that are easier to install by everybody (single
installers fully in local language)? For most of the people that we
work with (school teachers who do not speak English), the difference
is between being able to do it or not.

There is also a third approach that I keep reminding people of: a
modular installer. IMO, it would bring the best of two worlds, but it
would require someone to spend time implementing it. Here's how it would
work:
1) the user downloads a single file.
    option a) it's a *small* installer file. This file only contains the
installer code, license, and configuration data, but no packages.
    option b) it's a bundle, which contains the above file (the actual
installer) and a few default packages  (e.g. the suite and en-US
language pack). When started, it unpacks all files into some folder (as
is done now), then launches the actual installer.
2) when started, the actual installer allows the user to choose the
components to be installed
3) after the user chooses the components she wants installed, the
installer generates a list of packages it needs, then checks which of
these packages already exist in its directory (or the directory it was
started from), fetches the remaining packages requested and installs the
suite.

This way e.g. the magazine could put the installer and any relevant
language packs in its CD, and a large development could do just the
same. By the way, I remember some really old versions of Internet
Explorer were distributed this way (not sure about the later ones). I
think having an installer like this could satisfy almost every case. The
only potential downside to this that I see is that space usage on
mirrors could probably grow a bit, if LibO would decide to provide full
bundles as an alternative to this option. But OTOH, this could also be
avoided by adding an option in the installer to only download files for
off-line installation (or by distributing those full bundles on a
smaller amount of mirrors). In short, there are lots of options here.
All we need is someone to volunteer to implement this.

Regards,
Rimas

I that would be an excellent way to do it.
I remember (back when I was still using Microsoft) that there were a few packages built more or less like that, which I found really convenient. (I would download everything, so as to be able to install/uninstall modules at will.) I don't think that this would make a lot of difference for the mirrors. (It should reduce download volume for Ms-windows versions.)
It certainly would be a lot more convenient for users.
But as you say, it awaits volonteer(s) to do it.

--
André

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to l10n+help@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/l10n/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

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.