[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Comments? (OpenOffice.org Dictionaries)


I guess the disadvantage of individual language packs is that users have
to go off and find them and install them.  Consider:

o  Additional logic applied to Anaconda to install only the languages
necessary for the user (not sure, will ask Jeremy how much work it will

o  Must be _root_ to install these language packs.  With DicOOo you
don't have to be.

o  If the installation is not done at system install time, the user
still has to manually install language packs, as with DicOOo.

I'm not giving a +1 to DicOOo, its just something to think about.  I'm
not sure everybody has the huge amounts of space on CDs to be able to
package all the language packs that would be created (probably 25 or
30).  Remember, the language packs would include the following:

localized *.res files
localized Help files

Each would probably be anywhere from 5MB to 30MB depending on the


On Mon, 2004-04-12 at 17:15 +0200, Miloslav Trmac wrote:
> Hello,
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2004 at 10:31:55AM -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
> > The problem with separate language packs is when do you install them?
> > They could potentially be added to the comps files so that each
> > additional OOo language would only be installed if you selected that
> > language in Anaconda.  However, what do you do after the fact?
> What more needs to be done? Does using the installed language packs
> require additional manual intervention?
> > How
> > would they be distributed?  How would you notify users of the additional
> > language packs' existence?
> Same as you distribute/notify about any other package - they either are
> on the Core CDs, or in a (presumably well-known) repository.
> > It may well be from a distribution standpoint that DicOOo is the best
> > way to go since it empowers users to install only what they need, and
> > makes it easily available.  However, it has a few drawbacks (none fatal
> > I think): its basically a big macro, some people are uneasy about that,
> > and there is also no guarantee how long the information it uses will be
> > up online.
> * It requires additional manual action after installation (consider kickstart)
>   Post-install scripts would probably not be able to use DicOOo, so they would
>   have to mostly reimplement the language RPMs
> * It does not collaborate with the RPM package database
> * <paranoid>Users might download a malicious "dicOOo" script from something
>   that looks like a legitimate openoffice.org mirror</paranoid>
> > Looking forward as the Fedora Core / Red Hat maintainer of the OOo
> > packages, what do people think I should do?
> Given all the above (and the fact that Czech was included in the main
> package in previous releases :) I'd prefer language packages (we do have
> about 400 MB left on the fourth CD, after all), but I understand
> that's additional work to be done.
> While I don't have the disk space to build the main OO.o package,
> I'd be glad to help with building the l10n packs.
> 	Mirek
> -- 
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list redhat com
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]