[arch-dev-public] Dropping Oracle OpenOffice
LibreOffice has recently proved to be a solid replacement for Oracle OpenOffice. I'm about to drop all Oracle OOo packages from our repos. First my time is limited. I've asked so many times for help in the Office packaging area and nobody stepped in. Then there's the poor distribution support Oracle spends on the distributions. They almost do not care about custom distribution builds and their interest. They break the build against system libs every now and then and it takes ages to contact the relevant devs to fix their bugs. Development is only driven by the profit interests of Oracle... You can put in here all the arguments the Document foundation has given at its birth. So don't expect any efforts to fix bugs in Oracle packages anymore. As soon as they will break due to a .so name bump or something like this I'll remove all the packages from our repos if nobody else is willing to maintain them. Any objections to add "replaces=('openoffice-base') " to the next LibO pkg? -Andy
On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 18:45:34 +0100
Andreas Radke
LibreOffice has recently proved to be a solid replacement for Oracle OpenOffice. I'm about to drop all Oracle OOo packages from our repos.
First my time is limited. I've asked so many times for help in the Office packaging area and nobody stepped in.
Then there's the poor distribution support Oracle spends on the distributions. They almost do not care about custom distribution builds and their interest. They break the build against system libs every now and then and it takes ages to contact the relevant devs to fix their bugs. Development is only driven by the profit interests of Oracle... You can put in here all the arguments the Document foundation has given at its birth.
So don't expect any efforts to fix bugs in Oracle packages anymore. As soon as they will break due to a .so name bump or something like this I'll remove all the packages from our repos if nobody else is willing to maintain them.
Any objections to add "replaces=('openoffice-base') " to the next LibO pkg?
+1 from me. Daniel
On 03/07/2011 07:45 PM, Andreas Radke wrote:
Any objections to add "replaces=('openoffice-base') " to the next LibO pkg?
+1 -- Ionuț
2011/3/7 Andreas Radke
LibreOffice has recently proved to be a solid replacement for Oracle OpenOffice. I'm about to drop all Oracle OOo packages from our repos.
First my time is limited. I've asked so many times for help in the Office packaging area and nobody stepped in.
Then there's the poor distribution support Oracle spends on the distributions. They almost do not care about custom distribution builds and their interest. They break the build against system libs every now and then and it takes ages to contact the relevant devs to fix their bugs. Development is only driven by the profit interests of Oracle... You can put in here all the arguments the Document foundation has given at its birth.
So don't expect any efforts to fix bugs in Oracle packages anymore. As soon as they will break due to a .so name bump or something like this I'll remove all the packages from our repos if nobody else is willing to maintain them.
Any objections to add "replaces=('openoffice-base') " to the next LibO pkg?
-Andy
No objections, go Andy, a big +1 from me -- Angel Velásquez angvp @ irc.freenode.net Arch Linux Developer / Trusted User Linux Counter: #359909 http://www.angvp.com
On 8 March 2011 01:45, Andreas Radke
So don't expect any efforts to fix bugs in Oracle packages anymore. As soon as they will break due to a .so name bump or something like this I'll remove all the packages from our repos if nobody else is willing to maintain them.
Any objections to add "replaces=('openoffice-base') " to the next LibO pkg?
Just do it!
On 08/03/11 03:45, Andreas Radke wrote:
Any objections to add "replaces=('openoffice-base') " to the next LibO pkg?
I'm all for dropping this but is the replaces really needed? That basically rules out anyone supporting it in the AUR (which I know is unlikely...) Allan
Am Tue, 08 Mar 2011 15:17:40 +1000
schrieb Allan McRae
On 08/03/11 03:45, Andreas Radke wrote:
Any objections to add "replaces=('openoffice-base') " to the next LibO pkg?
I'm all for dropping this but is the replaces really needed? That basically rules out anyone supporting it in the AUR (which I know is unlikely...)
Allan
Right now there's no "openoffice-base" pkg in AUR. Without the replaces set users will stay with the unsupported and maybe vulnerable/buggy version for all time. -Andy
On Tue, 2011-03-08 at 15:17 +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
On 08/03/11 03:45, Andreas Radke wrote:
Any objections to add "replaces=('openoffice-base') " to the next LibO pkg?
I'm all for dropping this but is the replaces really needed? That basically rules out anyone supporting it in the AUR (which I know is unlikely...)
If anyone wants to maintain it in AUR, they can change the name. Openoffice-base wasn't such a good name anyways. There's not much "base" in that package.
Now that poppler has been moved to extra the Oracle OpenOffice pdfimport extension is broken. I removed the Oracle packages from our repos and the ftp/other source dir. Please keep the svn entries for some time. I may need them to check if LibO master will work with latest Oracle stuff. -Andy
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Andreas Radke
Now that poppler has been moved to extra the Oracle OpenOffice pdfimport extension is broken. I removed the Oracle packages from our repos and the ftp/other source dir.
Please keep the svn entries for some time. I may need them to check if LibO master will work with latest Oracle stuff.
-Andy
I'm not sure how you removed them but, in svn, the extra-x86_64 and extra-i686 directories are still in the repos directory. These two should be removed (the db-remove script should had removed them.). You can keep the files in trunk, they don't harm anything.
participants (8)
-
Allan McRae
-
Andreas Radke
-
Daniel Isenmann
-
Eric Bélanger
-
Ionuț Bîru
-
Jan de Groot
-
Ray Rashif
-
Ángel Velásquez