Am 14.10.2010 09:27, schrieb Ng Oon-Ee:
On Thu, 2010-10-14 at 09:14 +0200, Stefan Husmann wrote:
Am 14.10.2010 08:42, schrieb Ng Oon-Ee:
I just noticed that libreoffice-new has been uploaded. Contrary to the last post in https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=105664 the old libreoffice in the AUR has not yet (to my searching) been deleted (I think its been reuploaded). Obviously, its exactly the same.
I wonder what the point is of having libreoffice-new though. It's basically just extracting of some rpms, as compared to the libreoffice from [testing].
I propose that libreoffice[1] and libreoffice-new[2] be deleted. The author should reupload as libreoffice-bin. If a TU agrees, I volunteer to email the author.
[1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=41792 [2] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=41793
Hello,
I deleted libreoffice again because of the name clash. But in the past we allowed binary versions or beta versions of some projects, so why not doing here?
I would not recommend its usage, but let people decide.
Regards Stefan
I was just thinking the name is misleading, and -bin is a better name.
Yes this is a discussable point.