[arch-general] Installation of libreoffice

[Ray Rashif]

On 4 August 2011 17:35, Philipp Überbacher <hollunder at lavabit.com> wrote:
> In this specific case I don't think the upstream name matters much since
> I even have a hard time figuring out how upstream calls this part of LO.
> I don't know where the packager got the name from but it might well have
> been the ubuntu package for all I can figure out. I personally find a
> sane naming scheme in arch more important than consistency across
> distros (which would be pretty much the only reason to go with the
> 'wrong' name).

http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Administration_Guide/Linux

Has 'GNOME' and 'KDE' sprawled all over.

In this case, implying gtk is as misleading as implying gnome; it is
no better. The office suite really does not look native at all, it
just tries its best to be close to the 'desktop' (overall) _theme_
with icons and an appropriate file chooser. So technically, and
ultimately, it is not appropriate to imply gtk since it does a
horrible job with integrating to a widget system.

In other cases, where the respective gtk and qt packages override for
say, a UI, then the gtk implication rather than gnome would be
appropriate.

It's not always possible to make the non-DE users happy. In fact,
non-DE users have to adapt to the latest conventions and most
importantly, adapt to the norm. It is up to us to see whether an
integration works satisfactorily and without all the bulk, rather than
demand it. Expecting '-gnome' or '-kde' to always come with their
desktop-specific dependencies is not a proper expectation, for it is
not always "integration" in the correct, or full, sense.

Many applications claiming 'gtk' as part of its name or description
actually depend on gnome libraries. It's a fragmentation we have to
deal with, because it's a popular practice, and thus, the norm.


--
GPG/PGP ID: 8AADBB10