[arch-general] Dropping Oracle OpenOffice

[Jude DaShiell]

So as long as the libriopenoffice is in (o) other packages having a need 
for some flavor of openoffice depending on arch-linux dependencies policy 
would take the official packages first.  If that's the case such naming 
conventions would be unnecessary.On Wed, 9 Mar 2011, ??? wrote:

> 2011/3/9 Jude DaShiell <jdashiel at shellworld.net>:
> > For such a transition, I think it will be helpful for everybody using
> > arch-linux to name aall libri-openoffice packages
> > libri-openoffice-supported and all oracle-openoffice packages
> > oracle-openoffice-unsupported.  Debian at any rate has a playground area
> > where unsupported packages go within its repositories as well.  That might
> > get the message across to even windows users.  Certainly if I do a new
> > installation of arch-linux I'd want libri-openoffice-supported on my
> > system as opposed to anything else.On Tue, 8 Mar 2011, Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 2011-03-07 at 22:00 -0600, Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
> >> > just an fyi,
> >> > openoffice itself is *huge* and now that it is going to be dropped to
> >> > the aur, it will most likely lose all audience because of how long it
> >> > takes to compile from source. + libreoffice is just a better version
> >> > of openoffice imo, so there should really be no one that uses it.
> >>
> >> People who want openoffice will probably just use the -bin packages?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> 
> For Arch Linux,the AUR Repo is UNSUPPORTED?and Offical Repo is always
> supported,so i think it is unnecessary to name like that.
> 
>