On Thursday 31 of January 2013 14:02:44 Martin Sourada wrote: > On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:43:58 +0000 > > Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: > > On 01/31/2013 12:28 PM, Martin Sourada wrote: > > > Hi Marina, > > > > > > On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 13:14:41 +0100 > > > > > > Marina Latini wrote: > > >> Hi all, > > >> I'm an Ambassador and this proposal is confusing me. > > >> We have LibreOffice in our repositories; I think that bring back > > >> Apache OpenOffice generates only confusion between users, not > > >> freedom of choice. > > > > > > The confusion is already there in Windows world, linux user should > > > be more capable of treating it as freedom of choice instead of > > > confusion. > > > > Why do you think that? I observer exactly the same confusion with > > GNU/Linux users > > I think GNU/Linux users are generally more knowledgeable about computers > in general and unlike in widows where you need to follow the same steps > for installing either, most linuxes (is that correct plural?) have only > LibreOffice in their repos now, so there is less room for confusion. If > it's going to be properly marketed as different office suite for us it > won't probably be much different to choosing between LibreOffice and > KOffice (or whatever it's called now). > > > I thought it went there, to it's "Elephants' graveyard" to bit rot > > and have it's inevitable slow and painful death after being affected > > by the Oracle plague... > > Well, that's what I though too, until they took it out and released > couple of new versions as well as plans for 4.0 release. > > > > I think it's beneficial to provide Fedora users with the choice of > > > installing either, or even both, provided there's enough interest > > > among the devs to make it so. From a user point of view, I think the > > > main manpower for F19 should go into getting it into repos and > > > solving *all* conflicts. They should be parallel installable and > > > should not conflict even at runtime with each other. Especially the > > > runtime conflicts would be really confusing to (some of) our users. > > > > Why now? Why was that not done in the past when libreoffice got > > introduced ( as in shipping both ) to avoid the confusion that will > > be caused by this? > > Well, because LibreOffice continued where OpenOffice.org stopped. Now > (actually some time ago), Apache OpenOffice continued in a different > direction than LibreOffice, even if from the same starting point. So we > are in a different situation than back then. And Apache isn't Oracle, > it's in much better hands now. And it's the same situation as with MariaDB and MySQL. Fedora is going to prefer MariaDB (FESCo stated it clearly yesterday) - so we should try to make an effort to support MariaDB and not for example force users to use both just to run system. But on the other hand - if there's someone (and both are from upstream), who's going to take a burden of maintainance - why not? It can fail, they will loose interest one day - yes, could happen. And there's possibility that these projects even coming from same roots will diverge and become totally different projects... So +1 ;-) Jaroslav > Maritn -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
