incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexandro Colorado <...@openoffice.org>
Subject Re: [patch] Removal of Windows build requirement on unicows.dll - issue 88652
Date Wed, 28 Sep 2011 19:23:53 GMT
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 6:39 AM, Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 8:46 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
> <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote:
> > I don't think the vendor support lifetime for a consumer OS has bring the
> > end of application support on that OS.  What is known is that there will
> > be further service packs, maybe not even OS security patches, but it
> isn't
> > as if they decay and die.  Many machines run much longer than the support
> > life of the OS, and upgrades may not be feasible.
> >
>
> The nice thing is a user of Windows 98 or 2000 can still download old
> versions of OOo and run them.  And they can do that for free.  And
> they always will be able to do this.
>

Support and have it available as legacy are different things, usually
support in OOo doesnt go that far back. However the availability with 1.x is
something we want to have.


>
> The question is not whether we retroactively support for older
> versions of Windows.  They question is whether we maintain that
> support going forward, in new releases of the product.
>
> > Outgrowing the size of machine that an older OS runs on (and might be
> > limited to) is a different matter, as is relying on API functions that
> are
> > not supported that far back.
> >
> > I don't have an opinion about the Win2k versus Windows XP SP2+ choice for
> > OOo.  I am just curious to know what the current platform boundaries are
> > and might become for purposes of QA.
> >
> >  - Dennis
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michael Stahl [mailto:mst@openoffice.org]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 15:50
> > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [patch] Removal of Windows build requirement on unicows.dll
> - issue 88652
> >
> > On 27.09.2011 22:22, Rob Weir wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
> >> <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote:
> >>> What is the oldest Windows OS version that Apache OOo 3.4(-dev) will
> >>> be supported on?  How does that compare with the oldest Windows OS
> >>> version that the last stable release (3.3.0?) of OpenOffice.org is
> >>> supported on?  (If there is a JRE dependency, that is another variant
> >>> to consider.)
> >
> > AFAIK OOo 3.x Windows baseline is NT 5.0 (Windows 2000);
> > AFAIK this OS version is no longer supported by the vendor.
> >
> >> I'd recommend supporting Windows XP and beyond.   XP is officially
> >> supported by Microsoft until April 2014.   I'm certainly not making any
> >> effort to maintain or test support for earlier versions.  Of course,
> >> that doesn't prevent anyone else from testing and patching to support
> >> earlier versions.
> >
> > no objection from me to raising the baseline to WindowsXP; IMHO trying to
> > support an OS that the vendor doesn't support any more doesn't make
> sense.
> >
> >
>



-- 
*Alexandro Colorado*
*OpenOffice.org* EspaƱol
http://es.openoffice.org
fingerprint: E62B CF77 1BEA 0749 C0B8 50B9 3DE6 A84A 68D0 72E6

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message