Return-Path: 
 <ooo-dev-return-11785-apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org>
X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B794AB7AF
	for <apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org>;
 Sun,  8 Jan 2012 17:33:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 96610 invoked by uid 500); 8 Jan 2012 17:33:08 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 96461 invoked by uid 500); 8 Jan 2012 17:33:08 -0000
Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ooo-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org>
List-Id: <ooo-dev.incubator.apache.org>
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 96450 invoked by uid 99); 8 Jan 2012 17:33:07 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 08 Jan 2012 17:33:07 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0
	tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of gcaiod-ooo-dev@m.gmane.org
 designates 80.91.229.12 as permitted sender)
Received: from [80.91.229.12] (HELO lo.gmane.org) (80.91.229.12)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 08 Jan 2012 17:32:58 +0000
Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <gcaiod-ooo-dev@m.gmane.org>)
	id 1Rjwbm-00040Q-1A
	for ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org; Sun, 08 Jan 2012 18:32:38 +0100
Received: from 31-18-68-172-dynip.superkabel.de ([31.18.68.172])
        by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
        id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
        for <ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org>; Sun, 08 Jan 2012 18:32:38 +0100
Received: from mst by 31-18-68-172-dynip.superkabel.de with local (Gmexim 0.1
 (Debian))
        id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
        for <ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org>; Sun, 08 Jan 2012 18:32:38 +0100
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
From: Michael Stahl <mst@openoffice.org>
Subject: Re: /usr/bin/openoffice.org
Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2012 18:32:24 +0100
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <jecjv8$mfc$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <4F06CD69.5000408@a-w-f.de> <4F06D2F8.5090906@a-w-f.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 31-18-68-172-dynip.superkabel.de
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110930 Thunderbird/7.0.1
In-Reply-To: <4F06D2F8.5090906@a-w-f.de>
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

On 06/01/12 11:54, Andre Fischer wrote:
> Ah, found another one:
> 
> Synaptic on Ubuntu 11.10 has a package "openoffice.org" which installs 
> LibreOffice.  It is not installed by default (the "libreoffice" package 
> is) and also provides the 'explanation'
> 
> <quote>
> This is a transitional package, replacing the OpenOffice.org packaging
> with the LibreOffice packaging.
> 
> It can be safely removed after an upgrade.
> </quote>
> 
> but still, is this OK?

hi Andre,

this is a standard procedure that happens regularly on deb-based
distributions: upstream communities do weird things such as re-brand,
fork, become inactive and resume at a different place with a different
name, etc.;  examples that come to mind include GAIM re-branded to Pidgin,
Debian's Mozilla stuff re-branded IceAnimals, or the git/gnuit conflict.

the approach is that an empty package with the old name which has a
dependency on the real package with the new name is included in the next
release, to ensure a smooth upgrade experience for users (because
otherwise an outdated and unsupported version of the old package would
remain, which is bad from a security point of view).  this "transitional"
package is then usually dropped one release later (though i don't know
what happens exactly on Ubuntu, which supports upgrades between LTS releases).

in this case i guess it's at the discretion of the distributions which of
the 2 successors of the deceased OpenOffice.org they transition to (and
given the lack of a release from Apache OpenOffice it shouldn't surprise
anybody that currently LibreOffice is the more popular transition target).

regards,
 michael