incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean Weber <>
Subject Re: [EXTENSIONS][RELEASE] (was RE: Calling all volunteers: It is time to test)
Date Mon, 05 Mar 2012 20:07:31 GMT
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 05:46, Rob Weir <> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Jean Weber <> wrote:
>> On 06/03/2012, at 4:30, Larry Gusaas <> wrote:
>>> On 2012-03-05 12:08 PM  Rob Weir wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>>>> <>  wrote:
>>>>> If there is no solution for extensions, Apache OpenOffice 3.4 early incubator
releases should not overload prior versions of OO.o.  I recommend that AOO 3.4 install in
its own locations and not do anything that would prevent side-by-side functioning.  (My recommendation
would be that it do that anyhow.  But with known breaking of an important down-level feature,
that becomes imperative.)
>>>> In general, it is important for OOo 3.3 and earlier installs on
>>>> desktops to go away. Old releases increasingly become security
>>>> hazards, especially if they are no longer being actively maintained.
>>>> We do a great service to the community in general if we overwrite them
>>>> with the AOO 3.4.  This is true even given the inconvenience the user
>>>> experiences from the need to reinstall extensions.
>>> Users need to be informed that they will need to reinstall extensions if AOO
3.4 overwrites OOo3.x.x
>>> One option would be to not use the same user profile as OOo 3.x.x and create
a new profile for AOO 3.4. Or do as LibreOffice did when it came out and import the data that
can be used from the OOo user profile into a new profile.
>>>> In any case, I think the overwrite is fine.  It is what OOo 3.3 and
>>>> OOo 3.2 did as well by default.  We can document in the install
>>>> intructions how this can be overridden.
>>> The warning would have to be on the download page before the download link. How
many current users of OOo actually read the install instructions before installing a new version?
>>>>> I think there should be OOo-dev releases only until this is handled as
well.  It is now clear that integration has problems and there is no reason to provoke more
of it.
>>> Agree
>> Rob,
>> When an installation wipes out some or all of the user's extensions or other customisations
of a previous version, that is a sure way to alienate a LOT of people and create a lot of
very bad publicity, in addition to the inconvenience to users. I agree with Dennis and Larry
that this is unacceptable. Indeed, I am very dismayed that anyone would seriously consider
doing that. And documenting the issue, while necessary, is far from sufficient. Most people
don't read the instructions, as you should know.
> I'm not aware of "other customizations" being overwritten in this
> case. Can you say more?
> -Rob
>> Jean

Generic statement, intended to cover other possibilities of which I
might not be aware.


View raw message