Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: 66.94.237.88 is neither permitted
 nor denied by domain of kay.schenk@gmail.com)
Message-ID: <5032637C.2090905@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 09:19:08 -0700
From: Kay Schenk <kay.schenk@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686;
 rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
 (BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
References: 
 <CAP-ksoiLjUfioHfQ4JuVeKneWdrkJdESWAD9RLYVYiZ_PrAFoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1343837344.86302.YahooMailNeo@web113511.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
 <1343838251.9575.6.camel@sybil-gnome>
 <CAP-ksoi_FM1GiZ6HmwZ=Bbam+eTD9-KTDbd3cY=H5+qJN46VzQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1343864275.5716.12.camel@sybil-gnome>
 <CAP-ksoh+EA7_9ZVxVfpQNtd7Z0vgqDiQX30+Kdd3EwUq5m=W=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <501AF438.70707@wtnet.de> <k0n67o$sue$1@ger.gmane.org>
 <502F45FD.5060007@wtnet.de>
 <CAP-ksoiAokei-1rphRZBzz6Xb1xdO=D92_T3u-rOcsN7Wacieg@mail.gmail.com>
 <502FA122.3070004@wtnet.de>
 <CAP-ksoi9mDCzcOggRTTbSkAA7EoZLir928XYbEZ=UASNDq-2rQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <502FA8DE.5010300@wtnet.de> <502FC42D.7000101@wtnet.de>
 <502FC874.5030908@wtnet.de> <1345311017.5334.2.camel@sybil-gnome>
 <50302211.9050006@wtnet.de> <1345337148.2331.16.camel@sybil-gnome>
 <5030BDD9.6000202@wtnet.de>
 <CAP-ksohXPdWLXAYnX1CW84mqi+qjVdkcDtb6z1rfe+cfDRMbHw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGj3214g7RbjkDqKzU=C5Vj0-1vwWfnxP0FWfxX2vH+j_6vWpw@mail.gmail.com>
 <5032180A.3090108@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <5032180A.3090108@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


On 08/20/2012 03:57 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Kay Schenk wrote:
>>> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
>> hmmmm...I didn't realize that the winPenPack port is also listed on the
>> first page, the porting page. I don't remember seeing this earlier today.
>> Do we really want to do this? Is this really a "port" or a
>> "distribution"?
>
> Indeed it's more a distribution, but as discussed the porting page is
> already there and has more visibility, so I agree to put both
> distributions and ports there.
>
> Maybe we could adapt the title and descriptions to say that the page
> lists all third-party packages, including ports and distributions such
> as portable versions.
>
> Regards,
>    Andrea.

OK, I re-read through this thread just now. I guess it was agreed (or 
not refuted at any rate) that because the "porting"  page was a known 
entity and the non_ASF page was not (not even linked anywhere) to put 
winPenPack on porting.

Yes, we should change the title. Other statements we have in the 
Distribution FAQ will need to be changed as well because of this.
We should supply additional information on what the criteria is for 
being listed on the newly designed "porting" page.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK

"Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think."
                                    -- Niels Bohr