openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From J├╝rgen Schmidt <>
Subject Re: Ubuntu Build Instructions
Date Thu, 31 Jan 2013 15:02:08 GMT
On 1/31/13 9:55 AM, janI wrote:
> On Jan 31, 2013 2:56 PM, "Andre Fischer" <> wrote:
>> On 31.01.2013 14:50, Herbert Duerr wrote:
>>> Hi Jan,
>>> On 31.01.2013 14:07, janI wrote:
>>>> Thx for the update, I do however have 2 questions:
>>>> - there are 2 build guides for ubuntu:
>>>> I think one of them should be deemed outdated and point at the other ?
>>> Good point, I wasn't aware that somebody started that topic on a
> different page name anew. The developer who created the new page obviously
> wasn't aware of the old page either, else he would/should have updated it,
> wouldn't he? Hi Andre ;-)
>> No, he would not have.  One is a step by step instruction without much
> explanation.
>> The other details the general procedure of build AOO, without giving a
> command line for every step.
> but it still highlight the problem I had in the beginning...our wiki has
> really much valuable information, but to an extent it is shadowed by
> identical information which are not maintained.
> I searched for ubuntu build instruction way back, and as you can imagine
> got confused. Thx. to the brilliant help from this list I got it up and
> running.
> I hope we in the short future can get our wiki a bit streamlined (I am not
> thinking about removing information, but simply mark it as outdated, with a
> link to the newer information.

we should think about transition in the way to link very clearly to the
preferred and up-to-date page and mark old pages outdated or better
deprecated. Let's say 3 month later we can redirect old pages directly
to the new page to preserve external links or we can delete them.

But in general I totally agree we have many information in the wiki but
often not easy to find. Rework and clean up would be very much
appreciated and wold help the project and especially our users.

We should more radical drop really outdated, not longer interesting and
used stuff.

>> Please see last sentence in
> @herbert regarding buildbot, I can see your point and agree with it.
> However I still think we should document exactly how our binary
> distributables are made. I have actually not been able to produce an exact
> match yet where I have tried. When people want to play with the system it
> is nice to have a stable start like rebuilding the release and the same
> result.
> Jan I
>> -Andre

View raw message