Joined: Nov 21, 2005 Posts: 1285 Location: Witless Protection Program
Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:39 pm Post subject:
- Time to remove "# How to Build NeoOffice " from the Wiki Main Page (under the FAQ section)?
Let folks do a search if they want to build (and distribute ) their own home brew.
That link spot could be used from more immediate references?
- Now that X11 is up to 2.0.3, some of the *****'s could be removed?
- to add/update <edit - maybe in the " NeoOffice vs. OpenOffice.org for Macintosh (X11)" section?>
Quote:
NeoOffice pulls code from the release tags used for the official releases on Win32/Linux/Solaris.
?? No code is pulled from the Mac X11 specific cws or other branches.
Philip (Aqua - The first, the best, NeoOffice Aqua! )
Joined: Apr 25, 2006 Posts: 2315 Location: Montpellier, France
Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 6:02 pm Post subject:
LemonAid wrote:
- Time to remove "# How to Build NeoOffice " from the Wiki Main Page (under the FAQ section)?
Let folks do a search if they want to build (and distribute) their own home brew.
I think it's actually the only pages which officially warns you about the trademark usage policy (other than the trademark usage policy Wiki page itself) and the fact that you're not allowed to redistribute your build unless you remove all instances of the NeoOffice trademark. So I think it's better to keep the page, and to actually put this announcement/statement in its own colored box (I actually missed it when I visited the page for the first time). I think it should also be added to the build instructions pages on planamesa.com.
I agree about the asterisk, but then it contains useful information (about available languages) and you can almost be certain that a similar situation will occur when the OOo/X11 team "transitions" to 2.0.4.
About the quote & update : the important thing, in my opinion, is to avoid saying that Neo is based on OOo/X11 when it is not, since it's not true. Whether it is based on the main branch of OOo or not, while interesting, is not crucial.
I agree with Samwise on the * situation. I did debate deleting the 4* one, but because of the language issue I think it's important to leave it there. Those builds might be available in some cases, but Team OOo have done their best to hide them and warn users from using them.
I've made a change to the trademark warning on the Build page, too. I'm sort of ambivalent about it, because doing so makes it easier to take action against scum who try to rip off Patrick and Ed's work, but for the moment the spirit of free/open source software wins out
(I also wish we had more protection for the ship-in-globe logo, too, since that's as significant an identifier of NeoOffice as the wordmark itself... )
Smokey _________________ "[...] whether the duck drinks hot chocolate or coffee is irrelevant." -- ovvldc and sardisson in the NeoWiki
Joined: Nov 21, 2005 Posts: 1285 Location: Witless Protection Program
Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:54 pm Post subject:
Samwise wrote:
LemonAid wrote:
- Time to remove "# How to Build NeoOffice " from the Wiki Main Page (under the FAQ section)?
Let folks do a search if they want to build (and distribute) their own home brew.
I think it's actually the only pages which officially warns you about the trademark usage policy (other than the trademark usage policy Wiki page itself) and the fact that you're not allowed to redistribute your build unless you remove all instances of the NeoOffice trademark.
So I think it's better to keep the page, and to actually put this announcement/statement in its own colored box (I actually missed it when I visited the page for the first time). I think it should also be added to the build instructions pages on planamesa.com.
I agree about the asterisk, but then it contains useful information (about available languages) and you can almost be certain that a similar situation will occur when the OOo/X11 team "transitions" to 2.0.4.
About the quote & update : the important thing, in my opinion, is to avoid saying that Neo is based on OOo/X11 when it is not, since it's not true. Whether it is based on the main branch of OOo or not, while interesting, is not crucial.
- I agree that the notice should be "put this announcement/statement in its own colored box" on the Build page. And "added to the build instructions pages on planamesa.com"
I STRONGLY believe that this does not "need" to be on the Main Page.
It just leads to inviting more problems. Better to mention it prominently on OTHER Wiki pages. Like the Distribution page mention below!
The link two lines down: CD Distribution and Trademark Usage Guidelines covers these items in detail. If all the details are not currently included - they should be added to this page. (Ya, I space seeing this link also )
- Fine on the asterisks Just agreeing with previous statements
- As for OOo/X11 - It's better to say "clearly" what it is, then what it is not will be implied.
Quote:
NeoOffice pulls code from (the release tags used for) the official releases on Win32/Linux/Solaris.
This is not meant to be interesting, it's the truth. While Not crucial - that is not the point of this statement.
This is clear, and precise, way to clear up a lot of mis-conceptions. (" Just the Facts, Madam, just the facts")
The items that are place on the Main Page should be of the highest importance. This is valuable real estate.
A better item for this page would be the link about - Rats the "Improving Compatibility with Microsoft Office" link is already included in "Tips and Hints for Using NeoOffice". Darn - youse guys ARE G o o d!
Philip (Spending Waaaaaaay to much time doing ... Business speak now-a-days )
Joined: May 25, 2003 Posts: 4752 Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 2:06 am Post subject:
While I admittedly haven't kept up to speed on all the reorgs as mentioned in the thread, I totally have no problem with keeping the build instuctions link up. We won't be taking it down or anything. What we will be doing is finding a way to prevent our official patches from installing into non-official builds. Really, this is a good thing for us to do anyway since using our patches and updaters won't work in a homebrew build environment. They simply aren't compatible. Heck, I've even tweaked my own build environment in order to do testing of specific gcc4+powerpc tech compatibility and it'll be nice to no longer worry about horking it with an incompatible set of libraries
i do not agree with 'hiding' the how to build section.
the purpose of the neowiki is to provide easy access to information. being able to build neooffice from scratch is a essential part of the open source ideology. having information easy to find is a part of the wiki ideology.
hiding it will solve nothing. it is more important that the information be availible and correct.
Joined: Nov 21, 2005 Posts: 1285 Location: Witless Protection Program
Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 1:40 pm Post subject:
Fine with me.
I think I need to clear up a mis-conception.
I'm NOT talking about hiding the build instructions. What I would like to see - on the FIRST impression Main Page - are items that reach the widest audiance, AND are what a New User would MOST likely be looking for. "It's those first impressions that are so very important." Especially since the rest of the Internet is only a "click" away.
Developers should be willing to do a little effort to find the "Outstanding" build instructions. I don't think I have ever seem a better description on how to create the environment and build the code.
What I do want to ... reduce - is a flood of novice Open Source developers getting in over their heads because the build instructions are easy to use. Just because someone "can" build something, does not mean that they fully understand all the details.
Just like having to say "Changing the Structure of OOo is beyond the scope of the NeoOffice project". How many times has that been said? But NEW users/visitors to NeoOffice don't really understand the depth of this project. It's H U G E!
Novice Developers are the same kind of problem - but at a much higher technical level.
And have the potential to require a LOT more effort to support. While Patrick is polite, and helpful, to people who want to build it on their own - that is NOT the focus of his hard work.
Back to the items that have Not been responded to:
Quote:
"CD Distribution and Trademark Usage Guidelines" covers these items in detail.
If all the details are not currently included - they should be added to this page.
- As for OOo/X11 - It's better to say "clearly" what it is, then what it is not will be implied.
Quote:
NeoOffice pulls code from (the release tags used for) the official releases on Win32/Linux/Solaris.
This is not meant to be interesting, it's the truth. While Not crucial - that is not the point of this statement.
This is clear, and precise, way to clear up a lot of mis-conceptions.
- I assume that the lack of response on "❖ NeoOffice/J 1.1? " means that this (old, outdated?) item will not be moved.
Philip ( busy helping other new users with their systems )
All times are GMT - 7 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2
Page 2 of 2
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
) their own home brew.
)
)
Just agreeing with previous statements
" means that this (old, outdated?) item will not be moved.