Hi,
David A. Cobb wrote:
> I only discovered the page and the working group by way of the
> "back-door." That is, through the OpenOffice.org page on Installing for
> Linux. As it is, I would not have read that except for the 2.0 _beta_
> announcement -- I already had both a 1.1.2, and a "1.9.79" installation
> working.
Err? If you already have a Debian installation with the openoffice.org
package you already *have* our packages.
> I mistook the out-of-datedness of the web-page to mean the working group
> wasn't very active. Perhaps I should have lurked awhile; but it seemed
> interesting things were about to happen.
No. They already happened. The packages in Debian were regularily
updated.
> Are we speaking of the Debian OOo page, here? Or the OO.org "Linux"
> page? Either way, with a 'last updated' date prominently displayed, a
I'd guess both.
> fairly-simple "current status" bullet could cure the impression of not
> being current.
that would mean that it would need a update anyway :-)
Anyway, the site is now updated.
In my opinion, the site should vanish after sarge anyway, since the main
OOo development is done in ssarge/sid/experimental now and the mirrors
showed on that site are obsolte (except for the woody backport(s) which
must not be there anymore once sarge is there. Anyone wants to upgrade
anyhow from the old versions the backports have ;) )
> Perhaps you could point me toward some instruction in preparing proposed
> patches for the Debian page(s)? I did some, over a year ago, for the
Get the site from Debian CVS and send patches? :)
cvs -d :pserver:anonymous@cvs.debian.org:/cvs/debian-openoffice co
openoffice.debian.net
Grüße/Regards,
René
--
.''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
: :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
`. `' rene@debian.org | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73
`- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature