Hi, Kovacs Baldvin wrote: > I seriously consider instead to drop the whole openoffice.org-dev from > debian. Not openoffice, just the -dev. Really. If you choose instead This is complete bullshit. > dropping that line, then people won't know why on earth does it work > differently (meaning: why their programs don't run on windows???) as > they learn in the docs, in the forums, etc. They get confused, and move > away from openoffice. Not my problem. They use two bad things: Java and Windows. Why should I care about windows? openoffice.org-dev is perfectly usable for C++ and Java stuff, just that you don't have that file. And you can get it from diverse places... (OOo CVS, some "normal" SDK install, etc.) > However, if debian didn't support -dev at all, then they simply > download it from openoffice.org, it works for them, and they gonna > be happy. LOL, that won't work. They assume stuff Debian does and cannot meet. It assumes stuff which is broken (you can't call the programs without setting[ LD_LIBRARY_]PATH first etc). > If your principles hurt people, I think it is better to not give them > something wrong, but its better to wait until somebody provides you a > way to compile that dll, and release a -dev package only then. It only hurts people who use Windows. It only hurts people using Java and not being able to look up a unowinreg.dll for them to ship. IT's easy to get it. If documentation references it and people don't find it they should ask/get it from somewhere. And note that there are extensions which are perfectly able to use openoffice.org-dev without unowinreg.dll (on Linux, though, no idea about Windows and whether C++ stuff also needs it, I don't think so, so use C++ or get unowinreg.dll) Regards, Rene
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature