openoffice

[Don Russell]

Rodd Clarkson wrote:

> Significant testing means putting OOo-2.x into rawhide so people can
> (and will) bang on it with whatever they use to bang things. ;-]
> Without it's inclusion it rawhide it's going to be really hard to know
> whether it's up to snuff, but given that it's due for final release
> around the same time as FC4 it should be pretty good.

OK... I have no objection to putting it into rawhide...

>>Is it really a matter of choosing between FC4 and FC5? If omitted from 
>>FC4, why can't it made available via up2date at some time prior to FC5?
> 
> 
> As I understand it, Redhat is loath to update software that isn't binary
> compatible during a release.  So usually anything with a different major
> number is held back until the next release.  The difference between
> OOo-1.1.x and OOo-2.x are big enough that I wouldn't think RH would want
> to upgrade to 2.x mid release.
> 
> Consider that there was some concern about going from gimp-2.0.x to
> gimp-2.2.x even though they were supposed to be binary compatible, and
> while it did happen, it doesn't happen often.

OK.. you convinced me.... :-)

>>(up2date is one of pet peeves but it is A LOT better than it used to be)
> 
> 
> I wouldn't know.  I used to struggle with it until Alan Cox said it was
> a piece of crap (my paraphrasing) and that it should be dumped from FC.
> Given how nice yum is getting I couldn't agree more. ;-]

I've heard that too.... One of these days I'll "take the plunge" and 
learn how to use yum... in the mean time, I'm configuring sendmail, 
procmail, apache, ftp.... yum is on my to-do list :-)

Don