scp2 - modules (and fdo#60924)

[Petr Mladek]

Stephan Bergmann píše v St 12. 06. 2013 v 12:50 +0200:
> On 06/12/2013 09:24 AM, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
> >
> >     Yes, we do. They are used to create the module tree in the installer,
> >     where you can choose which parts should be installed and which should
> >     not.

> > We should make things simpler and easier and remove pointless dimensions
> > from the choice space.
> 
> One special case for the multi-locale Windows installation set is 
> choosing just a subset of the locales, of course.
> 
> But apart from that, I guess the ability for choice here brings much 
> more trouble than it is worth.

I am not sure what is the scope of your installer rework but I have
several dreams :-)


1. It would be great to reduce the number of Linux packages:

        + get rid of libobasisX.Y-* package names; the layer structure
          is not longer used, so all packages should use the
          name libreofficeX.Y-*.

        + merge all the core* subpackages packages into one package
          called libreoffice; The names are confusing because
          nobody knows what belongs to which coreX. I do not see
          any real advantage of the split.

	+ I would prefer to leave the calc, writer, base, kde, gnome
          subpackages because they have different dependencies; For
          example, only Base really needs java, so it is useful to leave
          it out if you create live CD. GNOME users do not have KDE and
          vice versa. In fact, it would be great to have the database
          drivers optional because of their dependencies.
          

2. Produce file lists during installation:

	+ the current installer produces file list for each subpackage
          if you set DESTDIR variable. They are usable for creating
          RPM and DEB packages. It would be great to keep this
          functionality


3. Split only help to extra installer on Linux and MAC:

	+ by other words, it might be nice to package Linux and MAC the
          same way like we do on Windows; It might improve the user
          experience because users are not used to run another installer
          just to get localized UI

	+ well, I am not 100% sure about this move. The fact is that
          the Windows installer allows to "easily" select which
          localization is installed. I am not sure how it works
          in the MAC installer. It won't be easy on Linux if you
          have all RPMs in a single directory.


Anyway, I am not sure if you wanted to touch this area. If yes, it might
be great to have this in mind ;-)

Thanks a lot for your effort. It is highly appreciated.


Best Regards,
Petr