Recommended build instructions ...

[Thorsten Behrens]

Michael Meeks wrote:
> * I was excited about Chocolatey
> 
Same here -

>     I read the website, thought 'wow Windows is getting its act together',
> then I tried to use it. The downloads complained of not being signed, I
> ignored that, but still they refused to work - eventually I gave up, and
> moved on to manual installation.
> 
And indeed the same story - that makes it at least two, let's kill
that section.

>     The LODE page for some reason recommends Visual Studio 2015 - three
> times, though there is 2013 in the small print. I was to discover many hours
> later that in fact LibreOffice x86 on the libreoffice-5-2 branch (at least)
> doesn't compile in this configuration.
>
Can we collectively resource fixing that? I recall a problem, but
forgot the details. Tying us to a particular version seems problematic
to me. Beyond that - yeah, let's fix the onboarding wiki.

>     I was broken by McAffe - it broke git - the simple clone failed with a
> permissions problem. We have a not-very-explicit "turn off AV" messaging but
> not in the LODE (or devcentral) pages, and we should do that earlier I
> think; step #1 ;-)
> 
That might need more nuancing perhaps, lest that we make it appear
~impossible for some people to build at all (policy & things).

Cheers,

-- Thorsten
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 949 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/attachments/20160909/19035f67/attachment.sig>