Menu
▾
▴
opencd-devel — Developer List
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2002 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(14) |
May
(172) |
Jun
(23) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2009 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(2) |
Sep
(2) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(11) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(7) |
Feb
(5) |
Mar
(4) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(1) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2013 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
(1) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Henrik N. O. <h....@bt...> - 2002-05-07 21:52:26
|
On Tue, 2002-05-07 at 18:36, Brendon Crawford wrote: > > I would be willing to work on development for the HTML > interface. How much do we want to actually add to this > interface? Should it be rich with DHTML, and nice easy > to use features? If so, will our browser even support > that? > I don't even know what DHTML is ... Perhaps someone can enlighten me? Some people are looking at the K-meleon browser at the moment, so that seems a likely candidate. I guess you can get the info you need from their web page and forum. A CGI implentation might be nice, or just plain HTML even with buttons like HOME, HELP (context sensitive help would be nice), EXIT, etc. The main thing is that there shouldn't bee too much information on each screen, but rather large friendly buttons and large fonts. Check this link for a nice set of icons: http://www.ximian.com/devzone/projects/art/icons.html (I'm thinking mostly about the larger ones) Most of these are not relevant to us perhaps, but I like the way they've done it, choosing a standard palette so that all the icons have a similar feel. Anyway, you can just make some temporary graphics for now as place holders. We should probably use symbol-only icons with text below, that way we can easily change the language. Can the browser detect the screen resolution? If not I guess we should optimize for 800x600. Here is my idea for a preliminary structure: (others will disagree) 1. Welcome, choose a language (flags?) 2. Choose usage type: Home, Education, Business, OSS Literature 3. Menu of available software (which will depend on #2, although there will be overlap) 4. Choose: a) product information -- screen shots, etc. b) Install help c) perform install In addition there will be features like HELP available everywhere. I really think that we should avoid drop down menus with too much choice. Think more like the Wizards used in Windows where there's only a few choices on each screen. Ok, good luck! - Henrik -- Henrik Nilsen Omma Theoretical Physics, Oxford 35 Frenchay Road 1 Keble Road Oxford OX2 6TG Oxford OX1 3NP h....@bt... he...@th... |
|
From: Henrik N. O. <h....@bt...> - 2002-05-07 21:49:33
|
On Tue, 2002-05-07 at 21:48, J Aaron Farr wrote: > > However, I do have some issues to raise: > > Are we targetting only the Win32 platform? If so, K-Meleon as our installer > engine might really be the way to go. If not, then we should probably look at > some browser based on a cross-platform language like java, python, perl, etc. > This way we would be able to easily run our stripped down web broswer on > multiple platforms. > I suggest we go ahead with win32 for these reasons: 1) 90% of desktops use Windows 2) Mac users are in less need of 'saving' because OS X is aleady a decent system based on the open source UNIX-like Darwin (as far as I understand). So, Mac users already have some introduction to OSS, and I would say they are less likely to switch to Linux. 3) If we make the installer HTML- based then it can for the time being run in a standard MAC browser (although the user may need to click 'yes' in a few places. Later we can work on a custom Mac browser. 4) Although we have agreed (it seems) to refrain from MS-bashing in this project, I think we'll all agree that it's the MS stranglehold we want to reduce. But most importantly, I think it's important to get one CD under our belt first, if so only on one platform, and then we can think about diversifying for the next release. So, my suggestion is: let's keep it simple and get one platform done. The choice of software will also be different for other platforms, adding to the confusion. - Henrik -- Henrik Nilsen Omma Theoretical Physics, Oxford 35 Frenchay Road 1 Keble Road Oxford OX2 6TG Oxford OX1 3NP h....@bt... he...@th... |
|
From: J A. F. <jaa...@ya...> - 2002-05-07 20:48:12
|
My goodness, I go away for a weekend and I return to find a host of emails! I haven't gotten through everything yet, so I still may be a little behind on some of the discussion. If so, please bring me more up to date. I'm not sure if anyone else has yet started work on K-Meleon or a similar light weight web browser. I've started looking at the source (it's C/C++) and have gotten some response from the K-Meleon developers. I just wanted to update everyone on what I've found. The biggest trick to getting K-Meleon to work for us will be getting it to run off of the CD-ROM. To do this requires digging around in some of the Mozilla code. The other features we require are fairly easily implemented in K-Meleon. I'm hoping to have a feel for what needs changed at least by the end of the week. However, I do have some issues to raise: Are we targetting only the Win32 platform? If so, K-Meleon as our installer engine might really be the way to go. If not, then we should probably look at some browser based on a cross-platform language like java, python, perl, etc. This way we would be able to easily run our stripped down web broswer on multiple platforms. If we do want to go with a cross-platform browser, then we face other issues. I've been looking for a while, and I haven't found many good java/python/perl browsers. The most complete one I could find was a java-based broswer called XBrowser, but I don't think it has a full screen mode (like K-Meleon). Grail is a python based browser, but it's lacking in some features as well (Doesn't support all of HTML 3.2). If anyone knows of any other viable broswers, please let me know. So I suppose my biggest question is, are we only targetting the Win32 platform? The answer should significantly influence our installer application. If anyone else is already looking at K-Meleon, or a similar browser, please let me know. I'm away on 'vacation' this week, but I'll see what I can do. jaaron __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com |
|
From: Brendon C. <end...@ya...> - 2002-05-07 17:36:05
|
>Message: 5 >Subject: Re: [Opencd-devel] More Thoughs >From: Henrik Nilsen Omma <h....@bt...> >To: opencd-devel <ope...@li...> >Date: 06 May 2002 19:22:42 +0100 .... >- One team that works on stripping down a web >browser (K-meleon I >guess), so that it works in permanent Full-screen >mode and launches the >normal installers. >- One team that works on a nice graphical interface >in HTML with large >friendly buttons, installation help in the form of >screen grabs with >explanations, etc. I would be willing to work on development for the HTML interface. How much do we want to actually add to this interface? Should it be rich with DHTML, and nice easy to use features? If so, will our browser even support that? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com |
|
From: Alan <ope...@op...> - 2002-05-07 00:43:58
|
> I can see the importance of having the GIMP, > OPENOFFICE email lists etc... OK, let me clarify this point. Fluidiot is referring above to the mailing list gateways on opensourceware.net/jive/ that currently carries Gimp, OpenOffice and other lists . He happens to be accessing the OpenCD-devel list through the gateway, that's the source of confusion. Alan [ posted using the Open Source Mailing Lists Gateway: http://opensourceware.net/jive/ ] |
|
From: simon o. <nz...@ho...> - 2002-05-06 22:44:58
|
> Ok, i don't know about anyone else but I am beginning > to find it a pain > to read both the mail list and the forum. I agree. I can see the importance of having the GIMP, OPENOFFICE email lists etc... But it is a bit frustrating having two discussion areas .. it seems to disjoint possibly relevant discussions.. I think it would be much more useful to have 1 place and 1 place only. Perhaps just creating more areas on either to accomodate the other. [b]OR[/b] if this is meant to be more official that there is some system that allows us to easily browse between each... or that we are notified on the forums.. Fluidiot [ posted using the Open Source Mailing Lists Gateway: http://opensourceware.net/jive/ ] |
|
From: Imran G. <im...@bi...> - 2002-05-06 21:34:23
|
I think what we should do is have two ISOs available. ISO 1: Would just have the binaries ISO 2: Would have binaries + source That way people who want to distributed a CD with source can do it, but the vast majority of people who don't want source will only have to download an ISO half the size. Imran -- http://bits.bris.ac.uk/imran |
|
From: Henrik N. O. <h....@bt...> - 2002-05-06 21:11:55
|
I've put the old forum up on FTP in CVS format. - Henrik -- Henrik Nilsen Omma Theoretical Physics, Oxford 35 Frenchay Road 1 Keble Road Oxford OX2 6TG Oxford OX1 3NP h....@bt... he...@th... |
|
From: Toby I. <to...@go...> - 2002-05-06 20:35:49
|
On Mon, 6 May 2002 13:37:55 -0400
"Daniel Marques" <ma...@CS...> wrote:
DM> For code under the GPL, its not enough (well, I don't think so, ask a
DM> lawyer) to provide a link to someone else who hosts the code.
This is true. Legally we have to supply the source ourselves if asked for it. However, if we give links to someone else who hosts the code, it is unlikely that anyone *will* ask for it. If they do, I'm sure we can make arrangements.
--
Toby A Inkster, Esq. ~ http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/
mailto:tobyink<at>goddamn.co.uk ~ gpg:0x5274FE5A
jabber:tobyink<at>amessage.de ~ icq:6622880 ~ aim:inka80 ~ yahoo:tobyink
In a hotel in Athens: Visitors are expected to complain at the office
between the hours of 9 and 11 A.M. daily.
|
|
From: Henrik N. O. <h....@bt...> - 2002-05-06 18:28:32
|
> > Ok, those were my thoughts. I think this project will only succeed if > people begin to form a consensus as to what they are trying to accomplish. > Jepp. I agree. - 1 CD containing quality GUI stuff and nice installer. - Source tarballs of the relevant source (no updates) on our site and the mirrors. No source ISO, people can make one if they want. Now let's get on with it. The installer: Did we decide on using an HTML-based system? If so, then we can split into 2 teams. - One team that works on stripping down a web browser (K-meleon I guess), so that it works in permanent Full-screen mode and launches the normal installers. - One team that works on a nice graphical interface in HTML with large friendly buttons, installation help in the form of screen grabs with explanations, etc. Since we know that the HTML stuff will work with the installer engine when it's ready, these two teams can work happily in parallel, and then comine it in the end. If people generally agree, then we should next prepare a 2-3 paragraph working plan for each of these parts. This work needs doing anyway, regardless of which apps we choose or where the source goes. We can continue debating the finer points of that in the forum (hint) while getting on with installer development on this list (hint, part 2 :) Those who haven't checked out the two mock-up HTML installers on FTP should start with that: ftp://ftp.theopencd.org - Henrik -- Henrik Nilsen Omma Theoretical Physics, Oxford 35 Frenchay Road 1 Keble Road Oxford OX2 6TG Oxford OX1 3NP h....@bt... he...@th... |
|
From: Daniel M. <ma...@CS...> - 2002-05-06 17:38:13
|
I think this project is a neat idea, but I can see that a lot of people on
the list have a lot of different ideas about what it should be. I've seen
people discuss PHP and Perl, cygwin and Apache, etc. Although I understand
people's enthusiasm for introducing others to a new way of computing, I
think that it too great a goal to accomplish in one move, and that
attempting to do so will cause this project to fail. It is not enough to
just create a CD, we need to create a CD that people (hopefully lots of
them) will use, and will expose them to a new kind of software that does not
take away their rights.
I'll just list my ideas and some justification on why they make sense
compared to the alternatives.
This disk should target only Windows home or end users. This means it
should only have (GUI) applications (OpenOffice, Mozilla, Gimp, etc.),
games, etc.
This means:
1) We should not include command line unix tools, this will only confuse
and scare users, and there is really nothing about them to do with open
source anyway.
2) We should not include any servers (Apache, etc.) or IT administration
tools. These people already know of the existence of open source
alternatives, and there are already many CD's on the market with versions of
these tools that cost enough for companies to "take them seriously".
3) We should not include compilers and other development tools. Very
few people write their own software: professionals evaluate tools carefully
when making a decision, and cannot suddenly switch from VC to gcc in the
middle of a project; amateur are computer savvy enough to about know the
existence of these tools and how to find them.
For code under the GPL, its not enough (well, I don't think so, ask a
lawyer) to provide a link to someone else who hosts the code. We should
just tar it all up and host in on our website. We do not need to provide
the tools to untar and then build the source (but maybe just a little page
pointing people where to get the tools and how to build the code if they
want).
Ok, those were my thoughts. I think this project will only succeed if
people begin to form a consensus as to what they are trying to accomplish.
Dan
|
|
From: Martin S. <bud...@bu...> - 2002-05-06 17:19:55
|
On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 08:55:21PM -0300, Steve Mallett wrote: > > I think the best plan is this. > > > > * On the CD, mention that the source is available from our website. > > Explain what the source is, why people might want it and why they > > might not. > > > > * From our website, link to the source tarballs on the projects' > > websites -- we don't host the source ourselves. > > We aren't seriously going to try to swamp the author's server/website/wallet > are we? If this project proves worth doing we will get help somewhere. I > would call that "bad form". My $.02 I think that the fact that we are creating a CD with the software on it would save the authors bandwidth, i.e. I download the software then say distrobute 10 cd's that means only one download from the authors site instead of 10. Sounds like a good deal to me. And users that want the source will invaribly end up testing/debugging stuff for the developers so everyone wins. Or is that in my perfect world. Just my 0.2 groats > - Budgester Technologies Ltd Office : 01992 718568 Mobile : 07815 982380 mailto:ma...@bu... http://www.budgester.com |
|
From: Matt T. <rad...@ho...> - 2002-05-06 15:57:56
|
I would agree that the third option of including the solves many issues and only introduces a few new ones. Specifically, >> 2. People looking for the latest and greatest won't come to us, we won't have it (and we should advertise that fact). << this will hold true as the OpenCDs release cycle will only include the most current stable version of any application. Our need for sources would be frozen at (roughly) three month intervals, which could mean we were using a two-month (or week, or day) old stable version that experienced users would already have. I agree with not being seen as a free-loading project to the greater OSS community. These hard work and development that these people have done is the reason this project is a realistic possibility at this point. Their support for the OpenCD project would give it more credibility and visibility. Being a somewhat typical win user, I know I wouldn't need the sources nor would anyone I would be likely to give it to know what a source was. And having skinny pipes at home (like most "rural" users) means trying to download a 500MB image is not really feasible. _________________________________________________________________ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com |
|
From: Advisor P. <chr...@ad...> - 2002-05-06 14:46:49
|
>I think it'd be good to start thinking about this while we're also = >planning the layout of the CD. I happen to do IT financing quite often, = >so I'd be open to helping to work on a budget for this project. Hi Jon... If you can work on a budget I will be more than happy to format a letter & begin solicitation to my contacts in the financial, brokerage and insurance industries. In some cases these companies may want to investigate private labeling of the cd rom as well. Whatever the deal needs, we still need to know how much we are asking for and what exactly is is for so we can add that to the proposal. Yes- As far as I know we are asking for money. Christian Ramsey www.advisorpage.com |
|
From: David W. <dwh...@id...> - 2002-05-06 14:30:22
|
I think it's best to start simple, then add things later. Start with the 2-5 things that people really want, then add the other things later. I believe the "short list" is Open Office and Mozilla... so let's get those on. I think it's appropriate to start by using each of their installers; if they're too hard to use, then work to either (1) make theirs better or (2) create a generic installer, and then try to convince the other projects to use it. Otherwise, you'll have a lot of work interfering with each other. Flavors are a _great_ idea, but since there isn't even _one_ CD yet, I think it's time to create one CD now and add the others later. I think it _is_ important to agree that other Flavors will come; that way, people won't be worried that gcc or the source code aren't on the initial CD... instead, they'll know that it'll go on a yet-to-be-released CD. When those other CDs are added, they need to have simple names, preferably telling you what's on them. E.G. "Software Development", "Games", "Servers", "Education", "Desktop" (or "Office Desktop"). A "source code" CD makes sense, too, to support those who don't have good bandwidth. Ideally the infrastructure should be more media-independent, but CDs are the most universal format right now. Older machines won't have DVD readers, and we want users with older machines to be able to use this. --- David A. Wheeler |
|
From: <j_a...@ya...> - 2002-05-06 13:51:02
|
> several good reasons. The remaining disagrement is > a minor one. I see > 3 options: > > 1) We simply link places where the source can be > obtained, from the CD > and from our web page > > 2) We store the source at our own web site in > individual zip files, one > for each app, and link to these. > > 3) We can do 1., 2. and make an ISO with these > source files, so that > people can burn it and distribute it easily. I vote for 3, for the following reasons: 1. People who do not know much about open source software may simply gloss over the fact that the source is freely available if a link is provided. Even if they're curious about it, they're not going to bother downloading the source to OpenOffice unless they have access to a fast internet connection (only 10% of the UK), and if they have a fast internet connection they've probably heard of the Open Source movement already. 2. It means that people who are not using Windows can compile the source and run the software. I know I've been going on about this a lot, but I think that it's very important. It means that we can hand the CD(s) to anyone, no matter their platform or expertise (well, kind of), and they can still use it. Also, see my point about people not having broadband. The UK is way behind nearly every other country in providing broadband. There are a lot of people who simply do not have the patience to download 750MB of source to play with. 3. It has the advantage over Henrik's point 2) above, that it's so much easier to maintain a mirror of it! As I mentioned on the OpenCD board before it died, the computer society at St Andrews (http://wired.st-and.ac.uk/) can host an ISO or two for the benefit of the Open Source community, but we don't want to spend too much time maintaining it. 4. It's really not that hard to do. :) The hardest part is finding storage space. Anyway, that's my input. --jaa __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com |
|
From: Steve M. <st...@op...> - 2002-05-06 11:56:21
|
> I think the best plan is this. > > * On the CD, mention that the source is available from our website. > Explain what the source is, why people might want it and why they > might not. > > * From our website, link to the source tarballs on the projects' > websites -- we don't host the source ourselves. We aren't seriously going to try to swamp the author's server/website/wallet are we? If this project proves worth doing we will get help somewhere. I would call that "bad form". My $.02 > * Keep backups of the source to the versions on the disc. Just keep > these backups on our own computers. If some project disappears or > removes the old versions of their software from their site, we can > pop up with the source code. > > Note, we only have to hold on to the source code for 3 years after the > release of each CD. -- Steve Mallett | http://OSDir.org - Just Stable, Open Source Apps st...@op... | web...@op... http://open5ource.net <personal> "To use Linux without criticizing it is to betray it." -Clay Shirky |
|
From: Toby I. <to...@go...> - 2002-05-06 11:47:23
|
On Mon, 6 May 2002 00:17:46 -0500 (CDT)
Paul Snow <ps...@ni...> wrote:
PS> I believe we should do Option 3, or at least Option 2 in making source
PS> available for the programs that we distribute on the CD. I am not
PS> referring to the latest version of the source, but the source for
PS> the application that we distribute.
I think the best plan is this.
* On the CD, mention that the source is available from our website.
Explain what the source is, why people might want it and why they
might not.
* From our website, link to the source tarballs on the projects'
websites -- we don't host the source ourselves.
* Keep backups of the source to the versions on the disc. Just keep
these backups on our own computers. If some project disappears or
removes the old versions of their software from their site, we can
pop up with the source code.
Note, we only have to hold on to the source code for 3 years after the release of each CD.
--
Toby A Inkster, Esq. ~ http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/
mailto:tobyink<at>goddamn.co.uk ~ gpg:0x5274FE5A
jabber:tobyink<at>amessage.de ~ icq:6622880 ~ aim:inka80 ~ yahoo:tobyink
On the box of a clockwork toy made in Hong Kong: Guaranteed to work
throughout its useful life.
|
|
From: Steve M. <st...@op...> - 2002-05-06 11:28:12
|
> I think it'd be good to start thinking about this while we're also planning > the layout of the CD. I happen to do IT financing quite often, so I'd be > open to helping to work on a budget for this project. Jon, do you give out financing, or help people get financing? -- Steve Mallett | http://OSDir.org - Just Stable, Open Source Apps st...@op... | web...@op... http://open5ource.net <personal> "To use Linux without criticizing it is to betray it." -Clay Shirky |
|
From: Henrik N. O. <h....@bt...> - 2002-05-06 10:07:43
|
On Mon, 2002-05-06 at 10:48, Martin Stevens wrote: > Ok, i don't know about anyone else but I am beginning to find it a pain > to read both the mail list and the forum. > > Hence I find myself ignoring the forum and just using the list instead. > > It would seem there is some crossover between the two and people will > generally use one or the other. > > Maybe there needs to be a digest of each posted to the other ? Good idea, although some work for someone. The weekly newsletter and the soon-to-be FAQ (Which Michael Hawkes will maintain) should address some of this. > Is everyone who uses the forum on the list ? and vice versa ? > > ANy suggestions for resolving this ? > I suggest that we get more strict with staying on topic in this list, namely TECHNICAL ISSUES RELATING TO THE INSTALLER and possibly the web pages. In that case, the list should slim down considerably and making a regular digest of it to put on the forum would not be too much work. Frankly, I think we do need the forum because you don't want all the talks about Mozilla Plugins and CD vending machines, etc. in your inbox. There have been talks here about software choices and source availability, etc., but I think these should go in the forum from now on (or IRC, even) So let's try to stay on topic here, and when someone strays of, we ask the nicely to: 1. Read the FAQ 2. Read the newsletter 3. Post to the Forum - Henrik -- Henrik Nilsen Omma Theoretical Physics, Oxford 35 Frenchay Road 1 Keble Road Oxford OX2 6TG Oxford OX1 3NP h....@bt... he...@th... |
|
From: Martin S. <bud...@bu...> - 2002-05-06 09:51:53
|
On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 03:29:05AM -0400, Mikko Virkkilä wrote: > I browsed around sourceForge to find any other installation programs and to my surprise there were only a few and most had only one developer. This is a surprise, since I would imagine that every product needs an installer (well many do), and I had assumed there would be some sort of community process going on for a cross platform installer. Well, actually there are quite a few going on, but they are no where near a usable state. > > I did however find a few projects that I hope will be of help, these and others can be found at: > http://sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trove_list.php?form_cat=147&discrim=230 > > OpenSETUP and Spoon-Installer seemed interesting. > > There is however a stable mature installer, that has been used in many programs called "Nullsoft "SuperPiMP" Install System", NSIS for short. There is a lot of documentation available. The address is: > > http://www.nullsoft.com/free/nsis/ I'm not seeing the source, can you point me to it ? > > > < message posted by an user using the Open Source Support Gateway at http://opensourceware.net/jive/ > > > _______________________________________________________________ > > Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply > the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: ban...@so... > _______________________________________________ > Opencd-devel mailing list > Ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opencd-devel > -- Budgester Technologies Ltd Office : 01992 718568 Mobile : 07815 982380 mailto:ma...@bu... http://www.budgester.com |
|
From: Martin S. <bud...@bu...> - 2002-05-06 09:49:44
|
Ok, i don't know about anyone else but I am beginning to find it a pain to read both the mail list and the forum. Hence I find myself ignoring the forum and just using the list instead. It would seem there is some crossover between the two and people will generally use one or the other. Maybe there needs to be a digest of each posted to the other ? Is everyone who uses the forum on the list ? and vice versa ? ANy suggestions for resolving this ? On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 11:11:13PM -0400, simon oosterman wrote: > Are people aware of the Yabb site aswell as this one? There have been a couple of messages that I have read that are not on the other website. > > I haven't quite figured out the difference between the two, but that's probably because I've been half asleep most of the time I've been writing... :) > > fluidiot > < message posted by an user using the Open Source Support Gateway at http://opensourceware.net/jive/ > > > _______________________________________________________________ > > Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply > the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: ban...@so... > _______________________________________________ > Opencd-devel mailing list > Ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opencd-devel > -- Budgester Technologies Ltd Office : 01992 718568 Mobile : 07815 982380 mailto:ma...@bu... http://www.budgester.com |
|
From: <ope...@op...> - 2002-05-06 07:30:55
|
I browsed around sourceForge to find any other installation programs and to my surprise there were only a few and most had only one developer. This is a surprise, since I would imagine that every product needs an installer (well many do), and I had assumed there would be some sort of community process going on for a cross platform installer. Well, actually there are quite a few going on, but they are no where near a usable state. I did however find a few projects that I hope will be of help, these and others can be found at: http://sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trove_list.php?form_cat=147&discrim=230 OpenSETUP and Spoon-Installer seemed interesting. There is however a stable mature installer, that has been used in many programs called "Nullsoft "SuperPiMP" Install System", NSIS for short. There is a lot of documentation available. The address is: http://www.nullsoft.com/free/nsis/ < message posted by an user using the Open Source Support Gateway at http://opensourceware.net/jive/ > |
|
From: Paul S. <ps...@ni...> - 2002-05-06 04:43:18
|
I believe we should do Option 3, or at least Option 2 in making source available for the programs that we distribute on the CD. I am not referring to the latest version of the source, but the source for the application that we distribute. Problems this solves: 1. The original source becomes unavailable for whatever reason (including that the source is out of date and the developers only keep a certain number of previous versions available). We will have the original source. 2. People looking for the latest and greatest won't come to us, we won't have it (and we should advertise that fact). Problems this creates: We have an ongoing commitment to keeping copies of the source for any CD's that we distribute because we did not distribute the source with the binaries. Option 3 may alleviate this obligation somewhat as we could retire iso sets together. Paul Snow ps...@ni... >Message: 6 >Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 02:51:45 +0200 >To: "opencd-devel-lists.sourceforge.net" <ope...@li...> >From: Robert Ian Smit <ro...@wa...> >Subject: Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: [Opencd-devel] Source > > >> >>Ok, I think we're nearing agreement on this point. >> >>We seem to agree that the source should _not_ be on the main CD for >>several good reasons. The remaining disagrement is a minor one. I see >>3 options: >> >>1) We simply link places where the source can be obtained, from the CD >>and from our web page >> >>2) We store the source at our own web site in individual zip files, one >>for each app, and link to these. >> >>3) We can do 1., 2. and make an ISO with these source files, so that >>people can burn it and distribute it easily. >> >>All of these meet the Licence requirements (I think), but if we chose >>only #1, we might be seen as not pulling our weight, by telling people >>to use the bandwith of the devel teams to get the source. >> >>- Henrik > > >Hi everyone, > >This is my first message. I will introduce my self in a separate message to >this list. > >I think we should go for option 1. And make sure the links to the source >are well hidden from a casual user. Anyone looking for the source will >probably know where to find it. Source, instructions for compilation and a >lot of the developer websites will scare people off. They don't care about >the +0.001(a-z) upgrade of a given application. They don't want to know >about the source of all evil (pun intended). They don't care that new >features are included in a nightly build. If there is a good reason for >power users to daily/weekly install a new build, the application is not >ready for prime time. I personally only install the milestone releases of >Mozilla. I waited for OpenOffice to hit 1.0 etc. > >Storing sources on the website will make maintaining it a bitch. It only >has real value if the sources are up to date (latest releases included, not >only the ones which currently carry our seal of approval). This takes a lot >of effort for instance in the case of Mozilla. Maybe with a lot of hard >work we can have a good repository of source. But think about it. What >happens if the site gets listed on Slashdot the first day an Openoffice or >Mozilla milestone sees the light of day. How many potential users from our >target audience will get a Host Not Reachable on that day and go to >download.com and go for demo-, free- or shareware or just stick to what >they already have. > >We should of course pay respect to the opensource initiative and the >developers. I think we should include some well-worded advocacy pieces. It >shouldn't get in the way of users who are not interested. And most >importantly it should not bash Microsoft, AOL or anything else or try to >prove superiority. But this is another discussion. > >The source-ISO has some benefits for the bandwidth-impaired. However trying >to tackle that issue is aiming to high. We should be focused on one thing >and one thing only. Change the world one step at a time and so on. > >Bob > > > > >--__--__-- > |
|
From: Jon S. <jsa...@di...> - 2002-05-06 04:00:29
|
Greetings List- I'm just curious, as I haven't seen much talk about this on any of the = lists - how are we getting the money to host any ISO's or source code? = Furthermore, if we want to make high-quality discs to distribute, where = are the funds coming from there? Are we currently seeking a way to fund this project, are we looking for = freebies (hosting etc.), are we going to charge a small fee for a burned = disc... etc.? I think it'd be good to start thinking about this while we're also = planning the layout of the CD. I happen to do IT financing quite often, = so I'd be open to helping to work on a budget for this project. -Jon=20 |
29 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
