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: Jon S. <jsa...@di...> - 2002-05-05 05:12:35
|
Greetings! Found this on Sourceforge - maybe it can do what we need? I think = source is available for it too, in case we need to modify it. It = *appears* to be GPL'ed - it is called Spoon Installer - found at = (http://sourceforge.net/projects/spoon-installer/). It is a stable, = mature installation maker, allowing you to do all kinds of pre/post = installation commands. I will upload a copy to the openCD server. -Jon |
|
From: Alex R. <tun...@pa...> - 2002-05-05 02:15:24
|
James Shuttleworth wrote: > > >Yeah, but if we send source code then we need to include difficult to > >use, professional compilers. Joe User doesn't like that... > > Does this mean people are considering *not* putting the source on the disk? > > I think not having it is not a good idea. It's open source stuff, so why > not have the source? Even if it's not anywhere in the menu except for a > line of text saying something like "And all the sourcecode is available in > the source folder". Sounds lovely to me. Most Linux distros don't say much more than that. It keeps the whole thing PC, and everyone's happy. Alex |
|
From: Alex R. <tun...@pa...> - 2002-05-05 02:09:24
|
Imran Ghory wrote: > > On 4 May 2002, Henrik Nilsen Omma wrote: > > > > > Interesting idea. Once we have the installer stuff sorted out it's > > really not much more work to make 3 versions. Other plusses: > > > > 1) Having the Corporate Backend version allows us to push some of the > > really heavy hitters like Apache and mySQL, without worrying about > > confusing the novice user. It would also be good to associate the > > OpenCD project with these apps because of their good reputation. > > > > 2) Each category can have different criteria. The Home verion must > > stress simplicity while the Backend reliability, etc. In total, this > > would allow many more apps to qualify. > > I've been doing some number crunching and found that their exists about > 240mb of programs that could go on the CD, excluding most programming type > software, but including some server software (Apache, MySQL, PHP and > Perl). So I don't think at this stage we need to break them off into > seperate CDs just seperate sections. > > (I'll make a breakup of the figure available later today) > > On another note at 240mb range we could reasonably include source. Or maybe a question at the beginning of the installation, something like: "Where are you installing this software?" (Click on) "Home" "Office" "Backend Server" Alex |
|
From: Bill R. <bil...@dn...> - 2002-05-05 01:14:59
|
> On Saturday 04 May 2002 09:20 pm, Bill Rees wrote: > > This flavor business is veering wildly off the original mark: to provide > > open source programs for the typical windows user. This means one flavor > > not several. Once the one flavor is out and in distribution, then focusing > > other flavors on smaller audiences makes sense but until the original > > purpose for this whole project is served, multiple flavors just detracts. > > I find large IT depts are actually 'average' users with a certificate of some > kind. They are all over the spectrum, unfortunately. > > However, that being said, would a "desktop user" use 750M of a CD on desktop > apps? Really..? Legit Question. Actually I think this is a bad question. First of all, what difference does the excess space make when you're focusing on delivering a CD of open source apps to the desktop user? The sole issue is delivering to that user the apps that they may not know anything about in a package that makes the experience easy, enjoyable, encouraging and educational (at least to the scope of OS Apps). The real question you've asked here is who the CD is targeted to: large IT departments or desktop users? > > Perhaps the underlying idea here is that we have a limited resource... a CD. > If a desktop users isn't going to take up an entire CD. And I have doubts > that it would (but am willing to admit being wrong if you'd like to do the > math), then _why not_ cram "other" flavors in there until we are forced to > re-evalute the scope of what we have to work with. > > Perhaps at that time we will have more to work with too. No? Yes the resource is limited but the resource, in my opinion, is our time and focus not the size of the apps or the space leftover. The more time we spend spreading our time among disparate populations, the more likely we will end up with a product that lacks the focus and desired affect that started this whole discussion. So let's not even think seriously (as opposed to noting ideas for later examination) about trying to cram as much as possible onto this CD and instead focus on what's the minimum we want to put onto the cd? What're the most important goals? |
|
From: Steve M. <st...@op...> - 2002-05-05 00:39:04
|
On Saturday 04 May 2002 09:20 pm, Bill Rees wrote: > This flavor business is veering wildly off the original mark: to provide > open source programs for the typical windows user. This means one flavor > not several. Once the one flavor is out and in distribution, then focusing > other flavors on smaller audiences makes sense but until the original > purpose for this whole project is served, multiple flavors just detracts. I find large IT depts are actually 'average' users with a certificate of some kind. They are all over the spectrum, unfortunately. However, that being said, would a "desktop user" use 750M of a CD on desktop apps? Really..? Legit Question. Perhaps the underlying idea here is that we have a limited resource... a CD. If a desktop users isn't going to take up an entire CD. And I have doubts that it would (but am willing to admit being wrong if you'd like to do the math), then _why not_ cram "other" flavors in there until we are forced to re-evalute the scope of what we have to work with. Perhaps at that time we will have more to work with too. No? -- 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: Steve M. <st...@op...> - 2002-05-05 00:32:33
|
On Saturday 04 May 2002 08:40 pm, Imran Ghory wrote: > On 4 May 2002, Henrik Nilsen Omma wrote: > > Interesting idea. Once we have the installer stuff sorted out it's > > really not much more work to make 3 versions. Other plusses: > > > > 1) Having the Corporate Backend version allows us to push some of the > > really heavy hitters like Apache and mySQL, without worrying about > > confusing the novice user. It would also be good to associate the > > OpenCD project with these apps because of their good reputation. > > > > 2) Each category can have different criteria. The Home verion must > > stress simplicity while the Backend reliability, etc. In total, this > > would allow many more apps to qualify. > > I've been doing some number crunching and found that their exists about > 240mb of programs that could go on the CD, excluding most programming type > software, but including some server software (Apache, MySQL, PHP and > Perl). So I don't think at this stage we need to break them off into > seperate CDs just seperate sections. I have bad news. PHP isn't actually opensource. GASP! Yes, its true, but a technicality of one of the minor and ofter ignored clauses of the Open Source Definition....having you agree to another license other than the one provided with the program. I believe it is not 'free' either (However, I understand that it is being changed). I think it was that one.... I don't want to be picky, but we should cover the bases. blah blah blah. I've been pushing the OSI http://opensource.org to get popular 'programs and langs etc' 'open source certified' so minor errors like this don't occur. How many of you would have bet otherwise?? -- 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: Bill R. <bil...@dn...> - 2002-05-05 00:14:48
|
This flavor business is veering wildly off the original mark: to provide open source programs for the typical windows user. This means one flavor not several. Once the one flavor is out and in distribution, then focusing other flavors on smaller audiences makes sense but until the original purpose for this whole project is served, multiple flavors just detracts. bill r ----- Original Message ----- From: "Imran Ghory" <im...@bi...> To: "Henrik Nilsen Omma" <h....@bt...> Cc: "Jeremy Hise" <jh...@li...>; "opencd-devel" <ope...@li...> Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2002 4:40 PM Subject: Re: [Opencd-devel] What about flavors? > On 4 May 2002, Henrik Nilsen Omma wrote: > > > > > Interesting idea. Once we have the installer stuff sorted out it's > > really not much more work to make 3 versions. Other plusses: > > > > 1) Having the Corporate Backend version allows us to push some of the > > really heavy hitters like Apache and mySQL, without worrying about > > confusing the novice user. It would also be good to associate the > > OpenCD project with these apps because of their good reputation. > > > > 2) Each category can have different criteria. The Home verion must > > stress simplicity while the Backend reliability, etc. In total, this > > would allow many more apps to qualify. > > I've been doing some number crunching and found that their exists about > 240mb of programs that could go on the CD, excluding most programming type > software, but including some server software (Apache, MySQL, PHP and > Perl). So I don't think at this stage we need to break them off into > seperate CDs just seperate sections. > > (I'll make a breakup of the figure available later today) > > On another note at 240mb range we could reasonably include source. > > Imran > > > _______________________________________________________________ > > 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 > |
|
From: Buchan M. <bg...@ca...> - 2002-05-05 00:03:49
|
I don't know what the example tries to demonstrate, but Mozilla, being a security-conscious browser, does not allow one to execute an exe with this easily. I replaced the link to a text file with one to a small setup program, and the only thing mozilla offers to do is save the file to a different location. This is why I have issues with an html-based installer. If issues like this can be overcome on every possible OS/browser combination possible on the target audience, without the need for them to follow fancy tricks, we can use it. But if it is more difficult to use than just finding the right setup files to run, it serves no purpose. Using javascript to solve a problem like this may be viable, but can you guarantee javascript capability and/or compatability across systems? I know this might be nitpicking, but do you do for a machine running win95 with Internet Explorer 3? I believe it should be relatively simple to write something in C++/WxWindows (I will see if I can get around to it this weekend still) that will mimic something like Demoshield. There are versions of wx for GTK, lesstif and MacOS X (I am not sure about previous versions of Mac OS), all under GPL or LGPL. Speaking of demoshield, has anyone tried my Demoshield demo yet? If not, I am currently working on a much better one for OpenOffice.org at the moment, and will post it somewhere when I am done. Also, if we are going to consider html-based, we need to consider how best to use the screen real-estate (you will see what I mean if you try my demoshield example). And yes, PNGs rather than GIFs, image quality (with decent display like Mozilla) is much better anyway. Buchan bud...@bu..., jsa...@di... wrote: > >Just got the OpenCDjs.zip >Good work Jon, >So far my only negative comment is should we be using gif >format images ? >What is the status on the unisys(?) patent on them >Let's either stick to jpg or png >Can we have the source code for the autorun.exe as well. >Martin Stevens >On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 12:00:07PM -0700, Jon Saltzman wrote: >> Greetings - >> >> I saw that Henrik put up the anonymous FTP, so I put up a framework for an HTML based browser install. I didn't want to include any apps due to size, so the link just points to a text file, but it seemed to work just fine with an application. >> >> I heard some talk that just clicking a link would not necessarily allow for the end user to install software on some machines - I would suggest that the solution is either a small javascript (easy to do), or simply to ignore the machines that it won't work on... HTML based installations are fairly standard, and not that ambigious, especially if designed well. >> >> The file is at http://66.197.181.104/incoming/openCDjs.zip >> >> I used a nice little program called UF AutoRun Creator which is completely freeware to generate the autorun.inf and professional autorun.exe file. >> >> I will continue to mess with this and see if I can find away around the browser download/install issue. >> >> -Jon >-- >Budgester Technologies Ltd >Office : 01992 718568 >Mobile : 07815 982380 >mailto:ma...@bu... >http://www.budgester.com >_______________________________________________________________ >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 |
|
From: Imran G. <im...@bi...> - 2002-05-04 23:43:10
|
On 4 May 2002, Henrik Nilsen Omma wrote: > > Interesting idea. Once we have the installer stuff sorted out it's > really not much more work to make 3 versions. Other plusses: > > 1) Having the Corporate Backend version allows us to push some of the > really heavy hitters like Apache and mySQL, without worrying about > confusing the novice user. It would also be good to associate the > OpenCD project with these apps because of their good reputation. > > 2) Each category can have different criteria. The Home verion must > stress simplicity while the Backend reliability, etc. In total, this > would allow many more apps to qualify. I've been doing some number crunching and found that their exists about 240mb of programs that could go on the CD, excluding most programming type software, but including some server software (Apache, MySQL, PHP and Perl). So I don't think at this stage we need to break them off into seperate CDs just seperate sections. (I'll make a breakup of the figure available later today) On another note at 240mb range we could reasonably include source. Imran |
|
From: Martin S. <bud...@bu...> - 2002-05-04 23:12:57
|
Just got the OpenCDjs.zip Good work Jon, So far my only negative comment is should we be using gif format images ? What is the status on the unisys(?) patent on them Let's either stick to jpg or png Can we have the source code for the autorun.exe as well. Martin Stevens On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 12:00:07PM -0700, Jon Saltzman wrote: > Greetings - > > I saw that Henrik put up the anonymous FTP, so I put up a framework for an HTML based browser install. I didn't want to include any apps due to size, so the link just points to a text file, but it seemed to work just fine with an application. > > I heard some talk that just clicking a link would not necessarily allow for the end user to install software on some machines - I would suggest that the solution is either a small javascript (easy to do), or simply to ignore the machines that it won't work on... HTML based installations are fairly standard, and not that ambigious, especially if designed well. > > The file is at http://66.197.181.104/incoming/openCDjs.zip > > I used a nice little program called UF AutoRun Creator which is completely freeware to generate the autorun.inf and professional autorun.exe file. > > I will continue to mess with this and see if I can find away around the browser download/install issue. > > -Jon -- Budgester Technologies Ltd Office : 01992 718568 Mobile : 07815 982380 mailto:ma...@bu... http://www.budgester.com |
|
From: Henrik N. O. <h....@bt...> - 2002-05-04 21:00:33
|
On Sat, 2002-05-04 at 09:51, Steve Mallett wrote: > This is a smart idea. What exactly is the distribution plan for the CD? Is > there one? > > If the wind blows the right way over the next few weeks I may be in a postion > to distribute these CD's without cost in the somewhat near future. Let me > repeat.... without cost. Hmmm... I'm hoping you'll tell us more :) > On Saturday 04 May 2002 05:22 pm, Jeremy Hise wrote: > > To me it would make sense to have something along the lines of: > > > > OpenCD Corporate Backend > > - Apache > > - mySQL > > - PHP > > - Perl > > - etc. > > > > OpenCD Corporate Frontend > > - Mozilla > > - ABIWord > > - Gnumeric > > - etc. > > > > OpenCD Home > > - Games > > - Mozilla > > - ABIWord > > - Gnumeric > > - XMMS > > - Sylpheed > > - etc. > > > > The ups are: > > 1) Release more "useful" packages per recipient > > 2) Allows more room, per CD, for source code (c'mon, distribute open source > > software without the source? Keep in mind OpenCD will embody the meaning of > > opensource to most recipients) > > > > The downs are: > > - Each corporate user will probably request twice as many CDs as > > non-corporate (because of course they will want apache AND the games) - > > More CDs to make > > > > But this seems like the way to go. > > > > Thanks! > > > > jeremy > > > > _______________________________________________________________ > > > > 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 > > -- > 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 > > _______________________________________________________________ > > 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 -- 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...> - 2002-05-04 20:59:04
|
Interesting idea. Once we have the installer stuff sorted out it's really not much more work to make 3 versions. Other plusses: 1) Having the Corporate Backend version allows us to push some of the really heavy hitters like Apache and mySQL, without worrying about confusing the novice user. It would also be good to associate the OpenCD project with these apps because of their good reputation. 2) Each category can have different criteria. The Home verion must stress simplicity while the Backend reliability, etc. In total, this would allow many more apps to qualify. Let's add a developers set also, that contains all the free devel tools which are relevant for the development of the apps on the other CDs. Then everyone can get their favorites included, like Emacs and gcc. I'm not sure the source needs to be on the Home or Front End CDs, perhaps that can go on the Development one. But, yes I agree, the source should be available in some convenient format. - Henrik On Sat, 2002-05-04 at 21:22, Jeremy Hise wrote: > To me it would make sense to have something along the lines of: > > OpenCD Corporate Backend > - Apache > - mySQL > - PHP > - Perl > - etc. > > OpenCD Corporate Frontend > - Mozilla > - ABIWord > - Gnumeric > - etc. > > OpenCD Home > - Games > - Mozilla > - ABIWord > - Gnumeric > - XMMS > - Sylpheed > - etc. > > The ups are: > 1) Release more "useful" packages per recipient > 2) Allows more room, per CD, for source code (c'mon, distribute open source software without the source? Keep in mind OpenCD will embody the meaning of opensource to most recipients) > > The downs are: > - Each corporate user will probably request twice as many CDs as non-corporate (because of course they will want apache AND the games) > - More CDs to make > > But this seems like the way to go. > > Thanks! > > jeremy > > _______________________________________________________________ > > 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 -- Henrik Nilsen Omma Theoretical Physics, Oxford 35 Frenchay Road 1 Keble Road Oxford OX2 6TG Oxford OX1 3NP h....@bt... he...@th... |
|
From: Steve M. <st...@op...> - 2002-05-04 20:52:18
|
This is a smart idea. What exactly is the distribution plan for the CD? Is there one? If the wind blows the right way over the next few weeks I may be in a postion to distribute these CD's without cost in the somewhat near future. Let me repeat.... without cost. On Saturday 04 May 2002 05:22 pm, Jeremy Hise wrote: > To me it would make sense to have something along the lines of: > > OpenCD Corporate Backend > - Apache > - mySQL > - PHP > - Perl > - etc. > > OpenCD Corporate Frontend > - Mozilla > - ABIWord > - Gnumeric > - etc. > > OpenCD Home > - Games > - Mozilla > - ABIWord > - Gnumeric > - XMMS > - Sylpheed > - etc. > > The ups are: > 1) Release more "useful" packages per recipient > 2) Allows more room, per CD, for source code (c'mon, distribute open source > software without the source? Keep in mind OpenCD will embody the meaning of > opensource to most recipients) > > The downs are: > - Each corporate user will probably request twice as many CDs as > non-corporate (because of course they will want apache AND the games) - > More CDs to make > > But this seems like the way to go. > > Thanks! > > jeremy > > _______________________________________________________________ > > 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 -- 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: Jeremy H. <jh...@li...> - 2002-05-04 20:26:59
|
To me it would make sense to have something along the lines of: OpenCD Corporate Backend - Apache - mySQL - PHP - Perl - etc. OpenCD Corporate Frontend - Mozilla - ABIWord - Gnumeric - etc. OpenCD Home - Games - Mozilla - ABIWord - Gnumeric - XMMS - Sylpheed - etc. The ups are: 1) Release more "useful" packages per recipient 2) Allows more room, per CD, for source code (c'mon, distribute open source software without the source? Keep in mind OpenCD will embody the meaning of opensource to most recipients) The downs are: - Each corporate user will probably request twice as many CDs as non-corporate (because of course they will want apache AND the games) - More CDs to make But this seems like the way to go. Thanks! jeremy |
|
From: Dhruva B. R. <sle...@ya...> - 2002-05-04 19:49:08
|
Note: forwarded message attached. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com |
|
From: Steve M. <st...@op...> - 2002-05-04 19:35:11
|
> In general I like it, but: > 1. Need a bit about what open source etc means. while you may be able to > recite the GPL word for word, most people only have what billg says and > that isn't entirely reliable all the time. http://opensource.org/advocacy/case_for_customers.html -- 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: David I. <ill...@bi...> - 2002-05-04 18:22:03
|
Comments inlined On Sat, 2002-05-04 at 18:33, Andrew J Boncek wrote: >=20 > Thought I would offer up this very draft Sample Corporate Letter. I trie= d > to formulate some items that a typical IT manager at a corporation would > be concerned about or a CIO in general. Comments appreciated. >=20 > -Andy >=20 > DRAFT >=20 > Sample Corporate Letter to Corporations about OpenCD > (Draft by: an...@bo...) >=20 > Executive Overview >=20 > Many corporations around the globe are realizing the power of open > source software and are merging free software applications into their > proprietary IT networks. Additionally, open source operating systems, > including Linux, OpenBSD, and FreeBSD, are being used in a number of > corporate information systems for web services, information security, and > a variety of other server tasks. While open source operating systems are > quickly being adopted in the server market, the penetration of open sourc= e > operating systems and software is minimal at the user=92s desktop. OpenC= D > brings the power and advantages of zero fee licenses and professional > quality, secure software to the typical corporate user. The general > absence of such an effort has somewhat slowed the widespread adoption of > free software in the enterprise and has additionally made such wide scale > adoption difficult to manage. OpenCD will provide an avenue for > corporations to deploy software usable on current existing proprietary [di] remove the proprietary - here and all the way through. Its just a euphemism for windows and make it look like you're bitter about it - maybe this could become ... deploy open software on platforms currently in use. > operating systems. >=20 > Brief Overview of the OpenCD Project >=20 > The OpenCD Project is a single distribution of selected open source > software that is proven to work on proprietary operating systems. The > potential savings for IT departments can be staggering and can > significantly reduce the outlays for recurrent licensing structures and > support needs. As IT departments are learning from current proprietary > software support structures, the additional fees to add additional users, > keep support for patches current, and other long term financial outlays > can reduce the overall potential to upgrade to the latest software. > OpenCD can be a professional quality installation with support built-in > through the open source software community support structure with no > additional costs. [di] All in all, I think you may be making too much of the support thing. Truthfully there is no support from anyone for the software we give away free more than simply phoning up your geek cousin and asking them or maybe the OSS developers if they have time. > As stated from the Project=92s description, OpenCD uses the following > criteria for the distribution: >=20 > 1. A selection of high-quality open source software for proprietary > operating systems. > 2. No licensing fees. The project is composed entirely of open > source free software. > 3. OpenCD contains many useful mainstream applications such as office > productivity applications and other workflow software that extends the > enterprise. > 4. The project uses professional quality installation methods. In > addition, the project provides the potential for easy, centrally managed > software distribution and revocation. [di] erm... it does? none of the proposed installers have anything near this level of functionality. while I would support it, claiming it at this early point is getting massively ahead of ourselves. > 5. A professional quality uninstall: The software can be safely > removed or upgraded from corporate computing systems. [di] ok, a good thing to claim, we just need to make sure its true and if it isn't, we need to supplement the programs distributed so they can be uninstalled. >=20 > The above criteria allows for a high degree of quality control for the > distribution. The CD uses entirely open source standards for software > development of the interfaces and installations and keeps the exists free > licensing structure intact. In addition, the OpenCD criteria is openly > published and can empower the IT department with the ability to present > the distribution to management with professional quality standards. OpenC= D > can ensure the proper and central adoption of high-quality open source > software. >=20 > Advantages of the OpenCD Distribution >=20 > OpenCD presents the corporate enterprise with a central adoption strategy > for integrating free software into existing operating systems. For IT > departments, the challenge to present open source operating systems on th= e > desktop has been difficult. Corporations have driven the proprietary > operating system application development due to a centrally dominated > market. With the rising availability of global software development > collaboration through the Internet, better quality open source office > applications, multimedia, and Internet programs on proprietary operating > systems are on the rise and are currently being deployed in small scale I= T > efforts. OpenCD brings these applications to the enterprise with little > cost to the corporation. > The strength of the open source community in providing exceptional > security is widely recognized. OpenCD takes advantage of open source > projects that for example utilize code review practices, adopt > international security guidelines, By its very nature, the open > availability of the application code has greatly enhanced the security of > these applications=85. > Additionally, OpenCD provides IT managers with an easy system for > inventory tracking of open software in use. In addition, it allows for > the potential to track the use and impact of open source software in the > corporation, thereby enabling the =85 [di] hmm. sounds cool :-) > The OpenCD project uses a regular release schedule that allows IT > departments a predictable timeframe to deploy open source software. With > one CD distribution in use, the IT departments can do central integration > testing, manage updates to the system, and prepare new systems for the > next release. In the current open source environment, it is difficult fo= r > an IT department to properly manage and track updates of open source > software. OpenCD provides this in the predictability and stability of a > release schedule. >=20 > Possible Concerns for the Corporate Network >=20 > As many IT managers have come to realize in the past few years, > most current open source software in the IT infrastructure is =93making i= t > in through the back door=94 (similar to the appearance of PDAs). OpenCD > allows for IT departments to =93control=94 the propagation of the softwar= e > throughout the enterprise by distributing the software from the > department. The distribution can be safely and statically distributed to > user support groups for training and technical support activities. > (Additions=85) >=20 > Conclusion >=20 > The OpenCD Project provides the corporate infrastructure with a > wide array of central distribution advantages and extends the capabilitie= s > current and future IT systems. The clear advantages of no-cost, high- > quality software is being realized by corporations globally, and OpenCD > continues these advantages through centrally evaluated software for use o= n > existing corporate operating systems. In addition, the project > specifically enables the general corporate user but still allows the > software distribution process to be managed by the resident IT > departments. In general I like it, but: 1. Need a bit about what open source etc means. while you may be able to recite the GPL word for word, most people only have what billg says and that isn't entirely reliable all the time. 2. Some of this sounds a bit ambitious. While I'm all in favour of it, we need to be sound in our claims. If a manager handed me a CD and this letter and asked if it were true, if it wasn't all true i.e. the centrally managed software bit etc, I'd have to tell them that and the CD would probably be chucked by the manager 3. Conceivably stability could be sold a bit more. i.e. we won't upgrade software to a less stable version, you don't have to upgrade etc, etc Just a few comments. In general it sounds like a really good idea and with a little refinement it will be great. David Illsleu |
|
From: Henrik N. O. <h....@bt...> - 2002-05-04 17:30:25
|
On Sat, 2002-05-04 at 17:21, Imran Ghory wrote: > On Fri, 3 May 2002, Alex Roston wrote: > > > There's FreeExtractor at http://www.disoriented.com/ which is distributed > under a zLib like licence and Inso at http://www.jrsoftware.org/isinfo.php > which is distributed under a non-standard licene. Reading through both of > the licences they appear to be "Free" under the FSF definition. > Yeah, these look quite nice. They could be useful for placing extra documentation OSS literature etc. on the users HD. As for the main apps, I guess we should aim to use the already supplied installers, in which case we still need this HTML-based (or some other) wrapper. We might consider repackaging all the apps though with one of these installers. I don't think it's very much work. The advantage would be that we could have a standardized look, making installation less scary. Also, we could put all the apps in one place, like the "OpenApps" folder instead of craming it in with the other junk in "Program Files". I think this might make a nice impression on the user. - Henrik -- Henrik Nilsen Omma Theoretical Physics, Oxford 35 Frenchay Road 1 Keble Road Oxford OX2 6TG Oxford OX1 3NP h....@bt... he...@th... |
|
From: Andrew J B. <an...@bo...> - 2002-05-04 17:20:21
|
Thought I would offer up this very draft Sample Corporate Letter. I tried to formulate some items that a typical IT manager at a corporation would be concerned about or a CIO in general. Comments appreciated. -Andy DRAFT Sample Corporate Letter to Corporations about OpenCD (Draft by: an...@bo...) Executive Overview Many corporations around the globe are realizing the power of open source software and are merging free software applications into their proprietary IT networks. Additionally, open source operating systems, including Linux, OpenBSD, and FreeBSD, are being used in a number of corporate information systems for web services, information security, and a variety of other server tasks. While open source operating systems are quickly being adopted in the server market, the penetration of open source operating systems and software is minimal at the users desktop. OpenCD brings the power and advantages of zero fee licenses and professional quality, secure software to the typical corporate user. The general absence of such an effort has somewhat slowed the widespread adoption of free software in the enterprise and has additionally made such wide scale adoption difficult to manage. OpenCD will provide an avenue for corporations to deploy software usable on current existing proprietary operating systems. Brief Overview of the OpenCD Project The OpenCD Project is a single distribution of selected open source software that is proven to work on proprietary operating systems. The potential savings for IT departments can be staggering and can significantly reduce the outlays for recurrent licensing structures and support needs. As IT departments are learning from current proprietary software support structures, the additional fees to add additional users, keep support for patches current, and other long term financial outlays can reduce the overall potential to upgrade to the latest software. OpenCD can be a professional quality installation with support built-in through the open source software community support structure with no additional costs. As stated from the Projects description, OpenCD uses the following criteria for the distribution: 1. A selection of high-quality open source software for proprietary operating systems. 2. No licensing fees. The project is composed entirely of open source free software. 3. OpenCD contains many useful mainstream applications such as office productivity applications and other workflow software that extends the enterprise. 4. The project uses professional quality installation methods. In addition, the project provides the potential for easy, centrally managed software distribution and revocation. 5. A professional quality uninstall: The software can be safely removed or upgraded from corporate computing systems. The above criteria allows for a high degree of quality control for the distribution. The CD uses entirely open source standards for software development of the interfaces and installations and keeps the exists free licensing structure intact. In addition, the OpenCD criteria is openly published and can empower the IT department with the ability to present the distribution to management with professional quality standards. OpenCD can ensure the proper and central adoption of high-quality open source software. Advantages of the OpenCD Distribution OpenCD presents the corporate enterprise with a central adoption strategy for integrating free software into existing operating systems. For IT departments, the challenge to present open source operating systems on the desktop has been difficult. Corporations have driven the proprietary operating system application development due to a centrally dominated market. With the rising availability of global software development collaboration through the Internet, better quality open source office applications, multimedia, and Internet programs on proprietary operating systems are on the rise and are currently being deployed in small scale IT efforts. OpenCD brings these applications to the enterprise with little cost to the corporation. The strength of the open source community in providing exceptional security is widely recognized. OpenCD takes advantage of open source projects that for example utilize code review practices, adopt international security guidelines, By its very nature, the open availability of the application code has greatly enhanced the security of these applications . Additionally, OpenCD provides IT managers with an easy system for inventory tracking of open software in use. In addition, it allows for the potential to track the use and impact of open source software in the corporation, thereby enabling the The OpenCD project uses a regular release schedule that allows IT departments a predictable timeframe to deploy open source software. With one CD distribution in use, the IT departments can do central integration testing, manage updates to the system, and prepare new systems for the next release. In the current open source environment, it is difficult for an IT department to properly manage and track updates of open source software. OpenCD provides this in the predictability and stability of a release schedule. Possible Concerns for the Corporate Network As many IT managers have come to realize in the past few years, most current open source software in the IT infrastructure is making it in through the back door (similar to the appearance of PDAs). OpenCD allows for IT departments to control the propagation of the software throughout the enterprise by distributing the software from the department. The distribution can be safely and statically distributed to user support groups for training and technical support activities. (Additions ) Conclusion The OpenCD Project provides the corporate infrastructure with a wide array of central distribution advantages and extends the capabilities current and future IT systems. The clear advantages of no-cost, high- quality software is being realized by corporations globally, and OpenCD continues these advantages through centrally evaluated software for use on existing corporate operating systems. In addition, the project specifically enables the general corporate user but still allows the software distribution process to be managed by the resident IT departments. |
|
From: Martin S. <bud...@bu...> - 2002-05-04 16:22:22
|
Most of the application installers do something similar to this i.e. a disk space check etc. I believe the best thing to do is to get a simple system with a clear HTML front end working as 0.01 and then make incremental upgrades. On Sat, May 04, 2002 at 10:31:18AM -0500, Matt Tackett wrote: > Not sure if this is posible from a technical standpoint with an HTML-based > installer, but can the installer be generated based on the hardware of the > user? More clearly, could a small hardware check be run as the installer > is popping up and only allow the installation of those programs that the > users system can run. Programs that were unable to be run wouldn't even > show up on on the installer in that users machine. This would allow the > project to put (games) applications that might need special hardware > (games) or a higher system requirements (games) on the CD without > aggravating the end user (he wouldn't know what he was missing or spend > time installing programs he couldn't run). > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. > > > _______________________________________________________________ > > 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: Imran G. <im...@bi...> - 2002-05-04 16:22:10
|
On Fri, 3 May 2002, Alex Roston wrote: > J Aaron Farr wrote: > > > > I've contacted the K-Meleon development mailing list and posted on their > > forums, but haven't gotten any response yet. I've also downloaded the source > > and I'll be looking at it over the weekend and next week (I'll be out of town > > for a week, but I'll do what I can). > > > > Does anyone else know of any other light weight OpenSource web browsers we > > could perhaps use? I was hoping to find one written in some cross-platform > > language other than java (although we could go with java) but I didn't turn up > > anything. > > Has anyone done a Google search for Freeware/OSS installers that run on > Windows? There must be some out there. There's FreeExtractor at http://www.disoriented.com/ which is distributed under a zLib like licence and Inso at http://www.jrsoftware.org/isinfo.php which is distributed under a non-standard licene. Reading through both of the licences they appear to be "Free" under the FSF definition. Imran |
|
From: Henrik N. O. <h....@bt...> - 2002-05-04 15:36:45
|
On Sat, 2002-05-04 at 05:17, J Aaron Farr wrote: > I've contacted the K-Meleon development mailing list and posted on their > forums, but haven't gotten any response yet. I've also downloaded the source > and I'll be looking at it over the weekend and next week (I'll be out of town > for a week, but I'll do what I can). So, what language is the source actually in? > Does anyone else know of any other light weight OpenSource web browsers we > could perhaps use? I was hoping to find one written in some cross-platform > language other than java (although we could go with java) but I didn't turn up > anything. Sorry, I don't understand, does it actually _need_ a Java engine to run, or is that just for tyhe Java plug-in to run Java stuff on the net? As far as I can see, the only plug-in we would like to use is the Full-screen plug-in. - Henrik -- Henrik Nilsen Omma Theoretical Physics, Oxford 35 Frenchay Road 1 Keble Road Oxford OX2 6TG Oxford OX1 3NP h....@bt... he...@th... |
|
From: Matt T. <rad...@ho...> - 2002-05-04 15:31:40
|
Not sure if this is posible from a technical standpoint with an HTML-based installer, but can the installer be generated based on the hardware of the user? More clearly, could a small hardware check be run as the installer is popping up and only allow the installation of those programs that the users system can run. Programs that were unable to be run wouldn't even show up on on the installer in that users machine. This would allow the project to put (games) applications that might need special hardware (games) or a higher system requirements (games) on the CD without aggravating the end user (he wouldn't know what he was missing or spend time installing programs he couldn't run). _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. |
|
From: Alex R. <tun...@pa...> - 2002-05-04 15:19:21
|
J Aaron Farr wrote: > > I've contacted the K-Meleon development mailing list and posted on their > forums, but haven't gotten any response yet. I've also downloaded the source > and I'll be looking at it over the weekend and next week (I'll be out of town > for a week, but I'll do what I can). > > Does anyone else know of any other light weight OpenSource web browsers we > could perhaps use? I was hoping to find one written in some cross-platform > language other than java (although we could go with java) but I didn't turn up > anything. Has anyone done a Google search for Freeware/OSS installers that run on Windows? There must be some out there. Alex |
|
From: James S. <ja...@di...> - 2002-05-04 11:31:23
|
>Yeah, but if we send source code then we need to include difficult to >use, professional compilers. Joe User doesn't like that... Does this mean people are considering *not* putting the source on the disk? I think not having it is not a good idea. It's open source stuff, so why not have the source? Even if it's not anywhere in the menu except for a line of text saying something like "And all the sourcecode is available in the source folder". |
29 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
