On Fri, 01 Feb 2013 09:38:19 +0100
Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-02-01 at 09:34 +0100, Robert Mayr wrote:
> > 2013/2/1 Martin Sourada <martin.sourada(a)gmail.com>
> > Yes, defaults needs to be sensible and usable and for many
> > people
> > that's what they end up with. I'm not saying we should go
> > and have AOO
> > installed by default, but available in repos in a state that
> > does not
> > conflict with LO (and other office suites *in official
> > repos*) ;-) Think
> > about sysadmins, multi-user systems, ... Seeing a bug report
> > saying "My
> > LO Writer segfaults with this error while AOO is installed"
> > isn't
> > exactly helpful, but not having AOO isn't a solution. Hence
> > I say OK to
> > adding AOO, as long as it wont conflict with LO both as
> > package and in
> > runtime.
> > Unlike pulseaudio (in the above linked thread), AOO is
> > end-user GUI application, not a
> > library/daemon/sound-server/whatever
> > used to get the wanted sound to your headphones (that by
> > design
> > interferes with anything else trying to do the same) ;-) By
> > adding AOO
> > we're not breaking some third app, we might break LO and
> > that's exactly
> > what I consider critical not to do. Is it doable? Are there
> > people
> > willing and able to do that? If yes, sure, let them.
> > +1 Martin, that's the point.
> No that's completely not the point:
Have you actually read what I wrote and what I was reacting to? Or have
I written it so bad to make it seem in conflict with what you linked?
I was arguing that you are trying to make a point that is not even on
the table, so there is no point discussing over it.
Since we all agree, let's move on :)