Re: [tdf-discuss] Non-removable extensions

31.10.2010 13:15, Andy Brown пишет:
> On Sun Oct 31 2010 09:51:03 GMT-0700 (PDT)  fyva wrote:
> > 30.10.2010 19:44, Andy Brown пишет:
> > > Who had the "bright" idea to require the non-removable extensions in
> > > LibreOffice? This, IMO, is totally uncalled for. This is a great way to
> > > lose users.
> > >
> > > Andy
> > They are removable by administrator -on Linux they can be removed
> > through the package manager? and on Windows they can be removed by
> > going to Add/Remove Programs in the Control Panel, and clicking the
> > "Change" button in the LibreOffice entry. There are 3 kinds of
> > extensions now: shared, bundled and user.
>
> I will pass this on. I still think it is uncalled for. Why not just make
> them removable via the Extension Manager. Not a good way to do things.
> If this goes into the release then it is another reason to not move to LibO
Maybe. There is also another problem. If you install a langpack , the 
dictionaries contained in  the langpack are now installed as bundled 
extensions, and they can't be removed even by the setup program 
(Windows) (because langpack installer does not have custom options). And 
more: the bundled extension can't be even disabled by the user on 
Windows (on Linux, I can't see much difference between Shared and 
Bundled extension, except that the shared extension can be removed by 
unopkg with root right, and the bundled extension can be removed via the 
package manager). If you install a new version of an extension, it is 
used instead of the version of the bundled extension. I.e you can 
install 2 LanguageTools, for example, and the shared and user extensions 
have higher priority than bundled, if I get this correctly.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***