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
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
