This is 90% a political problem. In the case of Firefox, you need to to have Firefox upstream "support" Ubuntu in the same way they "support" Windows: Create a proper Ubuntu compliant installer (.deb) file, provide proper documentation on how to run it (double click).
To do this, upstream has to care enough. The task is then to make them care enough. When I wrote ThirdPartyApt, I was thinking more about companies like VMware, who would not likely desire to be beholden to Ubuntu's release schedule, but would still like to support VMware on Ubuntu as a first-class citizen. That is, putting VMware in Canonical's repositories is a non-starter. They won't play by our 6 month rules. But having a button on their web site "Install VMware Workstation 6 for Ubuntu!" might be attractive. Again, political. On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 21:12 +0200, Krzysztof Lichota wrote: > Kevin Fries napisał(a): > > As for the OPs problem with Synaptic... That is 500% off base. I know > > this because I have sat down with end users and showed them synaptic, > > and the gnome installer. If more geeks like us did this with their > > favorite Windows user, I believe there would be more people asking why > > Windows does not install as nicely as Linux. Want proof? > > Yeah, and then they go into Synaptic and want to install Firefox 2.0 (or > 3.0, 4.0, etc.) and it is not there. So they go to Firefox website and > download source tarball or RPM, or whatever. And run away scared, > because "Linux is too difficult". > > Krzysztof Lichota > > -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
