300+ free and legal portable apps (over 9GB), up-to-date, & new apps regularly (Jul 28, 2014: Transmission-qt).
Get the fast, new 64GB PortableApps.com Companion, encrypted PortableApps.com Carbide, or carry your KeyZ.
PA.c Platform 12.0 Beta 3.2 (May 20, 2014) | PortableApps.com needs your help: Please donate today.

was not better just a single language ?

Mariolv (Homepage) - February 2, 2011 - 8:32am

Great ... i belive a lot in this new project of TDF ... but i asked me: was not better just a single language package than a multilanguage installation?

now the installation is more harder and slower for the portable application imho ...


( categories: )

The reason is...

The reason for this decision is given in The Document Foundation's blog (http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/01/25/the-document-foundation-la...):

(...) the Windows installer, which is going to impact the largest and most diverse user base, has been integrated into a single build containing all language versions, thus reducing the size for download sites from 75 to 11GB, making it easier for us to deploy new versions more rapidly and lowering the carbon footprint of the entire infrastructure (...)

I agree that it would be better if portable version was as small as possible, but I guess that repackaging would be much harder and more time consuming.

No typin th las lette ca sav yo plent o spac

Disk space vs. bandwidth?

I read that explanation from TDF earlier and was confused. A single language version should be smaller than a multi-language version. It's only now that it occurs to me that they must be referring to the amount of disk space required at the download site. ([number of languages] * [single language size] = 75GB, 1 * [multi-language size] = 11GB).

I'm still confused though. I would have thought that bandwidth would be more important than disk space to a download site and having everyone download a larger multi-language version is going to increase the bandwidth required.

i'm agree with u CNB. ...

i'm agree with u CNB. ... i've same doubts ... Sad

My 2 cents in: A vote for

3.3 Itself

The big difference in size is actually 3.3 itself. A local English-only install of LibreOffice 3.3 is 440MB (excluding your data). The full multi-lingual LibreOffice 3.3 contained in LibreOffice Portable (excluding your data) is 421MB.

Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!