As Franklin mentioned, the university where I work (UNAU) is using OxOOL since 2020. And works like a charm have to add. Would love to have it's features as LOOL base.
El 24 de junio de 2022 1:37:32 a. m. GMT-03:00, Franklin Weng <[email protected]> escribió: >Hi, > > >Here I have a proposal: to have LOOL respository sync to another LOOL-derived >suite: > >https://github.com/OSSII/oxool-community ><https://github.com/OSSII/oxool-community> > >OxOOL is developed by OSSII in Taiwan, derived from LOOL. It has commercial >version, which is several versions advanced to community version, while the >community version is also open sourced. Currently National Development >Council Taiwan, the main dominant unit of ODF policy in Taiwanese government, >uses (forks) this community version into "NDCODFweb": > >https://github.com/NDCODF/ndcodfweb <https://github.com/NDCODF/ndcodfweb> > >which is also mainly supported by OSSII. > >Besides NDCODFWeb and some other Taiwanese government units, OxOOL is also >used in different companies and products. For example, it is integrated into >ASUS cloud Omnistor Office (https://www.asuscloud.com/omnistor-office/), >OpenFind SecuShare Pro (https://www.openfind.com.tw/taiwan/secusharepro.html). > It is migrated into Pou Chen Group (https://www.pouchen.com) and some other >big anonymous companies. Also, it is deployed in UNAU >(https://www.unau.edu.ar/la-universidad/ ). > >OxOOL v4 will be released in a month and can be a good and useful base to >LOOL, also good to the LibreOffice community. > >I'm not a representative of OSSII, but the GM of OSSII told me that they are >happy to share the community version. > >In this proposal there are two ways to relive LOOL: > >1. To sync current LOOL with patches from OxOOL community v4, which may >technically take more time and efforts. > >2. Start a new repository from OxOOL community v4, which I'll say that it is >actually a "fast forward" from current status since OxOOL is also derived from >LOOL, though a bit far before. It will be technically easier than 1., just >that maybe some community people may feel uneasy or unhappy with this way. > >Both ways are okay for me, as long as LOOL can be relived. However no matter >which way, IMO TDF needs to employ in-house developers (independent from *any* >ecosystem member) for rerunning LOOL. The second option, which is my prefer >option, is a lot easier technically and in-house developers would just need to >(cowork with community members and OSSII to) maintain LOOL repository. > >Features in OxOOL commercial version are mostly (customized) requests from >customers and hence may not necessarily need to be backported (to community >version), but the GM of OSSII also promised that OxOOL Commercial version >functions (which they think good / necessary to be back ported) and bugfixes >will be back ported to LOOL (and OxOOL community version too). > >Of course, after reliving LOOL all developers are welcomed to contribute to >LOOL. > >Details can be discussed with OSSII. > > >Regards, >Franklin > > >Paolo Vecchi 於 2022/6/21 20:15 寫道: >> Hi all, >> >> just a heads up in case the community would like to come up with proposals >> in regards to LibreOffice On-Line. >> >> As you might be aware LOOL's repository has been frozen since the major code >> contributor decided to move it to GitHub and not contribute back to TDF's >> repository. >> >> At the time there has been a debate about it but then nothing actionable >> seems to have been proposed by the community since then. >> >> Recently an ex-member of the ESC proposed to the ESC to archive LOOL [0] and >> during the following ESC meeting no concerns were expressed for doing so [1]. >> >> The "Attic Policy" [2], that has been written to archive obsolete projects, >> states that the Board will need to vote on the archival process to confirm >> ESC's choice. >> >> It is likely that the board will need to vote on it soon so if the community >> would like to do something with LOOL there might be a small window of >> opportunity to have your preferences on what to do with it heard. >> >> If nobody comes along proposing to look after it and update if so that it >> could be brought back into an usable form for the community then the board >> might have to vote for having LOOL archived. >> >> Ciao >> >> Paolo >> >> >> >> [0] https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2022-June/088982.html >> [1] https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2022-June/089018.html >> [2] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Policies/Attic >>
