Hi Jürgen, Replies in-line. On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 22:29, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: > Hi Ian, > Ian Laurenson wrote: > > Hi Jürgen, > > Reply in-line. > > > > On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 20:42, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: > > > >>Hi, > >> > >>I'd like the idea as well and i will try to share some facts and > >>thoughts here. > >>1. OO.org 2.0 comes with a smart integrated package manager (UI and > >>command line support) which supports installation as well as removing of > >>new UNO packages (real components as well as Basic or script libraries) > > > > > > A great advancement it is to! It is the possibility of adding packages > > while OpenOffice.org is running that makes the concept of an add-on > > installer possible. > > Sure and the add-on installer is already there but it needs to be > extended with more functionality to install UNO packages for example > from the web and detect new versions of alread installed packages ... > I agree that this would be the ideal! I just didn't realise that this was an option.
> > > >>2. it offers also the export of UNO packages to extract UNO packages > >>from an existing installation > > > > > > As far as I can tell, the export of UNO packages provides a way of > > copying an installed UNO package to another location. From a brief test > > it doesn't include any changes to the installed files. > > Why it should change the installed files? > My apologies what I said was not clear at all. I will give an example of what I mean: Someone installs IannzFindFiles.uno.zip UNO package. They don't like my cluttered dialog and so modify the dialog and BASIC code in the IannzFindFile library so that it is a more intuitive wizard. Currently if they export the IannzFindFiles.uno.zip UNO package what they are exporting is my original cluttered version rather than their new improved wizard. Further to this, I think it would be good if their was a wizard to help people build their UNO package. > > > > > >>3. UNO packages are described with a XML based package descriptor file > >> > > > > Could you let me know where the documentation for this file format can > > be found? > > It is documented in the updated Developers Guide for OOo2.0 > > Where can I find the updated Developers Guide for OOo2.0? [snip] > > I think that some members of the OpenOffice.org community should have > > the responsibility for checking uploaded files for malicious content. > > The wizard has a check box for eliminating from the displayed list those > > add-ons or templates that haven't been checked. > > good idea, the packages should definitely checked and QA'ed > My thoughts on the QA concept is that if it is easy for users to rate and review extensions then the users will be doing the QA. But, I suspect not many users would be able to check if some code had some hidden malicious intent (or accidental catastrophe). > > > > I hope it is clear from the above, that I am not proposing a different > > format for UNO packages, but I am trying to find a way of helping users > > to find UNO package to meet their needs, and to do that may require an > > additional file with information about available UNO packages. > > Yes of course and i like the idea. And i think the package manager is > still the right start point or at least the right point to trigger a > further UI to cover the online search, update and deployment of packages. > I really like the concept of the package manager being the starting point for on-line searches, updates and deployment of packages. > I would suggest that we use a different term instead of add-on, because > add-on in OOo is a specialized UNO component providing some kind of UI > integration. But there are a lot of more UNO packages (BASIC library, > calc add-ins, ). I would prefer "OO.org extensions". GBut of course it's > only a guess to minimize confusion. If we use the term "Extension" then the "Package Manager" should probably be renamed "Extension Manager". I like the term "OpenOffice.org Extensions" and within OpenOffice.org simply called Extensions. I wonder if there should be a top level menu item between "Tools" and "Window" called "Extension". The tools menu is already quite long, and having the main way of accessing extensions through the tools menu adds another click. E.g: Tools > Add-ons > Iannz > FindFiles Compared with: Extensions > Iannz > FindFiles Thanks, Ian --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
