Mike Traum wrote: > Kay, > I understand what you're saying about the Bootsrap, but right now, > the Loader is completely dependant on OOo. > > As far as the error reporting to the user, this could be done. But, > maybe I wasn't clear because I made some points in previous emails. > If a user has an installation of OOo 1.1.x and 1.9.x on their > machine. and my application requires 1.9.x, I really think the > Bootstrap (or Loader to be more specific) needs to do it's best to > find the 1.9.x installation. As detailed in other messsages, under > this situation, a client under Windows will always get the 1.1.x > instance and a unix/linux client, I believe, will simply get > whichever one was installed most recently. Telling a user that 1.9.x > is required when they actually have it installed on their machine > will make no sense to them, and I think exposes a flaw in the Loader.
Mike, you have brought up some things that indeed are unfortunate or at least questionable. Before we go around in circles (I'm afraid we already do) we should let the UNO developers take some time and come up with a well balanced statement about what should be done in the future. I see your point that comes from a users (means: API users) point of view, but OTOH we have ideas and concepts how UNO should work. IMHO we need to check wether we can bring this together (means: how we can give the user the necessary control without breaking our design), because we are interested in improving the "user experience" for our API users. But I assume that this will take some time. Anyway, thanks for bringing this up. Best regards, Mathias -- Mathias Bauer - OpenOffice.org Application Framework Project Lead Please reply to the list only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a spam sink. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
