Hi, On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Juergen Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote: > Daniel B. wrote: >> Since our (and potentially a lot of other) extension breaks with this >> change this is a major issue that prevents us from rolling out OOo >> 3.2. Reverting the change until OOo 4.0 would give us enough time to >> update our extension and roll out the updated version. So I support >> Michael's suggestion to re-implement the interfaces that are missing, >> at least temporary, and document the change so that people are aware >> of the issue and can adapt their macros/extensions. >> > until now you are the only one with this problem. How many places using this > code do you have in your extension? We gave you the necessary info to do it > correct. It should be not really a big change i guess but anyway. I let it > up to others to decide if it is a showstopper or not. > > But how can we prevent you from rolling out 3.2 when it is not already final > and released? Either you change your broken or wrong extensions or we do the > changes back. You have to do it anyway in the near future whereas we have > double work. Sounds not really optimal ;-)
We really shouldn't argue this based on who has the most work because of this change but based on what is the right thing to do in this case. The fact of the matter is that multiple interfaces were removed without advance notice. Sure, these interfaces may have been included in error in the first place but since neither the "wrong" interfaces nor the right way to do it were documented how could someone have known that he used something that wasn't even supposed to be there? So you can't really blame someone for using those interfaces. Okay, maybe you CAN blame them for using _anything_ that isn't documented but in this case that would have meant to just completely do without this functionality which wasn't really a good option either. So, removing the interfaces in general is fine, but not without giving people ample time to react to this change and to learn how to do it right. Just breaking their extensions/macros from one minor version to the next isn't very nice. But yes, I'm biased because our extension is affected. You are right that it's not such a big change, and I may have exaggerated a bit. But you must understand that it's a bit of a shock when you realize that some interfaces suddenly just disappear from OOo 3.1 to 3.2 without any warning or explanation. It also has the effect that you begin to wonder what else could have gone missing that maybe you didn't notice in your test cases. Anyway, we now have an explanation what happened and we can do the necessary changes. I still think it would be better to postpone the removal of the interfaces to a later version, but if really noone else has a problem with it I'm not going to argue any further. Regards, Daniel --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
