Charles Schulz wrote: > Hello Mathias, > > Mathias Bauer a écrit : >> --snip-- >> >> Charles, you can't expect that every new feature that is planned by >> whomever will be announced everywhere. Not including the documentation >> project was probably a mistake and Jan already has agreed to this >> assessment. I for myself are not sure about this: does it mean that the >> documentation project wants to be notified about every plan to change a >> dialog in OOo? Because more than this didn't happen until now. >> >> Besides that I'm glad to see that the value of writing specs and >> "talking early" is seen by at least some people outside of Hamburg. :-) >> > > Mathias, the problem is not on the spec writing. I think we all agree by > now that the planned new feature is not at stake here. It is the > "repository" part that was a problem. The planned UI change is not in > question here. I, personnally, even think it is a great one. :-)
There is no "repository part" of the planned work as far as I see it. If you had asked the iTeam (the names are listed on the wiki page) before you started complaining you could have saved us a lot of noise. You bring a bad tone into the discussion by mixing up things that don't belong together. So let's keep things separated: the dialog implementation and the repository. And if it helped we should remove the latter part from the wiki page (though I would see this as an exaggeration). In my understanding it was an ideas collection and we didn't discuss a single minute about the "repository" part that obviously made you nervous. What you see in the wiki isn't a spec as you find on specs.openoffice.org - it's a collection of ideas, data, use cases etc. It would be enough to read and understand the very first sentence of the page to see this: "Templates are very important for any office suite. Here are some ideas how to improve the current situation on OOo." >> Sorry, where do you read that anybody wanted to take templates >> elsewhere? And especially where do you read that it was a Sun engineer? >> IIRC it was just an idea (IIRC from Caolan?), not even a feature. And we >> haven't set up an iTeam for this, just for the coding of a new template >> dialog. This still is a feature like any other one and is treated as any >> other one. > > The "who wanted to put stuff where" was unclear to me. It seemed to > involve (before the successive corrections and answers were made) the > iTeam at various levels. Moving the templates elsewhere is simply > written on the specs, second half of the page. I know, but IMHO it doesn't belong to the spec I was going to write (as I'm the one who volunteered to write the final spec version). And if you had asked me or someone else from the iTeam *before* writing your mails you could have got to know about this already. The complaints you have expressed could be turned against you: you started to discuss about the work of people without asking them in the first place. Thus the noise caused by the misunderstandings. If you start the implementation of a new feature you can't always talk with everybody in the beginning. Surely if implementing something touches the work of others we should and we will involve them. But the work on the new template dialog didn't start until now (we didn't even discuss the content of the wiki page!), so there wasn't any reason to involve anybody outside of the iTeam until now. So can we please calm down, get back to work and devore ourselves to more useful discussions? Ciao, Mathias -- Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS Please don't reply to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". I use it for the OOo lists and only rarely read other mails sent to it. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
