Thorsten Behrens wrote: > Hi Mathias, > > you wrote: >> I think that your blog is a little bit unfair and so I posted a comment. >> > Sorry if it came across like that - I did not mention your name > there, as this was not meant as a personal attack, but I was rather > challenging this (IMO) wide-spread mind-set the quote so nicely > captured.
Well, IMHO we have started to think about questions like these already some time ago, but we didn't develop this into something that you call vision but I would prefer to call a guideline. I had some talks about that in Barcelona and - what are the odds! - it was a topic of a talk I had with Kay Ramme yesterday. There are some elements that make it hard to think into this direction. My personal experience with asking people about possible code sharing quite often was: "I don't like UNO, I don't like Windows, I don't like your build system" etc. etc. While some of these statements are valid, I always wonder why nobody says: "nice idea, how to make it happen and how can I help you". The fixed mind-set isn't on one side only. Developers neglecting the importance of other platforms than Linux never will be able to understand what we are doing (please note that I wrote "understand", not "like"). >> Or more precicely: our problems are grouped objects and form controls >> that don't support the idea of a 1:n relation between core and layout >> properly. But we haven't given up. Would be nice to get some support of >> people in the know (perhaps you?). >> > Although my personal focus would be more on the gsl side of things, > I wouldn't rule out the possibility ;) Any more details (maybe > off-list)? I think as this is a very code-centric debate, we should do it elsewhere. >> I would be glad to see my apprehension unjustified. I don't want my >> statement be understood as a "I never would do that because the users >> won't like it", more like a "before I will do that I must have the >> impression that it can be accepted by the users". >> > Nah. The dilemma I was referring to is that the users will _not_ > accept it this year, but two or three years down the road, they'll > flock over to those other offerings nevertheless, _despite_ the fact > that those are worse than OOo on that metric - because their value > network has changed, i.e. all of a sudden the relative importance of > e.g. collaboration or ease of use & backward compatibility has changed. See my other reply: it was my fault to talk about "the" users, we should see it as a problem of a particular part of our user base (that we IMHO can't neglect). We have to find out how to convince them that improving the OOo architecture and prepare it for future challenges is worth some layout quirks. 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]
