On 1/16/13 10:30 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > Jürgen Schmidt wrote: >> On 1/15/13 11:31 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: >>> I extracted from the 3.3.0 >>> packages the dictionaries (already packaged as OXT) that we used in >>> 3.3.0. You can find them at >>> http://people.apache.org/~pescetti/ooo-330-dictionaries/ >> I think the place is not appropriate and I would prefer to bundle >> dictionaries from the extension repo > > Yes, obviously. Actually, if you see the URL where we download the > English dictionary from, it's clear we are not enforcing this rule...
external servers are ok, I meant I don't want to download it from the people server. If we can make it available on extras it is different. > > But we should also keep in mind that most users of these versions will > be upgrading from 3.3.0, so bundling different extensions than 3.3.0 > could (and I totally don't know if it does or not!) expose to higher > risk of corrupted spellchecker due to conflicting extensions. I agree and I am not happy with the current situation. QA is necessary or at least feedback from native speakers who have tried the dictionaries. > >> Maybe it's possible for our native speakers to review the dictionaries >> that are available in the repo. And maybe it somebody is interested to >> maintain the Swedish one and upload it in the repo. > > So Swedish would be a combination of: > 1) http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/node/5732 > 2) http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/SweThes > 3) http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/Swedish_hyph_patterns > > (I found the first one with search engines since apparently this > extension, but not its releases, has been retired from the Extensions > site too; the last one was updated yesterday, good sign) yes it is a good signal but doesn't really solve our current problem. I hope we will see ones soon that can be included as supported, bundled in the future versions I am at the moment not sure how to proceed best. Juergen
