On 16.08.2011 09:27, eric b wrote: > Does this method to allow "OpenOffice.org growing" only ? If we > systematicaly compare to an existing but fixed blob, we have no way > to remove useless/no longer needed services ? (but maybe I > misunderstood )
We can do with that reference file whatever we want, until now we had the requirement to refrain from incompatible API changes. Some time ago we decided that incompatible API changes should be allowed for future major releases of OOo, so the reference rdb usually would become the one of the last major release. There also is an exception list with "allowed incompatible changes", e.g. removal of superfluous (unused) types. This list usually was maintained by the API project lead, Jürgen Schmidt. > With a cold start, occurs a big and costly I/O read write process. > Searching what seems to cause that, it appears the .rdb files are > good candidates. I can be plain wrong, but I think there are a lot of > services embedded in the interface, who probably could be loaded ... > say somethingl like on demand or at least differently, no ? Sorry, I don't understand. Are you referring the cold start of the OpenOffice.org application? That would be a completely unrelated discussion. IIRC Stephan Bergmann and/or Matthias Hütsch have worked on performance improvements regarding types.rdb in the OOo 3.2 release time frame. >> The reference file must not be recreated as it belongs to an older >> version that the current source files are compared against. >> > > Thinking rwice I start to see better, and I can imagine people (say > companies providing services around OOo) playing with IDL files and > introducing some issues, indeed. > > In fact I never played too much with idl files (seems to be a simple > interface, that UNO will handle, isn't it ? ), excepted when we added > code for Impress annotation mode, and that's probably the reason why > I ask stupid questions in this domain I don't know well :-) Your questions weren't stupid at all. :-) Regards, Mathias
