I agree with you, we should NOT put a new framework on extensions writer. I was thinking along the lines of
make a new directory ./extras/extensions/source, with files <extension name>.<known extension> The extension writer must submit the file (we do not collect them) through a committer. This directory would then go into the normal l10n workflow, and the resulting translation would go back into the same directory as <extension name>.<langugage>.po jan. On 27 October 2012 03:53, Ariel Constenla-Haile <arie...@apache.org> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 01:17:33AM +0200, jan iversen wrote: > > I see, I have to get used to this license issues (a long time ago I > > believed open source was just open source, then I joined an apache > project). > > It has nothing to do with licensing. Even if the extension code and all > its dependencies are under the ALv2, why should OpenOffice include > extensions by default in the install set? This goes against the concept > of an extension. > > The fact that now there are three supported extensions is just > a question of old Sun/Oracle decisions to release these as extension and > not integrated as part of the application. > > > > > never mind. > > > > Would it be to our advantage if we offered third party developers (that > is > > how I see extension developers) the possibility to register a language > file > > and get it translated as part of the language packs ? > > This will break several concepts and things. Mainly extension developers > have complete freedom about when to release updates, how to integrate > translation in their extensions (use the configuration API and XCU > files, use the resource API and Java-property-like files, etc.), most > important what license to choose, etc. > > In short, you will have to implement a new framework and force > extensions developers to use it. Besides several concerns, legal > concerns among them. > > > > Or should we just say extension developers does not concern us (and help > > AOO get more used) so we just look the other way ? > > Programmability and extensibility has always been a priority in > OpenOffice, just read the Developer's Guide and other parts of the wiki. > > I tend to agree that it will be useful for an extension developer a way > to submit a set of resource strings and get them translated, as long as > the extension developer is not forced with release/legal/other concerns. > > > Regards > -- > Ariel Constenla-Haile > La Plata, Argentina >
