+1 to your ideas, much better formulated than mine. see below for comments.
Jan On 2 November 2012 12:09, Marcus (OOo) <marcus.m...@wtnet.de> wrote: > Am 11/01/2012 10:07 PM, schrieb jan iversen: > > Can "standard" loosely be defined as an extension: >> - is developed by people who have signed ICLA >> - uses the apache license header in the source files >> > > It's indeed important but IMHO this shouldn't be part of the decision to > draw the standard as it's about formal and general things. > > > - is of interest to the general public in different countries >> > > Absolute. > > > - is willing to let the source be controlled/reviewed by committer. >> > > With the possibility to become a committer later-on. > > > - accept a vote by the committers to be accepted >> > > If a code grant is necessary depends maybe a bit on the amount of the > extension source code. +1, but having the option of a vote is not bad...I did not want to write "accept that a committer can veto the change". > > > If those points are fuillfilled we could add the project to "swext", and >> then it would automatically be integrated in the build and l10n process. >> > > Is "swext" only for extension around AOO Writer or general? If for Writer > then it should be located in a different, own directory within the source > code. At least Wiki publisher attaches only to writer. What do you mean "within the source code", is main/swext not within ? > > > Please help me out here, I am not sure if that is enough for the "apache >> way". >> > > I would suggest to define the standard around some factors. Some thoughts: > > - What is the benefit for AOO? > This might be a bit problematic, who is to judge it. > - Is this helful for the general public or only for specific users? > +1 > - Does it exchange existing functionality with something own? > +1 > - What are the usage numbers / review comments look like? > If I understand it correct, you see the extension first in the usual extensions place, and then it can "grow" into AOO ? Would there not be cases, where it was developed directly within AOO. > - How big is the extension (keep in mind we shouldn't blow-up our software > too excessive). > Is that not more a problem of release packaging ? We could put the extensions in an own installation, like language packs. > - Don't install the extension by default but let the user decide what they > want, then make 1-3 wizard pages in the installer only for installing > extensions > +1 > > Of course this can only work if the extension developer is willing to come > into the AOO project with all the things needed (source grant, signed ICLA, > header change, voting for releases, etc.). > +1 that is important, extensions integrated in the source must obey the same rules as all other source code. > > Marcus > > > > On 1 November 2012 21:24, Marcus (OOo)<marcus.m...@wtnet.de> wrote: >> >> Am 11/01/2012 01:17 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 3:52 AM, Jürgen Schmidt<jogischm...@gmail.com> >>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 11/1/12 12:39 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Am 10/27/2012 01:17 AM, schrieb jan iversen: >>>>>> >>>>>> 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). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 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 ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> Of course it would be to our advantage; or let's say for the project >>>>>> and >>>>>> software. A lot of extensions would be available in many languages. >>>>>> >>>>>> However, I don't know where we should draw the line to set a limit. >>>>>> When >>>>>> we select here and there some extensions, then the other developers >>>>>> will >>>>>> ask why not their extensions. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> It's quite simple I would say, if people want develop extensions under >>>>> ALv2 and want to contribute the code to the project. We can easy create >>>>> a special section in our repo where we can host them. >>>>> >>>>> But this means they have to be handled in the same way as all other >>>>> stuff here. Means a new release have to be voted... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> I think the important thing is this: We don't just want code. We >>>> want communities. So if an extension author thinks that their >>>> extension is generally useful and he/she wants to join the AOO >>>> community and work on the extension here, and allow others to work on >>>> it as well, then this is good. >>>> >>>> >>> Of course, +1. >>> >>> >>> We can have a set of "standard extensions". >>> >>>> >>>> >>> So, we just need to define the standard. >>> >>> Marcus >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> And IMHO it's not possible to translate all strings for all extensions. >>> >>>> >>>>>> But maybe others here have a great idea? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> we can't probably provide it and I think we have to do enough ;-). But >>>>> I >>>>> can think of an alternative service hosted somewhere else. >>>>> >>>>> Juergen >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Or should we just say extension developers does not concern us (and >>>>>> >>>>>>> help >>>>>>> AOO get more used) so we just look the other way ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Maybe the right way is somewhere in the middle. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> Yeah, maybe. ;-) >>>>>> >>>>>> Marcus >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 27 October 2012 00:58, Marcus (OOo)<marcus.m...@wtnet.de> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 10/27/2012 12:36 AM, schrieb jan iversen: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> While doing an update to the l10n workflow I think I found a >>>>>>>> slight >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> problem. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Extensions offers the capability to integrate/extend our UI. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Assuming somebody writes an extension, and publishes it on >>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/******extensions/<http://www.openoffice.org/****extensions/> >>>>>>>>> <http://www.**openoffice.org/**extensions/<http://www.openoffice.org/**extensions/> >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> <http://www.**openoffice.org/**extensions/<http://openoffice.org/extensions/> >>>>>>>>> <http://www.**openoffice.org/extensions/<http://www.openoffice.org/extensions/> >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> how >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> does that get integrated into the >>>>>>>>> translation process ? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Simply, not at all. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As far as I can see the sources are not integrated into our >>>>>>>> "build >>>>>>>> --all >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --with-lang". >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Right. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If I am right that they are not part of the general translation, >>>>>>>> then is >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> that per design so or should it be different ? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yes, this is by design. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Extensions are offered to extent your AOO install at any point of >>>>>>>> time. >>>>>>>> These are developed by people that do not have to belong to our >>>>>>>> project >>>>>>>> (when we put aside some exceptions). They can act independently. And >>>>>>>> therefore they are allowed to (or have to ;-) ) do all on their own; >>>>>>>> incl. >>>>>>>> translation. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That applies for all extensions and templates available on: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>> http://extensions.services.****o**penoffice.org<http://** >>>>>>>> openoffice.org <http://openoffice.org>> >>>>>>>> <http://**extensions.services.****openoffice.org<http://** >>>>>>>> extensions.services.**openoffice.org<http://extensions.services.openoffice.org> >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>> http://templates.services.****op**enoffice.org<http://** >>>>>>>> openoffice.org <http://openoffice.org>>< >>>>>>>> http://templates.**services.**openoffice.org<http://services.openoffice.org> >>>>>>>> <http://**templates.services.openoffice.**org<http://templates.services.openoffice.org> >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I might be following a wrong track here, but please forgive me >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> trying >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> to make the l10n process as complete as I can. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Don't panic. That's a great goal and everybody is thankful to you >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> doing this task. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Marcus >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
