Re: OT Apache Open Office
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Dotan Cohen dotanco...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 16:45, Jon Dowland j...@debian.org wrote: On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 01:36:58PM +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote: Thanks, I will start enumerating the differences between OpenOffice and LibreOffice here: http://dotancohen.com/eng/difference_openoffice_libreoffice.html That's going to be one hell of a moving target. That is why I ask for the community's help. I don't expect to notice all the differences, but when major disparities of functionality are identified, I would like to have them enumerated in an easy-to-find resource. Hence the page. What audience are you trying to serve with that page? Two audiences: 1) Those who are deciding between the two suites. 2) Those who are having trouble with a specific aspect of one of the suites, which may be addressed in the other. I'd also hope: 3.) LibreOffice developers who would like an overview of areas where LO is perhaps deficient compared to OOo, and are interested in correcting those issues. -- Chris -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAOEVnYst16nGC5=9qpacheovk44rkg+qt3r06gnlyc3oqd8...@mail.gmail.com
Re: OT Apache Open Office
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 16:45, Jon Dowland j...@debian.org wrote: On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 01:36:58PM +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote: Thanks, I will start enumerating the differences between OpenOffice and LibreOffice here: http://dotancohen.com/eng/difference_openoffice_libreoffice.html That's going to be one hell of a moving target. That is why I ask for the community's help. I don't expect to notice all the differences, but when major disparities of functionality are identified, I would like to have them enumerated in an easy-to-find resource. Hence the page. What audience are you trying to serve with that page? Two audiences: 1) Those who are deciding between the two suites. 2) Those who are having trouble with a specific aspect of one of the suites, which may be addressed in the other. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/cakdxfkmgzidzszkcyybj1-18sjghhcr70b_1bg5ccwk2pn7...@mail.gmail.com
Fwd: OT Apache Open Office
...Reposted to list... -- Forwarded message -- From: Rene Engelhard r...@debian.org Date: Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 7:03 PM Subject: Re: OT Apache Open Office To: Brad Alexander stor...@gmail.com [ no idea whether you intented to send a PM, but.. ] On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 06:53:05PM -0400, Brad Alexander wrote: The problem i have is with trusting Oracle. Their commitment to FOSS is wishy-washy at best, meaning they will only play nicely with the community when they perceive it profiting them. I don't know how many of you read the apt-listchanges for upgrades, but the last upgrade on mysql-5.1 included the following text: Due to the non-disclosure of security patch information from Oracle, we are forced to ship this upstream version update of MySQL 5.1 into all releases that carry MySQL 5.1. There are several known incompatible changes, which are listed below, taken from dev.mysql.com's changelogs, available here: http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/news-5-1-x.html Yeah, I noticed this at $work some days ago. Proves thhe point that switching to LibreOffice was a good idea. BUT Oracle abandoned OpenOffice.org. That's why it's now Apache OpenOffice in the first place :-) Regards, Rene -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAKmZw+aw0=8xbfpoUAG88toudBc=SY2UPyEUâbuv80xfw...@mail.gmail.com
Re: OT Apache Open Office
On 11/03/12 22:09, Greg Madden wrote: I have been using dev builds, now rc's, of AOO for a while now. For my work, archived documents templates this is working out better, for my use scenario, than LO ver 3.4.x and later. There are differences between AOO LO, significant enough to warrant having a choice in Debian of which one to use. Users can try it out: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Unofficial+Developer+Snapshots Well, basically most of OO devs moved to LO. LO sanitized the code by translating German comments and variables so everybody can collaborate. They started to liberate new versions at a constant path. They moved to the ODF, that from my point of view is great advantage over being fucked over by Oracle (read this like losing traction from the community) and being spilled over Apache Fundation to see if they could bring it back to life... Dont take me wrong, I love OO, thats why I like to choose LO where the OO body (code) and spirit (community) has been moved to. Only time will tell what project survives, I just hope its sooner than later, and i hope its LO. These are not 2 different projects that give us choice. Its the same but better (for the reasons I just mentioned) greets! aL -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f5f0001.4090...@qindel.com
Re: OT Apache Open Office
Chris Davies chris-use...@roaima.co.uk wrote: I've found the converse to be true, particularly with templated documents. At one point I found that I could open templated documents with LO but in order to print them I had to save then in native OOo format and reload them in AOO. Fortunately that state of affairs lasted only a few weeks. Having had a number of complaints (most via private email) that I've written garbage, I feel obliged to rephrase my statement. I've found the converse to be true, particularly with MS Office Word documents containing (templated) text fields. At one point I found that I could open such Word documents with LO (AOO wouldn't recognise any of the field content) but in order to print them via CUPS I either had to save then in ODF format and reload them in AOO, or export as PDF and print that from outside LO. Fortunately that state of affairs lasted only a few weeks. Whether or not people still think this is garbage is largely irrelevant, because the fact is that it happened to me for a number of weeks. I'm happy to accept that it might have been the configuration on my specific system; without a reference I was unable to confirm this and felt it inappropriate to file a speculative bug report. I also no longer have reference to the specific versions of LO and AOO I was using at the time. Chris -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5md339x7c8@news.roaima.co.uk
Re: OT Apache Open Office
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 04:09, Greg Madden gomadtr...@gci.net wrote: Look at the referenced bug reports, there are attachments to the reports showing what has happened to my templates archived docs. others have noticed this also. Thanks, I will start enumerating the differences between OpenOffice and LibreOffice here: http://dotancohen.com/eng/difference_openoffice_libreoffice.html Please contact me with any additions or corrections, and I will start trolling both the OOo and LO mailing list for other differences. Thanks. To LO devs credit they patched v3.5.x? so that the double lines are no longer so large that they hide data in the cells for archived docs. Newest bug is for the double line style not being a close representation of previous bouble line style, e.g. new docs with tables using that style will not match archived docs with tables with that style. As far as maintaining a page with the differences I think it is worth watching how the new feature in LO concerning table,border line styles plays out. Not only did it break backwards compatibility in LO, it departs how AOO renders those line styles also. AOO does not render the double line style created in LO 3.4.x later(they are blank), have not tested other table line styles As that is a primary use case for you, I would appreciate it if your could be tasked with that particular difference. Just let me know what, if anything, changes. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAKDXFkNwXE27aSEBRGT-7USQTuaz3-KWz-atpyDC=opbjsx...@mail.gmail.com
Re: OT Apache Open Office
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 01:36:58PM +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote: Thanks, I will start enumerating the differences between OpenOffice and LibreOffice here: http://dotancohen.com/eng/difference_openoffice_libreoffice.html That's going to be one hell of a moving target. What audience are you trying to serve with that page? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120313144501.GG8794@debian
Re: OT Apache Open Office
Greg Madden gomadtr...@gci.net wrote: 1. About 'file open' : Someone mentioned LO has a stricter compliance with ? document format standards, anecdotal experience shows some MS docs do not open in LO that do open in AOO. Not really an area of concern here, I rarely get a MS document sent to me. I've found the converse to be true, particularly with templated documents. At one point I found that I could open templated documents with LO but in order to print them I had to save then in native OOo format and reload them in AOO. Fortunately that state of affairs lasted only a few weeks. Chris -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/q2u039x6q8@news.roaima.co.uk
Re: OT Apache Open Office
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 13:09:10 -0800, Greg Madden wrote: I have been using dev builds, now rc's, of AOO for a while now. For my work, archived documents templates this is working out better, for my use scenario, than LO ver 3.4.x and later. What are those improvements you're seeing? There are differences between AOO LO, significant enough to warrant having a choice in Debian of which one to use. (...) I can't tell... there were slightly differences in the times it was OpenOffice but I have lost its track. I prefer to keep close the LibreOffice suite just because I think it will be a more stable, long term solution. I wonder why both projects don't share their (re)sources now that Oracle is out. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jjl4bf$28k$7...@dough.gmane.org
Re: OT Apache Open Office
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 23:09, Greg Madden gomadtr...@gci.net wrote: There are differences between AOO LO, significant enough to warrant having a choice in Debian of which one to use. What are the significant differences that you have perceived? I might have to maintain a page outlining the differences if they really do affect workflow, features, and document compatibility. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/cakdxfkngzvbad7vtogg-gojb-+4vq0gkk-qhfl5iib+xyog...@mail.gmail.com
Re: OT Apache Open Office
Hi, On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 06:36:52PM -0800, Greg Madden wrote: Someone will have to step up and put the work in to package AOO, for the choice to exist in Debian. The Apache OO folks do provide .deb files with desktop integration. In my tests these work well enough on a Debian stable system, though it would be nice to get the benefits that the Debian LO devs have provided in that packages. I think even getting it built sanely will be an immense tasks. At the beginning of when LO split afair shortly after in OO configure options needed for sane distro packaging broke. Let alone I don't think they have build updates for new library or tool versions. LibreOffice got them. OpenOffice.org in the most times got them because distros gave that back - and as almost all distros major now switched to LibreOffice... (NB: didn't follow that closely) And you need to replay all packaging updates adapting for OpenOffice.org changes which have been in the LibreOffice packaging but are in common (as LibreOffice 3.3 was based on OpenOffice.org 3.3 and 3.4+ is based on 3.4 beta). And last but not least you have the technical problem that you would need to violate Debian policy do to so (fonts-opensymbol, python-uno. Policy mandates those names.) I think it'd be a simple waste of time without being able to reach the goal. Regards, Rene -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120312215547.gj...@rene-engelhard.de
Re: OT Apache Open Office
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 10:00:26AM +, Chris Davies wrote: documents. At one point I found that I could open templated documents with LO but in order to print them I had to save then in native OOo format and reload them in AOO. Fortunately that state of affairs lasted This is nonsense. This is both ODF. Not some native format of AOO. Regards, Rene -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120312214852.gi...@rene-engelhard.de
Re: OT Apache Open Office
On Monday 12 March 2012 11:30:19 am Dotan Cohen wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 23:09, Greg Madden gomadtr...@gci.net wrote: There are differences between AOO LO, significant enough to warrant having a choice in Debian of which one to use. What are the significant differences that you have perceived? I might have to maintain a page outlining the differences if they really do affect workflow, features, and document compatibility. Look at the referenced bug reports, there are attachments to the reports showing what has happened to my templates archived docs. others have noticed this also. To LO devs credit they patched v3.5.x? so that the double lines are no longer so large that they hide data in the cells for archived docs. Newest bug is for the double line style not being a close representation of previous bouble line style, e.g. new docs with tables using that style will not match archived docs with tables with that style. As far as maintaining a page with the differences I think it is worth watching how the new feature in LO concerning table,border line styles plays out. Not only did it break backwards compatibility in LO, it departs how AOO renders those line styles also. AOO does not render the double line style created in LO 3.4.x later(they are blank), have not tested other table line styles -- Peace, Greg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201203121809.12502.gomadtr...@gci.net
OT Apache Open Office
I have been using dev builds, now rc's, of AOO for a while now. For my work, archived documents templates this is working out better, for my use scenario, than LO ver 3.4.x and later. There are differences between AOO LO, significant enough to warrant having a choice in Debian of which one to use. Users can try it out: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Unofficial+Developer+Snapshots -- Greg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201203111309.10546.gomadtr...@gci.net
Re: OT Apache Open Office
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 01:09:10PM -0800, Greg Madden wrote: I have been using dev builds, now rc's, of AOO for a while now. For my work, archived documents templates this is working out better, for my use scenario, than LO ver 3.4.x and later. That's interesting. Do you mean there are things you can open with AOO that won't open with LO? That surprises me, because I was under the impression that LO had moved on *a lot* from OO, and AOO had not. So either I'm wrong, or LO has regressed in some cases. There are differences between AOO LO, significant enough to warrant having a choice in Debian of which one to use. Someone will have to step up and put the work in to package AOO, for the choice to exist in Debian. -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120311232751.GB6759@debian
Re: OT Apache Open Office
On Sunday 11 March 2012 3:27:51 pm Jon Dowland wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 01:09:10PM -0800, Greg Madden wrote: I have been using dev builds, now rc's, of AOO for a while now. For my work, archived documents templates this is working out better, for my use scenario, than LO ver 3.4.x and later. That's interesting. Do you mean there are things you can open with AOO that won't open with LO? That surprises me, because I was under the impression that LO had moved on *a lot* from OO, and AOO had not. So either I'm wrong, or LO has regressed in some cases. 'Moved on a lot' does not have meaning to me. New features bring new bugs and sometimes regressions. That said, I agree that the LO devs and document foundation have done a lot of good work, I try not to disparage, it just does not work in my case. 1. About 'file open' : Someone mentioned LO has a stricter compliance with ? document format standards, anecdotal experience shows some MS docs do not open in LO that do open in AOO. Not really an area of concern here, I rarely get a MS document sent to me. I am more concerned with document fidelity with archives templates from previous versions. This concept also includes all future documents. 2. New feature in LO 3.4.x and later, partial fix in Lo 3.5.1 RC-1, the Tabletable propertiesborders feature was 'improved'. This broke backwards compatibility with all Tables that used the 'double line' style. I use tables exclusively and the double line border style is on every page of my docs. I have enclosed a couple of bugs for the curious. https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38542 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42750 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47194 This is significant to me, it is how I present project results to my clients, so I have been testing AOO for a alternate plan if needed. There are differences between AOO LO, significant enough to warrant having a choice in Debian of which one to use. Someone will have to step up and put the work in to package AOO, for the choice to exist in Debian. The Apache OO folks do provide .deb files with desktop integration. In my tests these work well enough on a Debian stable system, though it would be nice to get the benefits that the Debian LO devs have provided in that packages. -- Peace, Greg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201203111836.52270.gomadtr...@gci.net
