Re: future of OpenOffice

[Chuck Davis]

Toki, I'm very glad to hear SOMEBODY has imagination!  :)

It seems we've had quite a number of people coming here lately (like a
professor someplace is sending them to get involved in open source) to
state they want to get involved.  I hope they and their professors are
taking notes from your material!  You have some very good ideas.

Thanks for being specific.

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 12:08 PM, toki  wrote:

> On 01/13/2017 03:15 PM, Chuck Davis wrote:
>
> > but I fail to see it in my use cases.
>
> As far as word processing is concerned, one can make a case that since
> either WordStar 3.3 or WordPerfect 5.1, the proffered functionality is
> overkill for more than 90% of the user base.
>
> As far as spreadsheets go, a case can be made that for anything that
> requires more sophistication than than Lotus 1 2 3 version 4.0, it would
> be more appropriate to use R & SQLite.
>
> > and start rolling out really useful features
>
> For Write, as a starting point, incorporate the features, functionality,
> and capabilities, of both WordStar 3.3 & WordPerfect 5.1, that are not
> currently present in AOo.
>
> For Base:
> Step One: Include SQLite;
> Step Two: Provide a UI that non-database specialists understand well
> enough, to be able to intuitively create forms and do searches;
> Step Three: Purpose-specific addons. Templates which include Forms,
> macros, etc, that makes such obvious and easy for all to utilize. By way
> of example:
> * Project Management;
> * Genealogy Records;
> * Cookbook, including nutritional data;
> * Contact Management;
>
> For Calc:
> Step One: Include R as part of the core install;
> Step Two: Purpose-specific addons. Templates which include macros, etc,
> that makes utilization obvious and easy for all. By way of example:
> * Financial Spread Betting;
> * Investment Analysis;
> * Earthquake Prediction;
>
> ###
>
> Something that sort of surprises me, is that AOo hasn't worked with SVN,
> to have "Save to SVN" as a standard feature. (The extension that
> provided this functionality is completely broken for LibO, and appears
> to be broken for AOo 4.1.3.)
>
> "Save to SVN" might look arcane, and not useful to anybody. As a
> practical matter, it offers much better change control, and greater roll
> back functionality, than anything currently offered for any office suite
> --- if it does everything in the background, with minimal
> user-configuration and no end-user integration required.
>
> ###
>
> Project Management is the most visible hole in FLOSS office suites. In
> theory, a set of extensions and templates could provide this functionality.
>
> A second hole is the ability to wrap spreadsheets, documents, images,
> etc into a single package. IOW, the functionality offered by Microsoft
> Office Binder.
>
> > I don't have enough imagination to know what those might be.
>
> For the most part, you're looking at specific use-cases.
>
> As one example, "Print to Moon". (Explaining this requires an off-topic
> essay.)
>
> Built-in speech recognition would be a second example.
>
> Self-voicing functionality would be a third example.
>
> jonathon
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

Re: future of OpenOffice

[Chuck Davis]

Thank you, Pedro, for some specific features you use.

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 9:02 AM, Pedro  wrote:

> Hi Chuck
>
> I'm a simple user so the code base and license are completely irrelevant to
>> me.  What IS relevant is the way the software works.  So, please, can you
>> tell me half a dozen things that LO can do that OO cannot do?
>>
>
> There are in fact a few useful features in LO that AOO does not have:
>
> 1) Opening/saving remote files from several sources (OwnCloud, WebDAV,
> Google Drive, etc)
>
> 2) Opening recent MS XML documents (quite a few show better results in LO
> than AOO)
>
> 3) Saving in MS XML format. This is useful for exchanging documents with
> those who can't or won't use LO or AOO, although it's true that saving in
> this format is the wrong way to push ODF (and document freedom) forward
>
> 4) Using fast data filters in Calc (just check/uncheck items instead of
> using the not-so-friendly Standard Filter)
>
> 5) Use a full window width horizontal scroll bar in Calc (this is unique
> in LO) instead of a scroll bar limited to the space to the left of the
> sheet tabs
>
> It's nearly half a dozen but are the ones I find really important on my
> day-to-day work...
>
> Regards,
> Pedro
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

Re: future of OpenOffice

[Damjan Jovanovic]

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Pedro  wrote:

> Hi Chuck
>
> I'm a simple user so the code base and license are completely irrelevant to
>> me.  What IS relevant is the way the software works.  So, please, can you
>> tell me half a dozen things that LO can do that OO cannot do?
>>
>
> There are in fact a few useful features in LO that AOO does not have:
>
> 1) Opening/saving remote files from several sources (OwnCloud, WebDAV,
> Google Drive, etc)
>
>
Not exactly. File access is provided by the UCB component ("universal
content broker", in main/ucb), and remote files can be opened/saved in AOO
too. It's just that LO has an extra user interface for these files and we
don't. You can open documents from "http://...; and other URLs from our
normal file dialog instead, by entering the URL in place of the filename.
We support http and derivatives like https and WebDav, ftp, file, package
(ie. zip), several native ones like GVFS and GIO on Gnome, and a few others.

Damjan

Re: future of OpenOffice

[Pedro]

Hi Chuck

I'm a simple user so the code base and license are completely 
irrelevant to
me.  What IS relevant is the way the software works.  So, please, can 
you

tell me half a dozen things that LO can do that OO cannot do?


There are in fact a few useful features in LO that AOO does not have:

1) Opening/saving remote files from several sources (OwnCloud, WebDAV, 
Google Drive, etc)


2) Opening recent MS XML documents (quite a few show better results in 
LO than AOO)


3) Saving in MS XML format. This is useful for exchanging documents with 
those who can't or won't use LO or AOO, although it's true that saving 
in this format is the wrong way to push ODF (and document freedom) 
forward


4) Using fast data filters in Calc (just check/uncheck items instead of 
using the not-so-friendly Standard Filter)


5) Use a full window width horizontal scroll bar in Calc (this is unique 
in LO) instead of a scroll bar limited to the space to the left of the 
sheet tabs


It's nearly half a dozen but are the ones I find really important on my 
day-to-day work...


Regards,
Pedro

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: future of OpenOffice

[Pedro]

Hi Damjan, all


On 13/01/2017 17:15, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Pedro  wrote:


There are in fact a few useful features in LO that AOO does not have:
1) Opening/saving remote files from several sources (OwnCloud, WebDAV,
Google Drive, etc)



Not exactly. File access is provided by the UCB component ("universal
content broker", in main/ucb), and remote files can be opened/saved in AOO
too. It's just that LO has an extra user interface for these files and we
don't. You can open documents from "http://...; and other URLs from our
normal file dialog instead, by entering the URL in place of the filename.
We support http and derivatives like https and WebDav, ftp, file, package
(ie. zip), several native ones like GVFS and GIO on Gnome, and a few others.


Those are excellent news. I just tested it and it works perfectly! Thanks!

Nevertheless, it is quite different from a user's point of view to have 
a regular Open dialog where you can browse through your remote files 
from knowing that you need to type the full URL to a document.


This is exactly where LibreOffice is further ahead in the commitment to 
"eliminate the digital divide"...


Pedro

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Copyleft vs Permissive

[Peter Kovacs]

On 12.01.2017 11:00, Pedro wrote:

Hi Peter


If your model works directly with the Product, the flexibility of the
Permissive license can be the stronger choice.
I do not believe that a lot of people understand this.


Can you elaborate on this point? I don't really see how using a 
copyleftless license is better when your business "works directly with 
the Product".


I see it as altruistic (like copyleft is communistic) but as a 
business model, I really don't see how it is a "stronger choice". 
Using a copyleftless license allows anyone else to build exactly the 
same product. 
Never forget, all of this is a mind game. IF you fear something or feel 
confident it is mostly based on your own weighting of arguments.


I assumed that if you work with a Product, then not all is released. 
Parts of it, are closed, and therefore individual, but share a common 
base with other competitors.
This can drop production/development cost or can shortcut knowledge 
original did not available.


I can not imagin that you can directly earn from a Product if you only 
have copy left license model. Some do, but this is only working if all 
other commiters more or less donate to the cause.
Or you have a complex method on lesser and full copy left structure. 
Which can results in issue over time, if something that develops 
differently then you have planned.


The risk over time, is on Permissive licence lower. Also if this is 
viable option, you can always retreat from the project without loosing 
your invest.


For us it means that Oracle, IBM can always start to market their own 
Product without the need to return something towards Open Office. From 
Oracles or IBM position this is a strong one.
However I do not believe that the community is at the same time in a 
weaker position, because Open Source is in my eyes not bound to market 
or earning strategy. Unlike companies we can take time.
You see that on the LO vs. OO discussion. Most of the LO argument are 
market based one. If you think outside the market its all not an issue. 
What Reamains is the strength of Open source as such.
In my eyes we are in a super strong position, as long as we have a 
commiter base that work for the greater good. And I am very convinced on 
the Open Office future.



Regards,
Pedro

my best regards
Peter


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: future of OpenOffice

[Peter Kovacs]

+1 :-D

I will pick maybe some of the stuff up.


On 13.01.2017 21:38, Chuck Davis wrote:

Toki, I'm very glad to hear SOMEBODY has imagination!  :)

It seems we've had quite a number of people coming here lately (like a
professor someplace is sending them to get involved in open source) to
state they want to get involved.  I hope they and their professors are
taking notes from your material!  You have some very good ideas.

Thanks for being specific.

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 12:08 PM, toki  wrote:


On 01/13/2017 03:15 PM, Chuck Davis wrote:


but I fail to see it in my use cases.

As far as word processing is concerned, one can make a case that since
either WordStar 3.3 or WordPerfect 5.1, the proffered functionality is
overkill for more than 90% of the user base.

As far as spreadsheets go, a case can be made that for anything that
requires more sophistication than than Lotus 1 2 3 version 4.0, it would
be more appropriate to use R & SQLite.


and start rolling out really useful features

For Write, as a starting point, incorporate the features, functionality,
and capabilities, of both WordStar 3.3 & WordPerfect 5.1, that are not
currently present in AOo.

For Base:
Step One: Include SQLite;
Step Two: Provide a UI that non-database specialists understand well
enough, to be able to intuitively create forms and do searches;
Step Three: Purpose-specific addons. Templates which include Forms,
macros, etc, that makes such obvious and easy for all to utilize. By way
of example:
* Project Management;
* Genealogy Records;
* Cookbook, including nutritional data;
* Contact Management;

For Calc:
Step One: Include R as part of the core install;
Step Two: Purpose-specific addons. Templates which include macros, etc,
that makes utilization obvious and easy for all. By way of example:
* Financial Spread Betting;
* Investment Analysis;
* Earthquake Prediction;

###

Something that sort of surprises me, is that AOo hasn't worked with SVN,
to have "Save to SVN" as a standard feature. (The extension that
provided this functionality is completely broken for LibO, and appears
to be broken for AOo 4.1.3.)

"Save to SVN" might look arcane, and not useful to anybody. As a
practical matter, it offers much better change control, and greater roll
back functionality, than anything currently offered for any office suite
--- if it does everything in the background, with minimal
user-configuration and no end-user integration required.

###

Project Management is the most visible hole in FLOSS office suites. In
theory, a set of extensions and templates could provide this functionality.

A second hole is the ability to wrap spreadsheets, documents, images,
etc into a single package. IOW, the functionality offered by Microsoft
Office Binder.


I don't have enough imagination to know what those might be.

For the most part, you're looking at specific use-cases.

As one example, "Print to Moon". (Explaining this requires an off-topic
essay.)

Built-in speech recognition would be a second example.

Self-voicing functionality would be a third example.

jonathon

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org





-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: future of OpenOffice

[Andrew Pitonyak]

For the average user, the functional differences are irrelevant. More 
specifically, most people use only a fraction of the capabilities. LO 
offered DOCX support before AOO, and that was a difference noticeable to 
most users.


For the hard core devoted follower, there are certainly philosophical 
differences related to code reuse, and people who care about that have 
probably already figured out that difference and chosen a side. For the 
end user, it makes little to no difference. Consider my macro document. 
Should I set the license such that you cannot use the samples unless you 
open your project? That is closer to LO than AOO.


Apart from that, you are left with questions such as, do I find a user 
interface more attractive, a particular feature better supported, or 
reliability on my specific platform. My parents use what I choose to 
install on their computers.


Andrew Pitonyak

Re: future of OpenOffice

[Peter Kovacs]

+1!!


On 14.01.2017 00:11, Pedro wrote:

Hi Damjan, all


On 13/01/2017 17:15, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Pedro  
wrote:



There are in fact a few useful features in LO that AOO does not have:
1) Opening/saving remote files from several sources (OwnCloud, WebDAV,
Google Drive, etc)



Not exactly. File access is provided by the UCB component ("universal
content broker", in main/ucb), and remote files can be opened/saved 
in AOO
too. It's just that LO has an extra user interface for these files 
and we

don't. You can open documents from "http://...; and other URLs from our
normal file dialog instead, by entering the URL in place of the 
filename.
We support http and derivatives like https and WebDav, ftp, file, 
package
(ie. zip), several native ones like GVFS and GIO on Gnome, and a few 
others.


Those are excellent news. I just tested it and it works perfectly! 
Thanks!


Nevertheless, it is quite different from a user's point of view to 
have a regular Open dialog where you can browse through your remote 
files from knowing that you need to type the full URL to a document.


This is exactly where LibreOffice is further ahead in the commitment 
to "eliminate the digital divide"...


Pedro

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: future of OpenOffice

[Dave Fisher]

Writing a list of the top 100 defects that are easy and YOU would like fixed IS 
the Apache Way. You can suggest and help. What is not the Apache Way is to 
force others.

All the best!

Regards,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 13, 2017, at 7:09 PM, toki  wrote:
> 
>> On 01/13/2017 08:38 PM, Chuck Davis wrote:
>> 
>> It seems we've had quite a number of people coming here lately ... to
> state they want to get involved.
> 
> I've been sorely tempted to send them an email, telling them to
> construct a specific add-on. I've a lot more ideas up my sleeve.
> The other option is to assign them one of the 23,796 bugs, at random.
> 
> Tisn't The Apache Way, but it points at something specific to do, for
> which they might get the class credit they are wanting, and maybe even
> the bug or add-on they were assigned materializes, fully functional, and
> complete.
> 
> jonathon
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Community building: give our User a chance to contribute!

[Raphael Bircher]

Hi at all

If we compare AOO to day with the good old OpenOffice.org Project in 2006,  
we have now a tiny community. Well, we will be able to maintain the  
project, make some bugfix and maybe some features too. But we will never  
track down the work who is in our issue tracker.


But surprisingly we have still a very height download number. If you read  
comments on social media you see, that many are really happy with the  
programm. The problem is, tat this user simply are looked out from the  
product development. The Enduser can only watch and pray.


While most bigger Apache Projects has a well working business model  
behind, OpenOffice has nothing. In fact we never cared about it. I believe  
it's rely time to change this. There are maybe at the moment no big  
investors, but maybe more individuals who love the idea.


I know, we have to stick within the Apache rules, but this should be  
possible. So let's collect ideas here.


Regards, Raphael

--
Mein Blog: https://raphaelbircher.blogspot.ch

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: future of OpenOffice

[Dave Fisher]

Hi -

If support for Microsoft Office formats is desired and Java is not a problem 
then Apache has a 15 year old project called Apache POI. Also, Apache 
ODFToolkit is sitting in the Incubator for 5.5 years now with one developer - 
Svante.

Conversion between ODF and OOXML is the only way to ultimate document freedom. 
Institutions cannot change - documents need to be write once and use anywhere. 

There is a way if there is a will.

Regards,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 13, 2017, at 4:56 PM, Peter Kovacs  wrote:
> 
> +1 :-D
> 
> I will pick maybe some of the stuff up.
> 
> 
>> On 13.01.2017 21:38, Chuck Davis wrote:
>> Toki, I'm very glad to hear SOMEBODY has imagination!  :)
>> 
>> It seems we've had quite a number of people coming here lately (like a
>> professor someplace is sending them to get involved in open source) to
>> state they want to get involved.  I hope they and their professors are
>> taking notes from your material!  You have some very good ideas.
>> 
>> Thanks for being specific.
>> 
>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 12:08 PM, toki  wrote:
>>> 
 On 01/13/2017 03:15 PM, Chuck Davis wrote:
 
 but I fail to see it in my use cases.
>>> As far as word processing is concerned, one can make a case that since
>>> either WordStar 3.3 or WordPerfect 5.1, the proffered functionality is
>>> overkill for more than 90% of the user base.
>>> 
>>> As far as spreadsheets go, a case can be made that for anything that
>>> requires more sophistication than than Lotus 1 2 3 version 4.0, it would
>>> be more appropriate to use R & SQLite.
>>> 
 and start rolling out really useful features
>>> For Write, as a starting point, incorporate the features, functionality,
>>> and capabilities, of both WordStar 3.3 & WordPerfect 5.1, that are not
>>> currently present in AOo.
>>> 
>>> For Base:
>>> Step One: Include SQLite;
>>> Step Two: Provide a UI that non-database specialists understand well
>>> enough, to be able to intuitively create forms and do searches;
>>> Step Three: Purpose-specific addons. Templates which include Forms,
>>> macros, etc, that makes such obvious and easy for all to utilize. By way
>>> of example:
>>> * Project Management;
>>> * Genealogy Records;
>>> * Cookbook, including nutritional data;
>>> * Contact Management;
>>> 
>>> For Calc:
>>> Step One: Include R as part of the core install;
>>> Step Two: Purpose-specific addons. Templates which include macros, etc,
>>> that makes utilization obvious and easy for all. By way of example:
>>> * Financial Spread Betting;
>>> * Investment Analysis;
>>> * Earthquake Prediction;
>>> 
>>> ###
>>> 
>>> Something that sort of surprises me, is that AOo hasn't worked with SVN,
>>> to have "Save to SVN" as a standard feature. (The extension that
>>> provided this functionality is completely broken for LibO, and appears
>>> to be broken for AOo 4.1.3.)
>>> 
>>> "Save to SVN" might look arcane, and not useful to anybody. As a
>>> practical matter, it offers much better change control, and greater roll
>>> back functionality, than anything currently offered for any office suite
>>> --- if it does everything in the background, with minimal
>>> user-configuration and no end-user integration required.
>>> 
>>> ###
>>> 
>>> Project Management is the most visible hole in FLOSS office suites. In
>>> theory, a set of extensions and templates could provide this functionality.
>>> 
>>> A second hole is the ability to wrap spreadsheets, documents, images,
>>> etc into a single package. IOW, the functionality offered by Microsoft
>>> Office Binder.
>>> 
 I don't have enough imagination to know what those might be.
>>> For the most part, you're looking at specific use-cases.
>>> 
>>> As one example, "Print to Moon". (Explaining this requires an off-topic
>>> essay.)
>>> 
>>> Built-in speech recognition would be a second example.
>>> 
>>> Self-voicing functionality would be a third example.
>>> 
>>> jonathon
>>> 
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Copyleft vs Permissive

[Dave Fisher]

Hi -

If Oracle or IBM thought they had any additional advantage with Apache 
OpenOffice development then the history of this project would differ.

Regards,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 13, 2017, at 3:55 PM, Peter Kovacs  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 12.01.2017 11:00, Pedro wrote:
>> Hi Peter
>> 
>>> If your model works directly with the Product, the flexibility of the
>>> Permissive license can be the stronger choice.
>>> I do not believe that a lot of people understand this.
>> 
>> Can you elaborate on this point? I don't really see how using a copyleftless 
>> license is better when your business "works directly with the Product".
>> 
>> I see it as altruistic (like copyleft is communistic) but as a business 
>> model, I really don't see how it is a "stronger choice". Using a 
>> copyleftless license allows anyone else to build exactly the same product. 
> Never forget, all of this is a mind game. IF you fear something or feel 
> confident it is mostly based on your own weighting of arguments.
> 
> I assumed that if you work with a Product, then not all is released. Parts of 
> it, are closed, and therefore individual, but share a common base with other 
> competitors.
> This can drop production/development cost or can shortcut knowledge original 
> did not available.
> 
> I can not imagin that you can directly earn from a Product if you only have 
> copy left license model. Some do, but this is only working if all other 
> commiters more or less donate to the cause.
> Or you have a complex method on lesser and full copy left structure. Which 
> can results in issue over time, if something that develops differently then 
> you have planned.
> 
> The risk over time, is on Permissive licence lower. Also if this is viable 
> option, you can always retreat from the project without loosing your invest.
> 
> For us it means that Oracle, IBM can always start to market their own Product 
> without the need to return something towards Open Office. From Oracles or IBM 
> position this is a strong one.
> However I do not believe that the community is at the same time in a weaker 
> position, because Open Source is in my eyes not bound to market or earning 
> strategy. Unlike companies we can take time.
> You see that on the LO vs. OO discussion. Most of the LO argument are market 
> based one. If you think outside the market its all not an issue. What 
> Reamains is the strength of Open source as such.
> In my eyes we are in a super strong position, as long as we have a commiter 
> base that work for the greater good. And I am very convinced on the Open 
> Office future.
> 
>> Regards,
>> Pedro
> my best regards
> Peter
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: future of OpenOffice

[Wolf Halton]

Thanks for these reminders. I was watching odftoolkit a few years ago. 

Wolf Halton
Mobile/Text 678-687-6104

--
Sent from my iPhone. Creative word completion courtesy of Apple, Inc. 

> On Jan 13, 2017, at 23:05, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
> Hi -
> 
> If support for Microsoft Office formats is desired and Java is not a problem 
> then Apache has a 15 year old project called Apache POI. Also, Apache 
> ODFToolkit is sitting in the Incubator for 5.5 years now with one developer - 
> Svante.
> 
> Conversion between ODF and OOXML is the only way to ultimate document 
> freedom. Institutions cannot change - documents need to be write once and use 
> anywhere. 
> 
> There is a way if there is a will.
> 
> Regards,
> Dave
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Jan 13, 2017, at 4:56 PM, Peter Kovacs  wrote:
>> 
>> +1 :-D
>> 
>> I will pick maybe some of the stuff up.
>> 
>> 
>>> On 13.01.2017 21:38, Chuck Davis wrote:
>>> Toki, I'm very glad to hear SOMEBODY has imagination!  :)
>>> 
>>> It seems we've had quite a number of people coming here lately (like a
>>> professor someplace is sending them to get involved in open source) to
>>> state they want to get involved.  I hope they and their professors are
>>> taking notes from your material!  You have some very good ideas.
>>> 
>>> Thanks for being specific.
>>> 
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 12:08 PM, toki  wrote:
> 
> On 01/13/2017 03:15 PM, Chuck Davis wrote:
> 
> but I fail to see it in my use cases.
 As far as word processing is concerned, one can make a case that since
 either WordStar 3.3 or WordPerfect 5.1, the proffered functionality is
 overkill for more than 90% of the user base.
 
 As far as spreadsheets go, a case can be made that for anything that
 requires more sophistication than than Lotus 1 2 3 version 4.0, it would
 be more appropriate to use R & SQLite.
 
> and start rolling out really useful features
 For Write, as a starting point, incorporate the features, functionality,
 and capabilities, of both WordStar 3.3 & WordPerfect 5.1, that are not
 currently present in AOo.
 
 For Base:
 Step One: Include SQLite;
 Step Two: Provide a UI that non-database specialists understand well
 enough, to be able to intuitively create forms and do searches;
 Step Three: Purpose-specific addons. Templates which include Forms,
 macros, etc, that makes such obvious and easy for all to utilize. By way
 of example:
 * Project Management;
 * Genealogy Records;
 * Cookbook, including nutritional data;
 * Contact Management;
 
 For Calc:
 Step One: Include R as part of the core install;
 Step Two: Purpose-specific addons. Templates which include macros, etc,
 that makes utilization obvious and easy for all. By way of example:
 * Financial Spread Betting;
 * Investment Analysis;
 * Earthquake Prediction;
 
 ###
 
 Something that sort of surprises me, is that AOo hasn't worked with SVN,
 to have "Save to SVN" as a standard feature. (The extension that
 provided this functionality is completely broken for LibO, and appears
 to be broken for AOo 4.1.3.)
 
 "Save to SVN" might look arcane, and not useful to anybody. As a
 practical matter, it offers much better change control, and greater roll
 back functionality, than anything currently offered for any office suite
 --- if it does everything in the background, with minimal
 user-configuration and no end-user integration required.
 
 ###
 
 Project Management is the most visible hole in FLOSS office suites. In
 theory, a set of extensions and templates could provide this functionality.
 
 A second hole is the ability to wrap spreadsheets, documents, images,
 etc into a single package. IOW, the functionality offered by Microsoft
 Office Binder.
 
> I don't have enough imagination to know what those might be.
 For the most part, you're looking at specific use-cases.
 
 As one example, "Print to Moon". (Explaining this requires an off-topic
 essay.)
 
 Built-in speech recognition would be a second example.
 
 Self-voicing functionality would be a third example.
 
 jonathon
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
 
 
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>> 
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: 

Re: Copyleft vs Permissive

[Dr. Michael Stehmann]

Am 14.01.2017 um 00:55 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> 

> You see that on the LO vs. OO discussion. Most of the LO argument are
> market based one. If you think outside the market its all not an issue.
> What Reamains is the strength of Open source as such.
> In my eyes we are in a super strong position, as long as we have a
> commiter base that work for the greater good. And I am very convinced on
> the Open Office future.

The question is, what "market based" mean.

If it means, that we take care of the users needs and wishes, it is a
good attitude. Observing the user experience and their work flows is
very usefull for example.

In the Free Software community some developers make good code, which is
useable only by geeks. And it is also not really usefull to create the
1th editor or the 1000th Linux distribution.

If "market based" means to look how to earn the best profit, it might be
userunfriendly.

Kind regards
Michael





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: future of OpenOffice

[Peter Kovacs]

Hello guys.

It stays as it is. Currently a merge is not possible. I assume this request
is not taken seriously on the LO side, since most information we had in
this discussion is pointing out the differences of both sister projects and
not advocate the things they share.
If anyone really wants to have a merge it will take him a lot of discussion
to convince both sides how much they have in common. Then if the positive
attitude seeds we would need a project which is done by both dev
communities. In order to build trust.

On the way we have some social issues to solve.
Even if Jörg expressed it in a emotional way, he is not wrong. Community
members of LO did damage their own renown. Maybe we have OO users that do
the same with our renown without our knowledge.

I do not see how this discussion can successfully stay on target. I would
like to point out this discussion was in my opinion mostly professional
conducted. That is a good sign in general. And I thank every one for the
try. I would like to see more of this professionalism from guests on our
list. Thanks a lot.

toki  schrieb am Fr., 13. Jan. 2017, 08:22:

> On 01/13/2017 12:48 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
>
> > I have long desired for there to be a useful confluence and even
> convergence of code, effort, vision
>
> The difference between the code base of the two projects is almost at
> the point where merging back into one is no longer a practical proposition.
>
> > and also because I did not see a solution to the situation.
>
> Reconcile yourself to having both LibO and AOo for as long their
> sponsoring foundations are willing to keep them.
>
> Personally, I am somewhat surprised that ODFTools hasn't been used as
> the core of an office suite that serves a specific target population
> that other office suites ignore.
>
> jonathon
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
> --

Disclaimer: Diese Nachricht stammt aus einem Google Account. Ihre Antwort
wird in der Google Cloud Gespeichert und durch Google Algorythmen zwecks
werbeanaöysen gescannt. Es ist derzeit nicht auszuschließen das ihre
Nachricht auch durch einen NSA Mitarbeiter geprüft wird. Durch
kommunikation mit diesen Account stimmen Sie zu das ihre Mail, ihre
Kontaktdaten und die Termine die Sie mit mir vereinbaren online zu Google
konditionen in der Googlecloud gespeichert wird. Sollten sie dies nicht
wünschen kontaktieren sie mich bitte Umgehend um z.B. alternativen zu
verhandeln.

Re: future of OpenOffice

[RA Stehmann]

Am 13.01.2017 um 10:43 schrieb toki:

> ^1: All of the games (Flight Simulator, Space Invaders, Tick Tack Toe)
> have been removed from LibO and AOo.  However, templates for various
> games are available.

I am looking for a Template for "Game of live".

Kind reagards
Michael





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: future of OpenOffice

[RA Stehmann]

Am 13.01.2017 um 11:39 schrieb RA Stehmann:

> 
> I am looking for a Template for "Game of live".

Sorry:
"Game of life"

Regards
Michael




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reporting broken download link

[Dewi Edwards (BCUHB - Pathology)]

Hello,

Hope it's not me doing anything daft but I have downloaded Open Office at home 
about 12 months ago for my daughter to try and I was trying to download a 
version to try out at work just now.

Using the web page below (see first screen shot) I click on the Download Full 
Installation but I keep getting the second screen shot that the site can't be 
reached - this was the same a few weeks ago when I tried.

Thanks - Dewi.

[cid:image001.jpg@01D26D92.4D9774F0]

[cid:image002.png@01D26D92.4D9774F0]


_
Cymraeg

Rhybudd Ebost (2010) - Bwrdd Iechyd Prifysgol Betsi Cadwaladr

Fe'ch cynghorir i ddarllen rhybydd ebost Bwrdd Iechyd Prifysgol Betsi Cadwaladr 
(a'i argraffu er mwyn cyfeirio ato yn y dyfodol).  Gellir dod o hyd iddo yn y 
lleoliad canlynol

http://www.wales.nhs.uk/sitesplus/861/tudalen/47230

English

Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board - Email Notice (2010)

You are advised to read (and print for future reference) the Betsi Cadwaladr 
University Health Board e-mail notice which can be found at this location

http://www.wales.nhs.uk/sitesplus/861/page/47229



Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board is the operational name of Betsi 
Cadwaladr University Local Health Board

What is the oldest Linux that AOO can run on? Is there a policy wrt baseline libraries/distro release?

[Fernando Cassia]

I wonder what are the older Linux version that AOO-current (whatever
is the latest version) will run on?

I'm not concerned too much about kernel but glibc which is a common
cause of hassles.
And I'm trying to create a VM with the oldest possible, still
supported Linux version, with AOO on it.

CentOS 5.5 is still a target platform?

And going forward, what do you plan to use as a base? is there a
policy? like "the oldest version of CentOS still supported"? or
"latest CentOS -1" or what?

Or are the AOO Linux binaries just expected to work on any Linux
regardless of glibc version?

Thanks,
FC

-- 
During times of Universal Deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary
act
- George Orwell

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: future of OpenOffice

[Chuck Davis]

Thank you, Jonathon, for giving us something specific.  I get so weary of
LO people (and most of the media world it seems) spouting how much better
LO is but I fail to see it in my use cases.  Most of what you have pointed
out is not applicable to the vast majority of users I would guess.  I keep
waiting to see the open source world quit copying the latest gimic from MS
and start rolling out really useful features -- and, no, I don't have
enough imagination to know what those might be.

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 1:43 AM, toki  wrote:

> On 01/12/2017 04:52 PM, Chuck Davis wrote:
>
> > tell me half a dozen things that LO can do that OO cannot do?
>
> From a corporate POV, the two most significant differences are:
> * TSCP/BAILS classification;
> * PDF signing;
>
> For linguists, and users of endangered/minority languages, the most
> significant differences are:
> * LibO 5.3 more accurately displays non-horizontal writing systems than
> AOo 4.1.3;
> * LibO 5.3 more accurately displays Indus Valley writing systems than
> AOo 4.1.3;
>
> Neither LibO nor AOo can handle reverse boustrophedon writing systems.  :(
>
> For the rest of use, the most significant differences are:
>
> * Table Styles;
>
> * Swapping out custom palettes --- gradients, hashes, colours --- is
> much easier in LibO 5.3 than AOo 4.1.3.
> Semi-related, but keeping track of 500 different palettes in LibO 5.3 is
> much easier than with AOo 4.1.3.
>
> > LO choked (version 5.2.2.2 on Linux), OO (version 4.1.2 on same machine)
> opened it perfectly and gave me
>
> AOo is far more tolerant of malformed documents than LibO is.
> OTOH, LibO can import from, and export to more file formats than AOo.
> I am not saying that LibO correctly imports/exports said file formats.
>
> > And now, I hear, they are going to add that stupid "ribbon" thingy to be
> even more annoying and counter-productive.
>
> I'm not sure if you are referring to MUFFIN in general, or the
> NoteBookBar in specific.
>
> Regardless, with a slight increase in complexity, user customization
> increases dramatically.   You have a choice of:
> * NetbookBar;
> * SideBar;
> * TopBar;
> * Sidebar with TopBar;
> * None of the above. (This requires the user to do a lot of mucking
> about in the "Expert Configuration" part of LibO. It requires even more
> time and patience to correctly configure everything to be keystroke
> reachable. I haven't tested this part out. Misconfiguration can require
> complete uninstallation of all files, then re-installing the program.);
>
> At least initially, use of the NetBookBar is _discouraged_. Odds are the
> only support it will see, is from third party extensions.
>
> Wondering how long before somebody creates a theme for LibO, that
> includes a NetBookBar. AFAIK, custom themes are not yet possible for AOo.
>
> > So code quantity or quality aside, what can LO do for me as a common
> user?
>
> The most important thing to know, is what the use-case is:
>
> * Do you really need an office suite?
> * Would a stand alone program be more suitable?
>
> If your cyberlife consists of:
>
> * Playing games, then GoDot is a better alternative;(^1)
> * Dwelling in spreadsheets, perhaps Gnumeric is more suitable;
> * Writing scientific reports, a TeX solution might be more suitable;
> * Creating pretty charts, R is more suitable;
> * Drawing pretty pictures, GIMP is more suitable;
> * Creating movies, Cinelerra is more suitable;
> * Animating things, do the whole thing with Blender;
> * Databases, then Python and SQLite, PostGres, or MariaDB is more suitable;
>
>
> ^1: All of the games (Flight Simulator, Space Invaders, Tick Tack Toe)
> have been removed from LibO and AOo.  However, templates for various
> games are available.
>
> jonathon
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>