Re: [Libreoffice] [tdf-discuss] Linux distros and LibO packaging
Rene Engelhard wrote: On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 11:13:48AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote: Besides that, distros will have to continue libreoffice-build, which does still contain patches. (Removing those would be a big regression about what we ship right now) Thanks. So some distributions will still need to patch LibreOffice because the vanilla LibreOffice would be a regression for their users with respect to the current OpenOffice.org/Go-OO/LibreOffice they ship. This, together with issues like the weird problem you linked to https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31271 indeed qualify as compelling arguments for distributions needing to patch LibreOffice much like they do with OpenOffice.org (even though of course in some cases the patches will be temporary fixes that will eventually get merged in the main codebase). Get some clue. And don't speak about this if you don't, kthxbye. ... Sorry, I apologize No need. LibreOffice is meritocracy-driven, not politeness-driven. Thanks, Andrea. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Linux distros and LibO packaging
On 19/01/2011 Cor Nouws wrote: Andrea Pescetti wrote (18-01-11 21:13) LibreOffice bugs like http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@documentfoundation.org/msg04508.html ... The bug you point to, does not suggest that they will make substantial changes, though? Well, at a first glance I'd say that modifying the code handling formulas in Writer tables is a deeper change than what I had expected from a distribution. Kohei Yoshida mentioned an extra formula support not integrated into LibreOffice proper in http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@documentfoundation.org/msg04524.html so this would be one of those cases where the distribution chooses to modify the plain LibreOffice since shipping the plain one would be a regression, as explained by Rene'. But I didn't look at the relevant code and I am not aware of further investigations. Regards, Andrea. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Linux distros and LibO packaging
Il 09/01/2011 16:56, RGB ES ha scritto: Good idea! Maybe a wiki page will be enough, but someone from each distro with enough knowledge should fill their part. On my experience, when giving support to OOo users on Linux many of their problems came from distro patches and were not present on vanilla build (anyone remember when kde4 integration appeared on openSUSE, offering to their users 0 KiB .doc files?). Or the long awaited pdf export xref bug https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=615812 ? Or the recent OpenSuSE build Libò bug https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664516 ? On both I tried helping to solve problems. Carlo 2011/1/9 Jean-Baptiste Faurejbf.fa...@orange.fr: Hi all, I think that we should have a webpage where Linux distributions who are packaging LibO, could list what changes they made compared to the official build by TDF. I see two main advantages : - for users and helpers : they will know easier if a problem comes from LibO or from packaging - for QA : it will be easier to know if a test done, for example on a version from Ubuntu PPA, may be consider as valid or not for LibO from a general point of view. Last but not least, that will increase transparency : we will know what we are talking about when we will talk about LibreOffice. ;-) So, is it a good idea to ask the Linux distributions to publish the changes they made to the official build ? Best regards JBF -- Seuls des formats ouverts peuvent assurer la pérennité de vos documents. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [Libreoffice] [tdf-discuss] Linux distros and LibO packaging
Hi, On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 07:13:56PM +0100, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Rene Engelhard wrote: On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 11:13:48AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote: Besides that, distros will have to continue libreoffice-build, which does still contain patches. (Removing those would be a big regression about what we ship right now) Thanks. So some distributions will still need to patch LibreOffice because the vanilla LibreOffice would be a regression for their users with respect to the current OpenOffice.org/Go-OO/LibreOffice they ship. Yep. This, together with issues like the weird problem you linked to https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31271 indeed qualify as compelling arguments for distributions needing to patch LibreOffice much like they do with OpenOffice.org (even though of not as much, as getting fixes or other stuff into the main codebase is far better in LibO than it was in OOo where it was extremely difficult. course in some cases the patches will be temporary fixes that will eventually get merged in the main codebase). Yep. And most of the go-oo fixes are already in the stock LibO anyway, so nothing to big here either. Grüße/Regards, René -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Linux distros and LibO packaging
Il 19/01/2011 11:56, Rene Engelhard ha scritto: Hi, On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 09:49:51PM +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: and, possibly, Debian might need to ship an acceptably free version by their own standards if there were any doubt as to the appropriate freeness of the LibreOffice code by the standards of the particular distribution involved. yep. In addition, Debian may need to patch heavily to meet the requirements of some of the disparate hardware architectures, for example. Well, not that heavily, and even if so I'd immediately give that back anyways. I think this is the key!!! To give patch immediately (!) back to TDF and explain that in the, e.g., proposed distro patch wiki. I also think that install Libò from one distro's repository is very useful to maintain LibreOffice updated as well as the entire whole system software and being able to install only a file if this is the need instead of reinstall/update all the stuff (the whole vanilla Libò tar.gz)!!! Isn't it? But I think TDF could also be the place in which all distros together discuss about new functionality before (!) implement it. TDF has been made to collect people ideas, discussions, software bugs and not only to serve people code. We are a bowl, we live in a XXI century very interesting bowl. We must understand this... Are we? We are here to avoid branches, to merge previously existing projects (Go-OO, NeoOffice, BrOffice, OOo4Kids, ...) in one big, open and with specific sectors (but single) Project! We are here to avoid wasting human efforts. We are here...! ;-) Grüße/Regards, René Have a nice evening, Carlo -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Linux distros and LibO packaging
On 01/23/2011 08:06 PM, Carlo Strata wrote: Il 19/01/2011 11:56, Rene Engelhard ha scritto: Hi, On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 09:49:51PM +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: and, possibly, Debian might need to ship an acceptably free version by their own standards if there were any doubt as to the appropriate freeness of the LibreOffice code by the standards of the particular distribution involved. yep. In addition, Debian may need to patch heavily to meet the requirements of some of the disparate hardware architectures, for example. Well, not that heavily, and even if so I'd immediately give that back anyways. I think this is the key!!! To give patch immediately (!) back to TDF and explain that in the, e.g., proposed distro patch wiki. I also think that install Libò from one distro's repository is very useful to maintain LibreOffice updated as well as the entire whole system software and being able to install only a file if this is the need instead of reinstall/update all the stuff (the whole vanilla Libò tar.gz)!!! Isn't it? But I think TDF could also be the place in which all distros together discuss about new functionality before (!) implement it. TDF has been made to collect people ideas, discussions, software bugs and not only to serve people code. We are a bowl, we live in a XXI century very interesting bowl. We must understand this... Are we? We are here to avoid branches, to merge previously existing projects (Go-OO, NeoOffice, BrOffice, OOo4Kids, ...) in one big, open and with specific sectors (but single) Project! We are here to avoid wasting human efforts. We are here...! ;-) Grüße/Regards, René Have a nice evening, Carlo I agree with you here on gathering all the patches from the various distros into one location, that way they will already come from the upstream source, which would mean less work for the distros themselves. One problem I see though is if you have something lets say that is Debian specific how can we ensure that it wouldn't break something that Suse would do the software before releasing it on their distro. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Linux distros and LibO packaging
Hi Andrea, Andrea Pescetti wrote (18-01-11 21:13) The OpenOffice.org experience, and the first distribution-specific LibreOffice bugs like http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@documentfoundation.org/msg04508.html make me think that fragmentation, while of course allowed by the license, should be discouraged when it comes to functionality; I'm not questioning desktop integration or branding, but I'd like to know why distributions feel they have to make changes to functionality... I do not expect at all that distros will have much appetite in making substantial functional changes. (And I am glad with that ;-) ) The bug you point to, does not suggest that they will make substantial changes, though? Regards, Cor -- - giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation - -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [Libreoffice] [tdf-discuss] Linux distros and LibO packaging
[ fullquoting for discuss@dfs sake. forgot the CC. Not that it matters much, but anyways. ] Hi, On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 11:13:48AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote: On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 09:13:43PM +0100, Andrea Pescetti wrote: It is a good idea to track changes, but it is probably a questionable practice to make changes. I expected LibreOffice to be consistent across Nonsense. This is OSS. it). Are there compelling reasons why distributions should ship versions of LibreOffice that have significant changes with respect to the official version? Define significant changes? Does ripping off the Mozilla address book support (implicitely, because using system-mozilla) count as that? Would you prefer Linux distros having a obsolete, patched and insecure Mozilla copy there? No, not acceptable. The OpenOffice.org experience, and the first distribution-specific LibreOffice bugs like http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@documentfoundation.org/msg04508.html Wow. I don't think Petr added a patch here, so it might just be system differences? Petr, correct me if I am wrong. Besides that, distros will have to continue libreoffice-build, which does still contain patches. (Removing those would be a big regression about what we ship right now) make me think that fragmentation, while of course allowed by the license, should be discouraged when it comes to functionality; I'm not questioning desktop integration or branding, but I'd like to know why distributions feel they have to make changes to functionality... Because bugs should be fixed ASAP, not when you think one wants to release. What if Debian didn't backport important fixes to it's 3.2.1 from 3.3 or so? Should we release wiith known important bugs in a stable release. Living 2 years with it? No. You have to care about quality. Besides that, some distro-specific bugs are not by feature patches, but just because of other bugs, Like bugs in system-libs, new version of systen lib breaking XYZ (e.g. the ) wrapping issue, need to find out the bugnr caused by changes in the Unicode Standard and ICU 4.4), build issues etc. Those https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31271 is what I meant here. you can't foresee and neither does documenting every change help here. Get some clue. And don't speak about this if you don't, kthxbye. Noone does this intentionally. Sorry, I apologize for the first two sentences of this. But I am getting annoyed by those senseless discussions. Should we repeat the errors Oracle did again? Grüße/Regards, René -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Linux distros and LibO packaging
Hi, On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 09:49:51PM +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: and, possibly, Debian might need to ship an acceptably free version by their own standards if there were any doubt as to the appropriate freeness of the LibreOffice code by the standards of the particular distribution involved. yep. In addition, Debian may need to patch heavily to meet the requirements of some of the disparate hardware architectures, for example. Well, not that heavily, and even if so I'd immediately give that back anyways. Grüße/Regards, René -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Linux distros and LibO packaging
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 08:07:03AM +0100, Jonathan Aquilina wrote: I am interested to see Rene's input on this as he is part of the Debian team. Thanks, answered both Andrea and Andrew. Grüße/Regards, René -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Linux distros and LibO packaging
On 09/01/2011 Jean-Baptiste Faure wrote: I think that we should have a webpage where Linux distributions who are packaging LibO, could list what changes they made compared to the official build by TDF. ... So, is it a good idea to ask the Linux distributions to publish the changes they made to the official build ? It is a good idea to track changes, but it is probably a questionable practice to make changes. I expected LibreOffice to be consistent across distributions (something that of course at the moment is not true of OpenOffice.org since most distributions apply significant patches to it). Are there compelling reasons why distributions should ship versions of LibreOffice that have significant changes with respect to the official version? The OpenOffice.org experience, and the first distribution-specific LibreOffice bugs like http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@documentfoundation.org/msg04508.html make me think that fragmentation, while of course allowed by the license, should be discouraged when it comes to functionality; I'm not questioning desktop integration or branding, but I'd like to know why distributions feel they have to make changes to functionality... Regards, Andrea. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Linux distros and LibO packaging
On 01/18/2011 10:49 PM, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 09:13:43PM +0100, Andrea Pescetti wrote: On 09/01/2011 Jean-Baptiste Faure wrote: I think that we should have a webpage where Linux distributions who are packaging LibO, could list what changes they made compared to the official build by TDF. ... So, is it a good idea to ask the Linux distributions to publish the changes they made to the official build ? It is a good idea to track changes, but it is probably a questionable practice to make changes. I expected LibreOffice to be consistent across distributions (something that of course at the moment is not true of OpenOffice.org since most distributions apply significant patches to it). Are there compelling reasons why distributions should ship versions of LibreOffice that have significant changes with respect to the official version? I could imagine that, hypothetically, GNewsense, Trisquel, Fedora and, possibly, Debian might need to ship an acceptably free version by their own standards if there were any doubt as to the appropriate freeness of the LibreOffice code by the standards of the particular distribution involved. In addition, Debian may need to patch heavily to meet the requirements of some of the disparate hardware architectures, for example. Likewise, I could imagine Fedora being slightly ahead of Red Hat in packaging and both being out of synch. with the RPM implemented in OpenSUSE, for example. All the best, Andy I am interested to see Rene's input on this as he is part of the Debian team. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Linux distros and LibO packaging
Hi all, I think that we should have a webpage where Linux distributions who are packaging LibO, could list what changes they made compared to the official build by TDF. I see two main advantages : - for users and helpers : they will know easier if a problem comes from LibO or from packaging - for QA : it will be easier to know if a test done, for example on a version from Ubuntu PPA, may be consider as valid or not for LibO from a general point of view. Last but not least, that will increase transparency : we will know what we are talking about when we will talk about LibreOffice. ;-) So, is it a good idea to ask the Linux distributions to publish the changes they made to the official build ? Best regards JBF -- Seuls des formats ouverts peuvent assurer la pérennité de vos documents. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Linux distros and LibO packaging
Good idea! Maybe a wiki page will be enough, but someone from each distro with enough knowledge should fill their part. On my experience, when giving support to OOo users on Linux many of their problems came from distro patches and were not present on vanilla build (anyone remember when kde4 integration appeared on openSUSE, offering to their users 0 KiB .doc files?). 2011/1/9 Jean-Baptiste Faure jbf.fa...@orange.fr: Hi all, I think that we should have a webpage where Linux distributions who are packaging LibO, could list what changes they made compared to the official build by TDF. I see two main advantages : - for users and helpers : they will know easier if a problem comes from LibO or from packaging - for QA : it will be easier to know if a test done, for example on a version from Ubuntu PPA, may be consider as valid or not for LibO from a general point of view. Last but not least, that will increase transparency : we will know what we are talking about when we will talk about LibreOffice. ;-) So, is it a good idea to ask the Linux distributions to publish the changes they made to the official build ? Best regards JBF -- Seuls des formats ouverts peuvent assurer la pérennité de vos documents. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Linux distros and LibO packaging
On 11-01-09 10:11 AM, Jean-Baptiste Faure wrote: Hi all, I think that we should have a webpage where Linux distributions who are packaging LibO, could list what changes they made compared to the official build by TDF. I see two main advantages : - for users and helpers : they will know easier if a problem comes from LibO or from packaging - for QA : it will be easier to know if a test done, for example on a version from Ubuntu PPA, may be consider as valid or not for LibO from a general point of view. Last but not least, that will increase transparency : we will know what we are talking about when we will talk about LibreOffice. ;-) So, is it a good idea to ask the Linux distributions to publish the changes they made to the official build ? Best regards JBF For Ubuntu most of the information reagrding its LibO package can be found or obtained on the corresponding needs-packagin bug: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/651124 Cheers, Fabian -- LibreOffice questions ? Des questions sur LibreOffice ? Preguntas acerca de LibreOffice ? Ask LibreOffice: http://libreoffice.shapado.com/ ~ Fabián Rodríguez http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:MagicFab -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
