Re: LO Community ex Vanilla and user expectations, impact and other points.
Am 22.04.21 um 13:01 schrieb Alexander Thurgood: [removed "identical" problematic examples] How is a QAer (other than myself as the original reporter) attempting to triage going to be able to tell which version of LO we are talking about here ? Both products have "Community" in the infobox. How will a user know what the difference is when asked ? Nothing prevents us to extend the version string with additional info (and also include the --with-vendor string into the version info list, instead of the text above it?), like: Version: 7.1.2.2 / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 8a45595d069ef5570103caea1b71cc9d82b2aae4 CPU threads: 8; OS: Mac OS X 10.16; UI render: default; VCL: osx Locale: fr-FR (fr_FR.UTF-8); UI: fr-FR Calc: threaded Vendor: The Document Foundation Installer / Origin: Apple AppStore ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: LO Community ex Vanilla and user expectations, impact and other points.
Hi Alex, *, On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 11:10 AM Alexander Thurgood wrote: > […] > As we know, the "community" version provided by Collabora doesn't have > the same functionality as the TDF download (e.g. no Java support, > therefore no hsqldb support, no reportbuilder, etc). Just to clarify this: Even if the version in the appstore was provided by TDF, it would have the same limitations. As Michael pointed out this is due to the Apple Appstore policy that doesn't allow external dependencies. And bundling a whole JRE isn't all that attractive... ciao Christian ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: LO Community ex Vanilla and user expectations, impact and other points.
Thanks Michael, much appreciated ! Alex ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: LO Community ex Vanilla and user expectations, impact and other points.
Further to this discussion a concrete example of where this confusion is likely to lead : I've just reported bug 141830. Bug not reproducible in : Version: 7.1.2.2 / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 8a45595d069ef5570103caea1b71cc9d82b2aae4 CPU threads: 8; OS: Mac OS X 10.16; UI render: default; VCL: osx Locale: fr-FR (fr_FR.UTF-8); UI: fr-FR Calc: threaded Bug present in : Version: 7.1.2.3 / LibreOffice Community Build ID: a393d9064b7eb849da7f488ab43f56a404be32ae CPU threads: 8; OS: Mac OS X 11.2.3; UI render: default; VCL: osx Locale: fr-FR (fr_FR.UTF-8); UI: fr-FR Calc: threaded This is the currently released version of LO Vanilla (installed this morning via AppStore). How is a QAer (other than myself as the original reporter) attempting to triage going to be able to tell which version of LO we are talking about here ? Both products have "Community" in the infobox. How will a user know what the difference is when asked ? Alex ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: LO Community ex Vanilla and user expectations, impact and other points.
Hi Alex, On 22/04/2021 11:12, Alexander Thurgood wrote: > Yes, I understand that, although it was also my understanding that it > is/was still possible to provide a complete JDK into the app that could > then be accepted into the AppStore. I also understand that that might > require significant effort from Collabora to do so, and that perhaps > from a business point of view, it is not a route that it wishes to go down. So - it's not clear to me what the situation is there: https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/more-about-the-app-store-gpl-enforcement And of course shipping, maintaining & security updating an entire OpenJDK is an horrible cost to bear, so as Christian says - not really that attractive; quite apart from the extra 180Mb. Size is particularly important on Mac with all these awful systems with tiny SSD's soldered onto the board I guess. >> Is there somewhere better we can point ? for example, if you could >> control that landing page (which is easy) where would you have it land? >> Can we make a better page that doesn't confuse people and explains how >> they can download the TDF version and an OpenJDK to get better 'Base' >> support? > > My suggestion would be to have it point to a Collabora page, after all > it is a Collabora product, which page would direct the user to the > LibreOffice project as the source for any questions, documentation, etc, > and additionally, should the user feel so inclined in order to obtain > the missing functionality, to the download site of the TDF release. Absolutely happy to do that. > Personally, I would find it helpful if the pros/cons of each we > identified on such a page. That way, the user makes their choice in full > knowledge. Seems very sensible. > For example, the AppStore blurb text doesn't mention that LO Vanilla There are really limits to what we can say in the app store text I'm afraid, and whether people read below the fold is also unclear to me. > Are these suggestions of any use ? Golden =) of course, its not trivial to re-spin builds and each time you re-submit there is a risk of some random other new sandbox violation being found - so this won't happen overnight; but we can certainly do this. Thanks for the feedback! Cor - can you file a ticket to knock up a quick pros/cons page as Alex outlines and get the URL to Tor to include into the build? once that's in we can iterate it to taste. Regards, Michael. -- michael.me...@collabora.com <><, GM Collabora Productivity Hangout: mejme...@gmail.com, Skype: mmeeks (M) +44 7795 666 147 - timezone usually UK / Europe ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: LO Community ex Vanilla and user expectations, impact and other points.
Le 22/04/2021 à 11:25, Michael Meeks a écrit : Hi Michael, > > This is a fairly fundamental limitation of the app-store I'm afraid; > and it is regrettable indeed. >> However, this version now points directly to the LibreOffice website, >> and I feel that user expectations are being somewhat misled, due to the >> missing functionality. Yes, I understand that, although it was also my understanding that it is/was still possible to provide a complete JDK into the app that could then be accepted into the AppStore. I also understand that that might require significant effort from Collabora to do so, and that perhaps from a business point of view, it is not a route that it wishes to go down. Additionally, from a wider project view, it might also set a precedent with regard to other OSes for which LO doesn't bundle the JDK (for a number of equally valid reasons). > > Is there somewhere better we can point ? for example, if you could > control that landing page (which is easy) where would you have it land? > Can we make a better page that doesn't confuse people and explains how > they can download the TDF version and an OpenJDK to get better 'Base' > support? > My suggestion would be to have it point to a Collabora page, after all it is a Collabora product, which page would direct the user to the LibreOffice project as the source for any questions, documentation, etc, and additionally, should the user feel so inclined in order to obtain the missing functionality, to the download site of the TDF release. Personally, I would find it helpful if the pros/cons of each were identified on such a page. That way, the user makes their choice in full knowledge. For example, the AppStore blurb text doesn't mention that LO Vanilla includes multiple language support - this is a huge positive for many people compared to the TDF downloads which require separate langpack installations and their associated issues. On the negative side, of course, the absence of any Java functionality, but also what that entails in terms of functional limitation. The current note in brackets at the end of the AppStore text is somewhat light on the implications of the lack of Java, stating that it only affects usage of the HSQLDB embedded engine, when in reality the extent is far greater. The landing page pointed to by the banner could explain those differences in more detail, e.g. : - no Java-based database connectivity whatsoever, so no JDBC connections to any DB engine reliant on JDBC drivers - considering the broad range of JDBC drivers available, this is by far one of the most common ways of connecting to a backend database engine ; - no database reporting engine (jfreereport) ; - no beanshell or Javascript support - no Java extension support (e.g. LanguageTool) Are these suggestions of any use ? Alex ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: LO Community ex Vanilla and user expectations, impact and other points.
Hi Alex, On 22/04/2021 10:10, Alexander Thurgood wrote: > Apologies if this has already been debated somewhere and I've missed it > (probably), but I have just received an update for LO Vanilla through > the Apple AppStore Hey - I'm sorry this upset you! there is clearly no intention to do that. > and I noticed that the StartCenter now carries a > banner/sticker inscribed "LibreOffice Community" in the bottom lefthand > corner, which is an active link pointing to > > https://www.libreoffice.org/) Right - we want to give credit there, and this is a 'vanilla' (the sense is no added flavours) community build. > As a QA triager, I am somewhat confused as to the message being sent out > here. So - how can we improve that ! =) > As we know, the "community" version provided by Collabora doesn't have > the same functionality as the TDF download (e.g. no Java support, > therefore no hsqldb support, no reportbuilder, etc). This is a fairly fundamental limitation of the app-store I'm afraid; and it is regrettable indeed. > However, this version now points directly to the LibreOffice website, > and I feel that user expectations are being somewhat misled, due to the > missing functionality. Is there somewhere better we can point ? for example, if you could control that landing page (which is easy) where would you have it land? Can we make a better page that doesn't confuse people and explains how they can download the TDF version and an OpenJDK to get better 'Base' support? > concern is that once a user realizes that a deliberate confusion has > been entertained, it will probably be too late ... > I also feel somewhat uncomfortable with providing help for > a product that maintains this duplicity. I don't think this is a deliberate confusion or anything duplicitous. > Unfortunately, I don't really have any better suggestions on how to > manage this, but for me, willingly confusing users is not the way forward. So - lets brainstorm on making it better. Ultimately bundling a whole Java / OpenJDK into the sandboxed app is not something we can easily do; we've been looking at improving the Firebird stuff to try to get at least a reasonable database there. We make this clear on our download description: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/libreoffice-vanilla/id921923693?mt=12 [snip] "LibreOffice Vanilla is based directly on the LibreOffice source code from The Document Foundation. It is recommended for users who want the convenience of installing from the App Store and getting automatic updates, compared to manually downloading and installing from The Document Foundation. "(Note that features implemented in Java are not present, like the HSQLDB embedded database engine.) [/snip] So - anyhow; it's important to me that we don't do something confusing or annoying. I'd really like to better understand your concern - and work out how can we improve? suggestions much appreciated. Would a different landing page work for you? or? All the best, Michael. -- michael.me...@collabora.com <><, GM Collabora Productivity Hangout: mejme...@gmail.com, Skype: mmeeks (M) +44 7795 666 147 - timezone usually UK / Europe ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
LO Community ex Vanilla and user expectations, impact and other points.
Hi all, Apologies if this has already been debated somewhere and I've missed it (probably), but I have just received an update for LO Vanilla through the Apple AppStore, and I noticed that the StartCenter now carries a banner/sticker inscribed "LibreOffice Community" in the bottom lefthand corner, which is an active link pointing to https://www.libreoffice.org/) As a QA triager, I am somewhat confused as to the message being sent out here. As we know, the "community" version provided by Collabora doesn't have the same functionality as the TDF download (e.g. no Java support, therefore no hsqldb support, no reportbuilder, etc). However, this version now points directly to the LibreOffice website, and I feel that user expectations are being somewhat misled, due to the missing functionality. Users who click on the link will land on the LibreOffice landing page and look for help (e.g. Ask, or the documentation section) where they will see that Java functionality is supposed to be supported, and my concern is that once a user realizes that a deliberate confusion has been entertained, it will probably be too late. The user in question will by now almost certainly have dismissed LO as not up to scratch, and will probably fail to understand why they should now go and install a different app with a confusingly similar name, and unauthenticated to boot, outside of the AppStore. My takeaway from this confusion is unfortunately all rather negative, and ultimately my concern is that the confusion will lead to the "by default" replacement of desktop LO on the Mac by "LO Vanilla/Community" with ensuing loss of functionality, driven by one actor of the LO community in its broadest sense, and which the LO project will have at worst underwritten, at best implictly condoned. I also feel somewhat uncomfortable with providing help for a product that maintains this duplicity. Unfortunately, I don't really have any better suggestions on how to manage this, but for me, willingly confusing users is not the way forward. I am as yet undecided on whether I would wish to maintain my contribution to the project in the current environment. Clearly, I have some thinking still to do in that regard. Alex ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
