Re: Change of 'soffice' name
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.orgwrote: I've been told that a similar problem happens on Debian, and on ubuntu, with the desktop-integration package I have installed the latest greatest Debian 6.06 (released this week afaik) and I was surprised to find out it includes OpenOffice .org 3.2.1 (OOO320M19), but in the usual Debian-way, stripped of the OO.o branding. (Remember, these are the folks who rename Firefox to Iceweasel and SeaMonkey to Iceape :-P). I wonder -since Debian still has not ditched OO.o to LO, if this wouldn´t be an opportunity for them to package AOO in next versions... Just thinking aloud.. FC -- During times of Universal Deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act Durante épocas de Engaño Universal, decir la verdad se convierte en un Acto Revolucionario - George Orwell
Re: Change of 'soffice' name
On 10/5/12, Fernando Cassia fcas...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.orgwrote: I've been told that a similar problem happens on Debian, and on ubuntu, with the desktop-integration package I have installed the latest greatest Debian 6.06 (released this week afaik) and I was surprised to find out it includes OpenOffice .org 3.2.1 (OOO320M19), but in the usual Debian-way, stripped of the OO.o branding. OpenOffice.org 3.2.1 was from Oracle up to 3.3, the apache release was 3.4.0 and 3.4.1. Try opening the About OpenOffice.org on the help menu to see if the Oracle logo still there. Debian did had an announcement in favor of libo June 2011. http://www.debian.org/News/2011/20110623 Google threw an unofficial Apache OO build on sourceforge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/apacheoo-deb/files/debian/ (Remember, these are the folks who rename Firefox to Iceweasel and SeaMonkey to Iceape :-P). I wonder -since Debian still has not ditched OO.o to LO, if this wouldn´t be an opportunity for them to package AOO in next versions... Just thinking aloud.. FC -- During times of Universal Deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act Durante épocas de Engaño Universal, decir la verdad se convierte en un Acto Revolucionario - George Orwell -- Alexandro Colorado PPMC Apache OpenOffice http://es.openoffice.org
Re: Change of 'soffice' name
On 10/05/2012 07:38 AM, Fernando Cassia wrote: On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.orgwrote: I've been told that a similar problem happens on Debian, and on ubuntu, with the desktop-integration package I have installed the latest greatest Debian 6.06 (released this week afaik) and I was surprised to find out it includes OpenOffice .org 3.2.1 (OOO320M19), but in the usual Debian-way, stripped of the OO.o branding. (Remember, these are the folks who rename Firefox to Iceweasel and SeaMonkey to Iceape :-P). I wonder -since Debian still has not ditched OO.o to LO, if this wouldn´t be an opportunity for them to package AOO in next versions... Perhaps so...maybe you could (a) contact them, or... (b) package it for them and add to their repository if you can. :) [I don't know anything about how Debian works by the way]. Anyway, I still believe it is file linkage problems causing this 'soffice' problem as I basically unlinked this (on opensuse) and everything worked fine. However, I have NO knowledge of what's going on with other packagings. Just thinking aloud.. FC -- MzK Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat. -- Robert Heinlein
Re: Change of 'soffice' name
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: OpenOffice.org 3.2.1 was from Oracle up to 3.3, the apache release was 3.4.0 and 3.4.1. Try opening the About OpenOffice.org on the help menu to see if the Oracle logo still there. No the logo is not there. There´s something in the debian way about not being very happy wrt third party trademarks. That´s why they rename Firefox to something else. And the OpenOffice.org 3.2.1 in Debian 6.0.6 has been built by Debian and stripped of the Oracle logo (in fact, it has no logo at all, just a text dialog). Oh well, The Debian Way, you know... (*rolleyes* ;) Debian did had an announcement in favor of libo June 2011. http://www.debian.org/News/2011/20110623 Oh that´s too bad. :-/ Google threw an unofficial Apache OO build on sourceforge: http://sourceforge.net/projects/apacheoo-deb/files/debian/ Thanks for the link! FC
Re: Change of 'soffice' name
Hi Alexandro, soffice is an established file name for the binary. If there is a clash with LO's naming scheme then why should AOO change the name? It's LO that abandoned the name OpenOffice And if you take a look at the naming scheme of the API sun/star/... this is something you cannot change that easily. Kind regards, Joost
[UX][DISCUSS]Re: Change of 'soffice' name
There has been issues in installing LibreOffice and OpenOffice basically because they are derived from StarOffice, since the Oracle transfer StarOffice no longer exist however OOo still have it's roots on it's code and libraries. Issues however when trying to have LibreOffice and OpenOffice has causes clash between both soffice binaries on many of the Linux (and other) distributions. One example is the menu service where OOo/LibO hold the same XML definition. I wonder if there are any plans on ever modifying this branding issue. From a user experience POV this would be a good idea. The old Novell version of OOo used to use ooffice, oowriter, oocalc. Perhaps for 4.0 we should change to aoffice or aooffice, aowriter etc GL
Re: Change of 'soffice' name
On 9/26/12 8:48 AM, Joost Andrae wrote: Hi Alexandro, soffice is an established file name for the binary. If there is a clash with LO's naming scheme then why should AOO change the name? It's LO that abandoned the name OpenOffice And if you take a look at the naming scheme of the API sun/star/... this is something you cannot change that easily. Kind regards, Joost the point is simply that more stuff and functionality is depending on this name. And if we consider to change it we have to collect all this stuff first and should work on a reliable migration plan. I see at the moment no pressure to work on this and we have much more important things to do. But feel free to start and keep us informed. And before we do any real changes on the name in the code please inform us about your finding and the migration plan. It's important that we don't break things and avoid confusion where possible. Juergen
Re: Change of 'soffice' name
On 9/26/12, Joost Andrae joost.and...@gmx.de wrote: Hi Alexandro, soffice is an established file name for the binary. If there is a clash Yes, question is if this can be change? Is there is any desire to keep referencing to staroffice? would user be benefit or confused by changing it to openoffice.bin or openoffice.exe? with LO's naming scheme then why should AOO change the name? It's LO that abandoned the name OpenOffice I was addressing this as a user issue not trying to get into a libo/oo discussion. And if you take a look at the naming scheme of the API sun/star/... this is something you cannot change that easily. I agree, I remember when Oracle did that to Java and broke it on some apps. The question should be to what degree this change is possible without breaking the builds big time. Kind regards, Joost -- Alexandro Colorado PPMC Apache OpenOffice http://es.openoffice.org
Re: Change of 'soffice' name
2012/9/26 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com On 9/26/12 8:48 AM, Joost Andrae wrote: Hi Alexandro, soffice is an established file name for the binary. If there is a clash with LO's naming scheme then why should AOO change the name? It's LO that abandoned the name OpenOffice And if you take a look at the naming scheme of the API sun/star/... this is something you cannot change that easily. Kind regards, Joost the point is simply that more stuff and functionality is depending on this name. And if we consider to change it we have to collect all this stuff first and should work on a reliable migration plan. +1. At least on Linux, the conflict between AOO and LibO comes from distro packaging: you can install both, AOO and the official LibO side by side without problems. Just for curiosity: is it possible to put a second launch script, so you can start the program with both, soffice and, for example, aoo? Regards Ricardo I see at the moment no pressure to work on this and we have much more important things to do. But feel free to start and keep us informed. And before we do any real changes on the name in the code please inform us about your finding and the migration plan. It's important that we don't break things and avoid confusion where possible. Juergen
Re: Change of 'soffice' name
On 09/26/2012 02:14 AM, RGB ES wrote: 2012/9/26 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com On 9/26/12 8:48 AM, Joost Andrae wrote: Hi Alexandro, soffice is an established file name for the binary. If there is a clash with LO's naming scheme then why should AOO change the name? It's LO that abandoned the name OpenOffice And if you take a look at the naming scheme of the API sun/star/... this is something you cannot change that easily. Kind regards, Joost the point is simply that more stuff and functionality is depending on this name. And if we consider to change it we have to collect all this stuff first and should work on a reliable migration plan. +1. At least on Linux, the conflict between AOO and LibO comes from distro packaging: you can install both, AOO and the official LibO side by side without problems. Just for curiosity: is it possible to put a second launch script, so you can start the program with both, soffice and, for example, aoo? Regards Ricardo I agree with both Juergen and RGB. I don't know what the case is on other platforms, but on Linux, LO basically reassigns the soffice binary to libreoffice, the actual program name to launch libreoffice, via symlinks. How to undo this is covered in the installation guide. But I admit, since I only launched LO once and then deinstalled it, I don't know if this comes into play later with using it. From what I saw initially, it doesn't. It seemed happy to run with the symlinke disabled from what I recalled. Re inclusion of second launch script. Of course, this could be done, but I'm wondering about further confusion with this approach. With Linux, it's not a big deal but I don't know about Windows, Mac, etc... I see at the moment no pressure to work on this and we have much more important things to do. But feel free to start and keep us informed. And before we do any real changes on the name in the code please inform us about your finding and the migration plan. It's important that we don't break things and avoid confusion where possible. Juergen -- MzK Just 'cause you got the monkey off your back doesn't mean the circus has left town. -- George Carlin
Re: Change of 'soffice' name
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 5:14 AM, RGB ES rgb.m...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/9/26 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com On 9/26/12 8:48 AM, Joost Andrae wrote: Hi Alexandro, soffice is an established file name for the binary. If there is a clash with LO's naming scheme then why should AOO change the name? It's LO that abandoned the name OpenOffice And if you take a look at the naming scheme of the API sun/star/... this is something you cannot change that easily. Kind regards, Joost the point is simply that more stuff and functionality is depending on this name. And if we consider to change it we have to collect all this stuff first and should work on a reliable migration plan. +1. At least on Linux, the conflict between AOO and LibO comes from distro packaging: you can install both, AOO and the official LibO side by side without problems. Just for curiosity: is it possible to put a second launch script, so you can start the program with both, soffice and, for example, aoo? Regards Ricardo I see at the moment no pressure to work on this and we have much more important things to do. But feel free to start and keep us informed. And before we do any real changes on the name in the code please inform us about your finding and the migration plan. It's important that we don't break things and avoid confusion where possible. Juergen It might be as simple as changing a single stanza in the launch script that could check for other soffice installations in the system and either push the Apache OpenOffice install to a different install prefix or just force a different /usr/bin/symbolic-link The latter is a simple thing that shouldn't require changing any of the binary names, since a symbolic link can have any name you want. I suspect there would need to be a small adjustment in the Linux menu integration, but it is very likely that you wouldn't need to change anything there. I have not looked into it yet because I just uninstalled LibreOffice before installing Apache OpenOffice. That option is not scalable, and people get annoyed when softwares go to war against one another, as would be the effect if OpenOffice just removed LO when it was installed. I will look into a more scalable and friendly option. -- Wolf Halton This Apt Has Super Cow Powers - http://sourcefreedom.com Open-Source Software in Libraries - http://FOSS4Lib.org Advancing Libraries Together - http://LYRASIS.org Apache Open Office Developer wolfhal...@apache.org
Re: Change of 'soffice' name
On 9/26/12, Wolf Halton wolf.hal...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 5:14 AM, RGB ES rgb.m...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/9/26 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com On 9/26/12 8:48 AM, Joost Andrae wrote: Hi Alexandro, soffice is an established file name for the binary. If there is a clash with LO's naming scheme then why should AOO change the name? It's LO that abandoned the name OpenOffice And if you take a look at the naming scheme of the API sun/star/... this is something you cannot change that easily. Kind regards, Joost the point is simply that more stuff and functionality is depending on this name. And if we consider to change it we have to collect all this stuff first and should work on a reliable migration plan. +1. At least on Linux, the conflict between AOO and LibO comes from distro packaging: you can install both, AOO and the official LibO side by side without problems. Just for curiosity: is it possible to put a second launch script, so you can start the program with both, soffice and, for example, aoo? Regards Ricardo I see at the moment no pressure to work on this and we have much more important things to do. But feel free to start and keep us informed. And before we do any real changes on the name in the code please inform us about your finding and the migration plan. It's important that we don't break things and avoid confusion where possible. Juergen It might be as simple as changing a single stanza in the launch script that could check for other soffice installations in the system and either push the Apache OpenOffice install to a different install prefix or just force a different /usr/bin/symbolic-link The latter is a simple thing that shouldn't require changing any of the binary names, since a symbolic link can have any name you want. I suspect there would need to be a small adjustment in the Linux menu integration, but it is very likely that you wouldn't need to change anything there. I have not looked into it yet because I just uninstalled LibreOffice before installing Apache OpenOffice. That Most of the reports have to do with the Menu registration using the same declaration for swriter, scalc, etc. Having an aoo centric mime declaration could help avoid any clash. option is not scalable, and people get annoyed when softwares go to war against one another, as would be the effect if OpenOffice just removed LO when it was installed. I will look into a more scalable and friendly option. -- Wolf Halton This Apt Has Super Cow Powers - http://sourcefreedom.com Open-Source Software in Libraries - http://FOSS4Lib.org Advancing Libraries Together - http://LYRASIS.org Apache Open Office Developer wolfhal...@apache.org -- Alexandro Colorado PPMC Apache OpenOffice http://es.openoffice.org
Re: Change of 'soffice' name
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 11:59:59AM -0400, Wolf Halton wrote: I have not looked into it yet because I just uninstalled LibreOffice before installing Apache OpenOffice. That option is not scalable, and people get annoyed when softwares go to war against one another, as would be the effect if OpenOffice just removed LO when it was installed. I will look into a more scalable and friendly option. On Fedora, you can't install AOO because the URE package is obsoleted by libreoffice-ure. You have to uninstall libreoffice, install AOO, and blacklist libreoffice in the package manager configuration (exclude=libreoffice* in /etc/yum.cfg), otherwise every time you update the system, lo-ure will replace aoo-ure. The good news are that this isn't new at all, it also had to be done in OpenOffice.org times. I've been told that a similar problem happens on Debian, and on ubuntu, with the desktop-integration package. In conclusion, changing the shell scrip name won't solve deeper issues that make the package even impossible to install. Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina pgpE2FTUZPPl5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Change of 'soffice' name
RGB ES wrote: +1. At least on Linux, the conflict between AOO and LibO comes from distro packaging: you can install both, AOO and the official LibO side by side without problems. Indeed. And since it's a packaging problem, distributions should take care of it. The alternatives system should be implemented more or less in all distributions already, so it could be used to allow users to switch the soffice alias (although I would find it reasonable to keep it for OpenOffice, but distributions will have their reasons). Just for curiosity: is it possible to put a second launch script, so you can start the program with both, soffice and, for example, aoo? It is, but it would be an extra one, in addition to soffice. ooffice would be a natural candidate (besides being the name that some distributions had already adopted when repackaging OpenOffice). Regards, Andrea.
Re: Change of 'soffice' name
Hi. On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 8:56 PM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: There has been issues in installing LibreOffice and OpenOffice basically because they are derived from StarOffice, since the Oracle transfer StarOffice no longer exist however OOo still have it's roots on it's code and libraries. Yes, there is this conflict in libraries soffice. Some colleagues were able to install without problems AOO and Libo conflict in linux. Others had problems like me. On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote: I've been told that a similar problem happens on Debian, and on ubuntu, with the desktop-integration package. Yeah. Can It install the force. I use only the AOO as office official. (: Albino
Change of 'soffice' name
There has been issues in installing LibreOffice and OpenOffice basically because they are derived from StarOffice, since the Oracle transfer StarOffice no longer exist however OOo still have it's roots on it's code and libraries. Issues however when trying to have LibreOffice and OpenOffice has causes clash between both soffice binaries on many of the Linux (and other) distributions. One example is the menu service where OOo/LibO hold the same XML definition. I wonder if there are any plans on ever modifying this branding issue. -- Alexandro Colorado PPMC Apache OpenOffice http://es.openoffice.org
