RE: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL
I resonate with these remarks (two extracts below). I particularly want to acknowledge all of the work that Kay Schenk and several others have put into making AOO more approachable by new developers. -- Extract #1 -- From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 10:17 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL [ ... ] Ongoing maintenance and new developer knowledge are more a factor to me than bells and whistles, really. [ ... ] -Original Message- From: Louis Suárez-Potts [mailto:lui...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 10:21 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL [ ... ] More to the point, and trying to be realistic…. OpenOffice is right now on maintenance mode, as far as I can tell. We will issue a 4.1.2 and probably further micro releases addressing bugs, midges, and gnats. But we’re not slaying dragons nor otherwise attempting ambitious projects. And it’s not a matter of bells and whistles—of glitter to appeal to fools who can’t otherwise see the gold. [It's a] matter of creating a product that the millions who are going to be using open source productivity applications can actually use on the platforms and environments they are given or buy. These will continue to be desktops (including laptops) but also mobile devices. That is: the future is not like the past and to pretend it is and will continue to so seems to me problematical. Yet any transition is bound to demand resources we can’t pull out of thin air. [ ... ] But I also still believe that OpenOffice has a future and that investigating ways in which we can make OpenOffice not only easier to work on but to use would serve us—the overall community—well. [ ... ] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 01:00:34AM +0100, Andrea Pescetti wrote: On 31 December 2014 I wrote to this list that I would be available to resign from the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair position as soon as a successor could be elected. We had nominations and long discussions and in the end we have one candidate available to be the next OpenOffice PMC Chair: Louis Suárez-Potts. It's now time to vote. Do you approve that, in his capacity as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair, Andrea Pescetti submits a resolution to the Board asking to be replaced by Louis Suárez-Potts as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair? [ ] +1 Yes [ ] 0 Abstain [ ] -1 No -1 No Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Celebrating 15 years of open source success -- ApacheCon NA!
On 29/12/2014 Kay Schenk wrote: Participate in ApacheConNA in Austin, TX, April 13-15, 2015, http://apachecon.com/. ... A suggested list of topics can be found at: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=50855951 Proposals can be submitted until Feb. 1, 2015 via the following link : http://events.linuxfoundation.org/events/apachecon-north-america/program/cfp I've seen almost no feedback. I looked at the official CFP link to see if we missed something but nothing relevant was submitted after 1 December 2014. Unless Kay received some replies to the mail sent to announce@, we have no volunteers yet. We started with 10 talks, but we'll have to downsize if we don't have enough speakers. So, please, take your time to see if you could present one of the following talks (this is a copy-paste from the above page): 1 State: A perspective of our first 15 years, and the current state of the project 2 Future: Outlook for OpenOffice, 2015 and beyond 3 Development: Significant recent or foreseen technical improvements in OpenOffice; the architecture of OpenOffice as it relates to open source development/maintenance. 3a Improvements to core code (Modules vs complete office suite) 3b Improvements to the development process (IDEs, etc.) 3c Improvements to core libraries, etc. 3d Incorporating other open source products or ideas 4 Localization: L10N community, translation, Pootle server 5 QA: Quality assurance processes, Bugzilla, bug triaging, testing tools 6 Documentation and Marketing: Documentation, Trademarks, OpenOffice Reputation, OpenOffice in the Press (Documentation and Marketing could also be split) 7 ODF: The relationship of the ODF standard and OpenOffice. How did this standard contribute to making OpenOffice open source? 8 Adoption: How did making OpenOffice open source contribute to its adoption by business enterprises; Migration use cases. 9 Ecosystem: A panel of OpenOffice downstream users (Symphony, NeoOffice, LibreOffice, Go-oo) discussing their use of OpenOffice code and what they've contributed back. 10 Mobile: How desktop based office systems will adopt to responsive design in mobile devices Feel free to add more talks, but only if you volunteer to deliver them yourself! We can wait a few days, even a week, but then we'll have to cut the topics we can't cover. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
[VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair
On 31 December 2014 I wrote to this list that I would be available to resign from the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair position as soon as a successor could be elected. We had nominations and long discussions and in the end we have one candidate available to be the next OpenOffice PMC Chair: Louis Suárez-Potts. It's now time to vote. Do you approve that, in his capacity as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair, Andrea Pescetti submits a resolution to the Board asking to be replaced by Louis Suárez-Potts as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair? [ ] +1 Yes [ ] 0 Abstain [ ] -1 No Vote opens now and it will last one week (and a few hours), until 22 January 2015 10:00 AM GMT, to give all community members the opportunity to participate. If vote passes, the resolution will be submitted to the Board in time for the February meeting (18 February 2015). Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re:Re: compile error
Would you then compiled which version of the source code, is 4.1.1? At 2015-01-13 02:16:35, Oliver Brinzing oliver.brinz...@gmx.de wrote: Hi 郄宁, Can be compiled. but excuse me,build --all and build --all -P2 ---P2 what's different about the compilation? this should speed up the building process, please see https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide/Building_on_Windows - parallel builds Regards Oliver - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: [VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair
+1 (non-binding) -Original Message- From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 16:01 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair On 31 December 2014 I wrote to this list that I would be available to resign from the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair position as soon as a successor could be elected. We had nominations and long discussions and in the end we have one candidate available to be the next OpenOffice PMC Chair: Louis Suárez-Potts. It's now time to vote. Do you approve that, in his capacity as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair, Andrea Pescetti submits a resolution to the Board asking to be replaced by Louis Suárez-Potts as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair? [X] +1 Yes [ ] 0 Abstain [ ] -1 No Vote opens now and it will last one week (and a few hours), until 22 January 2015 10:00 AM GMT, to give all community members the opportunity to participate. If vote passes, the resolution will be submitted to the Board in time for the February meeting (18 February 2015). Regards, Andrea. - 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: [VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair
Andrea Pescetti wrote: On 31 December 2014 I wrote to this list that I would be available to resign from the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair position as soon as a successor could be elected. We had nominations and long discussions and in the end we have one candidate available to be the next OpenOffice PMC Chair: Louis Suárez-Potts. It's now time to vote. Do you approve that, in his capacity as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair, Andrea Pescetti submits a resolution to the Board asking to be replaced by Louis Suárez-Potts as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair? snip [X] +1 Yes (non-binding) [ ] 0 Abstain [ ] -1 No Keith N. McKenna signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair
-1 On Jan 14, 2015 10:05 PM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Andrea Pescetti wrote: On 31 December 2014 I wrote to this list that I would be available to resign from the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair position as soon as a successor could be elected. We had nominations and long discussions and in the end we have one candidate available to be the next OpenOffice PMC Chair: Louis Suárez-Potts. It's now time to vote. Do you approve that, in his capacity as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair, Andrea Pescetti submits a resolution to the Board asking to be replaced by Louis Suárez-Potts as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair? snip [X] +1 Yes (non-binding) [ ] 0 Abstain [ ] -1 No Keith N. McKenna
Re: Nominations for a new PMC Chair
Hi, On 14 Jan 2015, at 07:17, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: On 14/01/2015 jan i wrote: I decline my nomination for personal reasons and are not voteable. Copy-pasting the same remark I sent on this list about the other four, I respect your choices and your reasons not to run, but I would like to acknowledge you (and all nominees, and a couple more people) as key people to the continued success of the project. Actually, I just wrote to Jan privately and asked him to reconsider his resignation, as I believed the conditions he had put on his candidacy were difficult and that it would be better to go through the ritual of democracy, first. And looking at the future: Louis, as the only remaining candidate at this stage, do you confirm you are still a candidate, i.e., that you haven't changed your mind? Sorry for the odd question, but we've seen lots of surprises so far and before checking procedural issues for this unusual one-candidate-only election I prefer to verify that we still have a candidate. I actually have not changed my mind, though I should hope that Jan has or will; or if he does not, that others might wish to enter the election. My reason for wanting to move ahead is that I do not see what is being gained by delay or by these surprises *before* the election. The chair role is mostly an admin role; as Rob pointed out, it doesn’t magically change anything regarding the resources we have to draw upon. That’s up to us. So I’d much, much rather get on with the job of marshalling resources *as a community* and be done with this election. If we want another election, then let’s have another one; I personally have no issues with that. Regards, Andrea. Best, Louis - 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: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL
Hi; Replacing VCL with Qt (or GTK or enlightenment or anything) is a very complex project. There is a KDE CWS which may be somewhat of a starting point but it dowsn't really touch the surface of what you want to do. This said, it is the type of revolutionary projects I would certainly encourage. Feel free to start a branch for it :). Pedro. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL
The TL;DR: I don't think there is a reasonable way to depend on Qt in AOO. I also don't think that depending on Qt, were it feasible, would satisfy the concern that started this thread concerning the difficulty of maintaining [with] VCL. It might just move the pea to a more-difficult third-party dependency, after requiring a mammoth cut-over to a new GUI framework. -- replying below to -- From: Louis Suárez-Potts [mailto:lui...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 20:59 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL On 13 Jan 2015, at 23:04, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: [ ... ] PS: I thought there was a LGPL case where you could run QT as a DLL underneath an application, but I don't see how that can work with an ASF Project for a number of reasons. I also don't see anything about that featured in the current materials (although Wikipedia points to the Digia QT LGPL Exception, which is at the bottom of this page: http://doc.qt.io/qt-5/lgpl.html#digia-qt-lgpl-exception-version-1-1. Some of the gyrations may be related to how QT was spun into and out of Nokia. According to my email archives, I apparently stopped paying attention to it at the end of 2011. I may also may be thinking of a different project with regard to using a pre-built DLL and LIB. I think Dennis summarised the point well, However, some more: I had the impression that ASL 2 was compatible with (L)GPL3--but there is some salt here, and it also depends on what you want to infer by “compatible”. Where work would be done on the product using Qt licensed under LGPL or GPL is one issue, and the scope of the work is another. In this case, given the nature of the VCL, the result would probably also be licensed under Qt’s license. orcmid The ASLv2 compatibility with GPL is from the GPL side. That is, ASLv2 code can be depended on in GPL projects. The Apache Software Foundation has more constraints on what releases under its auspices may depend upon. There is a nice summary of the applicable principles under discussion at this very moment: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ApacheProjectMaturityModel. /orcmid However, that does not mean that add-ons, plug-ins, and other such enhancements couldn’t be made using Qt and hosted off-site. And, yes, we’ve had this very discussion before, many times before, *many* times. (And also hosted extensions off-site, with varying licenses, to the annoyance of the FSF.) orcmid I don't doubt that an ALv2-licensed deliverable could depend on LGPL-licensed code so long as the combined rules of LGPL and GPL are satisfied by the way the LGPL-licensed code is handled. However, what the ASF requires of its projects is more stringent than that, going beyond the FSF-accepted compatibility to limit what ASF-approved releases can impose on someone who wants to employ them. As far as I recall, that's why AOO must be buildable without reliance on what are called category-X dependencies. The case of writing tools and some others tend to be finessed via the plug-in extension route, even if bundled in the AOO-provided distributions. Depending on Qt for being able to use AOO at all goes way beyond that tolerance, it seems to me. /orcmid Originally, the issue preventing use of Qt with OOo was that it forbade free commercial application. Sun didn’t like that as it loved StarOffice. But then Sun sank, OpenOffice got Apache’d and Qt’s license changed (wonder why) and went as Dennis describes it: open and also proprietary. There are some Apache projects that do use Qt, and Qt itself does use ASL2 for some modules. But I think that replacing the longstanding VCL with the popular favourite Qt is not exactly feasible and that there are likely easier alternatives, if we want to change. Is it worth investigating again? I mean not just to reconsider Qt but also VCL. orcmid I am curious about Apache projects that use Qt. I'd like to see how they navigate that. Any links? /orcmid But back to Qt: hope springs eternal, and Qt remains popular, whatever its license and other flaws. I don’t just mean that the Digia exception should give us hope—though why not? Establishing useful compatibility with Apache and for Apache, as well as for users of Qt independent of Apache, would dramatically expand the tool’s usage, I’d guess. Qt’s pages are fairly good, and probably better than my interpretations. Stackoverflow is also good. See: louis [ ... ] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL
Maintaining the independently-developed VCL GUI framework is an important concern. (Then there's UNO as a cross-platform COM derivative.) The problem with much of the complexity of AOO, it seems to me, is that it is difficult to find improvements that can be achieved with progressions of small changes that have every- think still working each step of the way. Combined with the level of expertise required to know what changes are safe and consistent with the architecture of AOO, there is a big challenge for identifying any major moves. It would be great to know what insights there are for cultivating and sustaining the necessary expertise and maybe simplifying the learning curve and entrance requirements. Maybe just keep doing more of what is already being done in this area? -- replying below to -- From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 15:46 To: OOo Apache Subject: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL Something I started thinking about and ta da...it's been proposed before -- http://markmail.org/message/gjvwudqnzejlzynz In my mind, we could use some assistance in the maintenance of the toolkit for our UI instead of continuing to do it ourselves. This said, I know next to nothing about QT and from what I've seen, the licensing is pretty complicated and might not work for the ASF -- http://doc.qt.io/qt-5/licensing.html#licenses-used-in-qt orcmid I finally noticed and followed the markmail link above. Of course, in January 2009, all of OpenOffice.org was under LGPL and the license was not a concern for the open-source side of things. The private commercial licensing of OO.o by Sun (e.g., to IBM) would have been a concern. The dependency on what continued to be a pretty closely-held project might have been a concern even then. If The Document Foundation had decided this was a good idea, the prospect of an ecumenical accommodation with LibreOffice would be even stranger today than it already is [;). /orcmid Main web site -- http://qt-project.org/ Thoughts? -- - MzK There's a bit of magic in everything, and some loss to even things out. -- Lou Reed - 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: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL
On 14 Jan 2015, at 12:27, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: The TL;DR: I don't think there is a reasonable way to depend on Qt in AOO. I also don't think that depending on Qt, were it feasible, would satisfy the concern that started this thread concerning the difficulty of maintaining [with] VCL. It might just move the pea to a more-difficult third-party dependency, after requiring a mammoth cut-over to a new GUI framework. Agreed. The sole benefit, besides pleasing some, would be to bring in new developers and plausibly more companies. But I doubt the cost of switching would be paid by the influx of contributors and I would expect that if we do want to engage in a new, and probably ruthless refactoring, that we should look elsewhere. louis - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL
On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 09:27:53 -0800 Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: Maintaining the independently-developed VCL GUI framework is an important concern. (Then there's UNO as a cross-platform COM derivative.) The problem with much of the complexity of AOO, it seems to me, is that it is difficult to find improvements that can be achieved with progressions of small changes that have every- think still working each step of the way. Combined with the level of expertise required to know what changes are safe and consistent with the architecture of AOO, there is a big challenge for identifying any major moves. It would be great to know what insights there are for cultivating and sustaining the necessary expertise and maybe simplifying the learning curve and entrance requirements. Maybe just keep doing more of what is already being done in this area? Changing a GUI framework as discussed here is a major task - fraught with difficulty and hidden gotchas. It would be better to put the effort going into two areas: bug-fixing - there are many little bugs to be fixed; secondly, improvement in the functionality. Here is not the place to start a debate on what needs to be changed/improved, but we should bear in mind that bells and whistles always attract users. If we let competitive products outdistance us, we lose our share of the userbase. -- replying below to -- From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 15:46 To: OOo Apache Subject: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL Something I started thinking about and ta da...it's been proposed before -- http://markmail.org/message/gjvwudqnzejlzynz In my mind, we could use some assistance in the maintenance of the toolkit for our UI instead of continuing to do it ourselves. This said, I know next to nothing about QT and from what I've seen, the licensing is pretty complicated and might not work for the ASF -- http://doc.qt.io/qt-5/licensing.html#licenses-used-in-qt orcmid I finally noticed and followed the markmail link above. Of course, in January 2009, all of OpenOffice.org was under LGPL and the license was not a concern for the open-source side of things. The private commercial licensing of OO.o by Sun (e.g., to IBM) would have been a concern. The dependency on what continued to be a pretty closely-held project might have been a concern even then. If The Document Foundation had decided this was a good idea, the prospect of an ecumenical accommodation with LibreOffice would be even stranger today than it already is [;). /orcmid Main web site -- http://qt-project.org/ Thoughts? -- - MzK There's a bit of magic in everything, and some loss to even things out. -- Lou Reed - 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 -- Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL
On 01/14/2015 09:46 AM, Rory O'Farrell wrote: On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 09:27:53 -0800 Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: Maintaining the independently-developed VCL GUI framework is an important concern. (Then there's UNO as a cross-platform COM derivative.) The problem with much of the complexity of AOO, it seems to me, is that it is difficult to find improvements that can be achieved with progressions of small changes that have every- think still working each step of the way. Combined with the level of expertise required to know what changes are safe and consistent with the architecture of AOO, there is a big challenge for identifying any major moves. It would be great to know what insights there are for cultivating and sustaining the necessary expertise and maybe simplifying the learning curve and entrance requirements. Maybe just keep doing more of what is already being done in this area? Changing a GUI framework as discussed here is a major task - fraught with difficulty and hidden gotchas. It would be better to put the effort going into two areas: bug-fixing - there are many little bugs to be fixed; secondly, improvement in the functionality. Here is not the place to start a debate on what needs to be changed/improved, but we should bear in mind that bells and whistles always attract users. If we let competitive products outdistance us, we lose our share of the userbase. Thanks for all the comments so far. Further thoughts -- * Given licensing conditions of Qt, I was hoping it could be handled as our other category-b licenses. This would depend on what libraries are used of course. * Yes, a daunting task which is why it hasn't already been done. * I was initially thinking that a migration like this would: -- free up developer time to concentrate on other aspects of AOO -- relieve developers from continual maintenance in graphical environments -- position AOO better for use on non-desktop platforms Rory's comments -- Here is not the place to start a debate on what needs to be changed/improved, but we should bear in mind that bells and whistles always attract users. Ongoing maintenance and new developer knowledge are more a factor to me than bells and whistles, really. If we let competitive products outdistance us, we lose our share of the userbase No argument there. -- replying below to -- From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 15:46 To: OOo Apache Subject: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL Something I started thinking about and ta da...it's been proposed before -- http://markmail.org/message/gjvwudqnzejlzynz In my mind, we could use some assistance in the maintenance of the toolkit for our UI instead of continuing to do it ourselves. This said, I know next to nothing about QT and from what I've seen, the licensing is pretty complicated and might not work for the ASF -- http://doc.qt.io/qt-5/licensing.html#licenses-used-in-qt orcmid I finally noticed and followed the markmail link above. Of course, in January 2009, all of OpenOffice.org was under LGPL and the license was not a concern for the open-source side of things. The private commercial licensing of OO.o by Sun (e.g., to IBM) would have been a concern. The dependency on what continued to be a pretty closely-held project might have been a concern even then. If The Document Foundation had decided this was a good idea, the prospect of an ecumenical accommodation with LibreOffice would be even stranger today than it already is [;). /orcmid Main web site -- http://qt-project.org/ Thoughts? -- - MzK There's a bit of magic in everything, and some loss to even things out. -- Lou Reed - 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 -- - MzK There's a bit of magic in everything, and some loss to even things out. -- Lou Reed - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL
On 14 Jan 2015, at 12:46, Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote: On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 09:27:53 -0800 Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: Maintaining the independently-developed VCL GUI framework is an important concern. (Then there's UNO as a cross-platform COM derivative.) The problem with much of the complexity of AOO, it seems to me, is that it is difficult to find improvements that can be achieved with progressions of small changes that have every- think still working each step of the way. Combined with the level of expertise required to know what changes are safe and consistent with the architecture of AOO, there is a big challenge for identifying any major moves. It would be great to know what insights there are for cultivating and sustaining the necessary expertise and maybe simplifying the learning curve and entrance requirements. Maybe just keep doing more of what is already being done in this area? Changing a GUI framework as discussed here is a major task - fraught with difficulty and hidden gotchas. It would be better to put the effort going into two areas: bug-fixing - there are many little bugs to be fixed; secondly, improvement in the functionality. Here is not the place to start a debate on what needs to be changed/improved, but we should bear in mind that bells and whistles always attract users. If we let competitive products outdistance us, we lose our share of the user base. What “competitive products” do you mean? LibreOffice? Microsoft Office? Or perhaps you mean Calligra, which actually went through an intense refactoring (successful, too) several years ago. (Calligra is nice, but does not work with Mac OS X very well at all and is not maintained. Plans exist, but I get the feeling it’s like fusion power.) More to the point, and trying to be realistic…. OpenOffice is right now on maintenance mode, as far as I can tell. We will issue a 4.1.2 and probably further micro releases addressing bugs, midges, and gnats. But we’re not slaying dragons nor otherwise attempting ambitious projects. And it’s not a matter of bells and whistles—of glitter to appeal to fools who can’t otherwise see the gold. It’s rather matter of creating a product that the millions who are going to be using open source productivity applications can actually use on the platforms and environments they are given or buy. These will continue to be desktops (including laptops) but also mobile devices. That is: the future is not like the past and to pretend it is and will continue to so seems to me problematical. Yet any transition is bound to demand resources we can’t pull out of thin air. Note, this has always been the argument for the status quo here. (It was also coupled to the one you raised, earlier.) This obdurance is one reason I helped establish the new project Corinthia, which is a new thing altogether. But I also still believe that OpenOffice has a future and that investigating ways in which we can make OpenOffice not only easier to work on but to use would serve us—the overall community—well. louis - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL
On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 13:21:24 -0500 Louis Suárez-Potts lui...@gmail.com wrote: On 14 Jan 2015, at 12:46, Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote: On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 09:27:53 -0800 Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: Maintaining the independently-developed VCL GUI framework is an important concern. (Then there's UNO as a cross-platform COM derivative.) The problem with much of the complexity of AOO, it seems to me, is that it is difficult to find improvements that can be achieved with progressions of small changes that have every- think still working each step of the way. Combined with the level of expertise required to know what changes are safe and consistent with the architecture of AOO, there is a big challenge for identifying any major moves. It would be great to know what insights there are for cultivating and sustaining the necessary expertise and maybe simplifying the learning curve and entrance requirements. Maybe just keep doing more of what is already being done in this area? Changing a GUI framework as discussed here is a major task - fraught with difficulty and hidden gotchas. It would be better to put the effort going into two areas: bug-fixing - there are many little bugs to be fixed; secondly, improvement in the functionality. Here is not the place to start a debate on what needs to be changed/improved, but we should bear in mind that bells and whistles always attract users. If we let competitive products outdistance us, we lose our share of the user base. What “competitive products” do you mean? LibreOffice? Microsoft Office? Or perhaps you mean Calligra, which actually went through an intense refactoring (successful, too) several years ago. (Calligra is nice, but does not work with Mac OS X very well at all and is not maintained. Plans exist, but I get the feeling it’s like fusion power.) I didn't want to be over specific, but you mention three I had in mind. I tried Caligra about a year ago and it blew up on my test document (an .odt file of a book in progress of some 100K+ words). It has one potential attractive feature for me - Caligra Author - but this seems largely stalled and redirected towards eBooks - I start out with print books and can easily make an eBook using Calibre, so I lost interest. More to the point, and trying to be realistic…. OpenOffice is right now on maintenance mode, as far as I can tell. We will issue a 4.1.2 and probably further micro releases addressing bugs, midges, and gnats. But we’re not slaying dragons nor otherwise attempting ambitious projects. Running on (X)Ubuntu 14.10 OpenOffice is absolutely reliable (in my experience and for my purposes), but there are frequent reported problems on the Forum with Spellcheck (possibly almost always User finger trouble) and with Impress; in both of these cases (in)compatibility with MS file formats comes up regularly (without mentioning any of the .nnnx formats).. And it’s not a matter of bells and whistles—of glitter to appeal to fools who can’t otherwise see the gold. It’s rather matter of creating a product that the millions who are going to be using open source productivity applications can actually use on the platforms and environments they are given or buy. These will continue to be desktops (including laptops) but also mobile devices. That is: the future is not like the past and to pretend it is and will continue to so seems to me problematical. Yet any transition is bound to demand resources we can’t pull out of thin air. Note, this has always been the argument for the status quo here. (It was also coupled to the one you raised, earlier.) This obdurance is one reason I helped establish the new project Corinthia, which is a new thing altogether. But I also still believe that OpenOffice has a future and that investigating ways in which we can make OpenOffice not only easier to work on but to use would serve us—the overall community—well. louis - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Your stand proposal for Apache OpenOffice has been accepted
On 14.01.2015 01:46, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Michael, Mechtilde, what about the quantity? Shall we go for about 500 pins with the plain orb and 500 stickers with the OpenOffice logo and a 15-year statement? What remains unused at FOSDEM could be used for other events. That seems to be proper quantities. Regards Michael signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Your stand proposal for Apache OpenOffice has been accepted
On 14.01.2015 01:46, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Remember that, beyond the basics, we still can consider the extended wishlist This https://www.flickr.com/photos/101590593@N06/16085134929/ is IMO a very proper picture for a poster. Kind regards Michael signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Your stand proposal for Apache OpenOffice has been accepted
V Streda, 14. január 2015 o 09:29 +0100, RA Stehmann napísal(a): On 14.01.2015 01:46, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Michael, Mechtilde, what about the quantity? Shall we go for about 500 pins with the plain orb and 500 stickers with the OpenOffice logo and a 15-year statement? What remains unused at FOSDEM could be used for other events. That seems to be proper quantities. OK, so you 'd like 500 stickers with modified logo a 500 with unmodified, am I right ? I choosed dimensions 8 x 4 cm. Budget is around 80€ including shipping for this 1000 stickers. Go forward ? Mhh, and pin buttons, 0.312 per piece so more than 150€ without shipping. Ideas ? Regards Michael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Nominations for a new PMC Chair
On 14/01/2015 jan i wrote: I decline my nomination for personal reasons and are not voteable. Copy-pasting the same remark I sent on this list about the other four, I respect your choices and your reasons not to run, but I would like to acknowledge you (and all nominees, and a couple more people) as key people to the continued success of the project. And looking at the future: Louis, as the only remaining candidate at this stage, do you confirm you are still a candidate, i.e., that you haven't changed your mind? Sorry for the odd question, but we've seen lots of surprises so far and before checking procedural issues for this unusual one-candidate-only election I prefer to verify that we still have a candidate. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
