Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 09:30:14PM +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote: > Currently the new layout is off by default and can be enabled at runtime > by setting SAL_USE_COMMON_LAYOUT env variable. After merging with > master, I’m going to wait a week or so for any potential build issues > then swap the

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

ent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 2:13 PM To: slacka Cc: libreoffice-dev Subject: Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch Had we already dropped support for XP, it would have been an embarrassing demonstration and reflected badly on us. The only ones that should be embarrassed are tho

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

> The point is there are a lot of people out there for whatever reason still > us XP. Despite what you keep suggesting, dropping XP won’t do anything to > change them. > Dropping XP support in future LO versions won't do anything to existing LO versions that will continue to work nicely for them.

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

, dropping XP won’t do anything to change them. From: tlillqv...@gmail.com <tlillqv...@gmail.com> on behalf of Tor Lillqvist <t...@iki.fi> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 2:13 PM To: slacka Cc: libreoffice-dev Subject: Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch   Ha

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

> Had we already dropped support for XP, it would have been an embarrassing > demonstration and reflected badly on us. > The only ones that should be embarrassed are those still running XP. Also, who are these "us" you are speaking for? --tml ___

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

-feature-commonsallayout-branch-tp4197400p4198948.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

Hi, On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 04:01:22AM +0400, Yousuf Philips wrote: > You know the saying, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", and most people dont > consider XP broke (me included) even if MS isnt officially supporting it. Its not broke -- it simply doesnt exist anymore. That is what "end of

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

On 10/20/2016 11:07 AM, Tor Lillqvist wrote: Is there any reason to believe that those clueless people who hold on to it will change their mind in any significant number by the time LO 5.4 comes out? Or LO 5.5? They will hold on to it as long as the machine keeps working. You know the saying,

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

On 20/10/16 05:14, Yousuf Philips wrote: > On 10/20/2016 02:34 AM, Khaled Hosny wrote: >> So that is not as bad as I thought it would be. We can have a runtime >> check for 5.3 that forces disable CommonSalLayout for Windows XP. We can >> then communicate in advance that we are dropping Windows XP

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 09:30:14PM +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote: > - We use a bit of DirectWrite to load fonts on Windows, so Windows XP is > not supported as well. Again it can be fixed with some effort, but I > don’t think anyone will miss XP. Ideally we should do a full switch to >

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 06:40:08AM -0700, V Stuart Foote wrote: > On Windows 8.1 & 10 builds (32-bit master TB62) and the Alpha1 build, > HARFBUZZ unified text is having some issues with OpenGL rendering. With > default GPU rendering it is doing pretty well. > > See tdf#103365 - Text isn't

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

t;https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103365> -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Merging-feature-commonsallayout-branch-tp4197400p4197843.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice ma

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

> You know the saying, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", and most people > dont consider XP broke (me included) By the same token, they should then also consider LibreOffice 5.2 not broken, and hold on to that. --tml ___ LibreOffice mailing list

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

Hi *, On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Jan Iversen wrote: > > I would like to support tml in this view. > > If 5.3 happened to run in XP without additional code, no harm done in > supporting XP. > > But we need to (unless I misunderstood things) add a setup variable

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

> On 20 Oct 2016, at 09:07, Tor Lillqvist wrote: > > > I'd say just do it and drop XP support. LO <= 5.2 will keep working for them > just fine. I would like to support tml in this view. If 5.3 happened to run in XP without additional code, no harm done in supporting XP. But

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

> As XP still has between 6 and 9% of desktop market share, Is there any reason to believe that those clueless people who hold on to it will change their mind in any significant number by the time LO 5.4 comes out? Or LO 5.5? They will hold on to it as long as the machine keeps working. I'd say

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

On 10/20/2016 02:34 AM, Khaled Hosny wrote: So that is not as bad as I thought it would be. We can have a runtime check for 5.3 that forces disable CommonSalLayout for Windows XP. We can then communicate in advance that we are dropping Windows XP support in 5.4 (since we will remove the old code

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 03:11:25PM -0700, yphilips wrote: > So cloph asked in QA about testing SAL_USE_COMMON_LAYOUT on windows XP and i > did and it crashed on startup, so unless we want to alienate XP users from > running 5.3, we'd likely need to put in a flag to disable it for XP. So that is

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

> unless we want to alienate XP users from > running 5.3, What would be so wrong in that? --tml ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

/Merging-feature-commonsallayout-branch-tp4197400p4197639.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

On 2016-10-18 18:36, Khaled Hosny wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 09:06:42AM +0200, Milos Sramek wrote: >> Dear Khaled, >> >> do you think that extensive comparison of rendering of numerous >> documents with and without the new layout engine makes sense? >> If yes, I can run my tests in such a

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

Dear Khaled, do you think that extensive comparison of rendering of numerous documents with and without the new layout engine makes sense? If yes, I can run my tests in such a way to see if there are any differences. My test documents use latin script except for a few ones in Chinese. So, if you

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

Congratulations when this gets merged! It's a big chunk of work. One question is on my mind that I was meaning to ask before: Is issue tdf#66819 "Setting additional spacing between characters does not prevent automatic ligature substitution." solved in this branch? Greetings, Stephan

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 09:30:14PM +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote: > I believe that feature/commonsallayout (AKA unified text layout) is now > feature complete with no known major bugs, and should be ready to be > merged on master. I’ll try merge it tomorrow night and hope for the > best, unless

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:05:14PM +0200, 'Christian Lohmaier' via Khaled Hosny wrote: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote: > > I believe that feature/commonsallayout (AKA unified text layout) is now > > feature complete with no known major bugs, and

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 09:06:42AM +0200, Milos Sramek wrote: > Dear Khaled, > > do you think that extensive comparison of rendering of numerous > documents with and without the new layout engine makes sense? > If yes, I can run my tests in such a way to see if there are any > differences. This

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote: > I believe that feature/commonsallayout (AKA unified text layout) is now > feature complete with no known major bugs, and should be ready to be > merged on master. I’ll try merge it tomorrow night and hope for the >

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

Not directly, but you can now control OpenType features using the same syntax used for OpenType features. It should be easy to turn of ligatures in VCL when characters spacing is used, except that character spacing is not applied by VCL but by the client and we have no clue about it at all. I

Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

I believe that feature/commonsallayout (AKA unified text layout) is now feature complete with no known major bugs, and should be ready to be merged on master. I’ll try merge it tomorrow night and hope for the best, unless someone objects loudly. Currently the new layout is off by default and can