Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-11-02 Thread Khaled Hosny
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 default.

The new layout engine is the default now and can be disabled at runtime
by setting SAL_NO_COMMON_LAYOUT (notice the NO) env variable.
 
Regards,
Khaled
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-11-02 Thread Kaganski Mike
Hi Luke,

11/2/2016 3:54 AM, Luke Benes пишет:

Us, as in the LibreOffice, the software many of us volunteer to make as good as 
possible for everyone to enjoy.

Should the Chinese IT manager be embarrassed? Maybe, but coming from a First 
World nation, it’s hard for me to imaging supporting my family on $800/month, 
but at least I try to understand. Should my grandfather at almost 80 now be 
embarrassed? I don’t think so. Maybe I should have tried harder. I know he 
doesn’t use his Chromebook and never boots to Lubuntu.

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.



From: tlillqv...@gmail.com<mailto:tlillqv...@gmail.com> 
<tlillqv...@gmail.com><mailto:tlillqv...@gmail.com> on behalf of Tor Lillqvist 
<t...@iki.fi><mailto:t...@iki.fi>
Sent: 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 those still running XP. Also, who 
are these "us" you are speaking for? --tml

While I agree that no one is to judge if those who are still running XP should 
be embarrassed or not, this specific consideration doesn't matter here.

Those who chose to stay with XP chose the software branch that isn't updated 
anymore. They made their choice between fixed set of functionality that is put 
into XP and evolving set of functionality that is being expanded in later 
versions. OS being platform, this choice inherently included also choosing to 
stay with software that supports that OS. And by making that decision, you 
imply that they suddenly put extra burden on "us" those who volunteer to put 
their effort into writing LO? Just by deciding to stay with aging OS, without 
any donation to this community or someone in person, someone magically creates 
an obligation on "us" and makes it twice as difficult for someone other to 
support and develop their software?

Instead, I see it another way: they had already made a choice to stay with one 
stalled branch (XP); they also chose to stay with another (their version of 
MSO); it's just natural that they can make the same decision about yet another 
software: say v.5.2 of LO. It does support XP, and is open and free as always; 
no one ever takes the right to use that from them.

--
Best regards,
Mike Kaganski
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-11-02 Thread Tor Lillqvist
> 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.

--tml
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-11-01 Thread Luke Benes
Us, as in the LibreOffice, the software many of us volunteer to make as good as 
possible for everyone to enjoy. 

Should the Chinese IT manager be embarrassed? Maybe, but coming from a First 
World nation, it’s hard for me to imaging supporting my family on $800/month, 
but at least I try to understand. Should my grandfather at almost 80 now be 
embarrassed? I don’t think so. Maybe I should have tried harder. I know he 
doesn’t use his Chromebook and never boots to Lubuntu. 

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. 







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
  




 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

 
 
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-11-01 Thread Tor Lillqvist
> 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
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-11-01 Thread slacka
I just came back from a trip to China and found many machines there still
running XP with old versions of MS Office. I used the opportunity to
introduce several people there, including one IT manager, to LibreOffice.
Had we already dropped support for XP, it would have been an embarrassing
demonstration and reflected badly on us.  

Dropping support for XP isn't going to push anyone into upgrading there OS.
It will however prevent new users from discovering us, especially in markets
like China and India. 




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Merging-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

2016-10-27 Thread Bjoern Michaelsen
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 life"
(aka death) means.

> On the other hand, you still have governments paying
> microsoft to still support it XP, so XP isnt going away anytime soon.

You are refered to folks doing L3 support for LibreOffice with that -- as this
is a promise that is entirely unreasonable to ask of this community. And with
that this also ends the topic for this list.

_Iff_ you throw huge amounts of money at a L3 supporter and have bought support
from Microsoft[1] for the OS you want to base on, you might get lucky there.
But as said that is not an issue for this list. The topic has been discussed
conclusively on the ESC before and there are no new facts to waste its time on 
this
again.

Best,

Bjoern



[1] Because while asking for support of newer LibreOffice versions on Windows
XP is already a painful thought, doing the same on Windows XP without having
support for _that_ is even more nonsense.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-27 Thread Yousuf Philips

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, "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. XP is a lighter weight OS, so many people wont upgrade 
because their hardware cant handle it. On the other hand, you still have 
governments paying microsoft to still support it XP, so XP isnt going 
away anytime soon.


http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/london-metropolitan-police-windows-xp-updates/
http://bgr.com/2015/06/24/windows-xp-support-us-navy-millions/

There are a number of Mac users who arent above OS X 10.8 for various 
reasons, but as LO's Mac user base isnt as large as Windows, dropping 
the support there in favour of a better toolchain and functionality does 
make sense.



But yeah, I know, the hardest thing in the FLOSS world is taking
decisions that might annoy somebody.


Users will always be annoyed with things changing, even if it is for the 
better.



--tml


Yousuf
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-24 Thread Wols Lists
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 support in
>> 5.4 (since we will remove the old code by then).
>>
>> WDYT?
> 
> As XP still has between 6 and 9% of desktop market share, which is
> around the same amount of Windows 8/8.1 and Mac OS X, it is in the top 5
> desktop OSes and i wouldnt recommend alienating them any time soon.
> 
> https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10=0
> 
> 
> http://gs.statcounter.com/#desktop-os-ww-monthly-201607-201607-bar
> 
> It would be useful to use the update ping stats to know what percentage
> of our user base are still on XP and if it isnt as high as the above
> stats perceive it to be, then it is worth dropping it sooner.
> 
Well, I'll bite. I still rely on XP. And upgrading is not really on the
cards - I've tried and everything keeps falling apart around me.

Two problems - I no longer have access to Windows keys, so I can't
upgrade my VMs, and anyway as of Windows 7, you can't point your home
directories at a linux share :-(

My XP setup has "My Documents" and "My Pictures" pointing at ~/Documents
and ~/Pictures. With the introduction of libraries in 7, that cannot be
done any more. (The recommended solution - "cache the remote server
locally", isn't really a solution, especially when the remote server is
storing a couple of terabytes ...)

And unfortunately, my wife now has memory issues, so trying to get her
to learn something new and move off of XP is NOT an easy job :-(

Yes I do understand that we can't keep supporting ancient technology,
and MS do like to keep changing things :-( but that's exactly what makes
life very difficult for my wife - and, indeed, many older people...

Cheers,
Wol

___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-22 Thread Khaled Hosny
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
>   DirectWrite and modernise our Windows font rendering, but that is
>   another story.

I did some cleanup to the Windows part of the code while working on
other Windows issue, and after [1] the font loading code does not use
DurectWrite anymore. So it should theoretically work on Windows XP now,
untested of course.

1. 
https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/gitweb?p=core.git;a=commitdiff;h=2148c853b0d0deea92b97a810950f4d9f0cbb152
 
Regards,
Khaled
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-21 Thread Khaled Hosny
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 showing in the new commonsallayout if OpenGL is
> on   

https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/30123/

Regards,
Khaled
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-21 Thread V Stuart Foote
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 showing in the new commonsallayout if OpenGL is
on <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 mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-21 Thread Tor Lillqvist
> 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
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-20 Thread Christian Lohmaier
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 as well
> as extra code (however little amount), and that is the limit for me.

Nah, other way round, until now that new feature has to be enabled
with the environment variable (and maybe will be switched to default
un upcoming builds leading to 5.3.0

So I think removing the old layouting code for 5.3.0 is out of the
question, so the old layouting code will be available anyway, so all
that's needed for 5.3 is to always use the old way and not harfbuzz.

> Let the 5.2 line be the last supported on windows XP.

I did understand Khaled's post as the old codepath would be nuked for
5.4, then there would be no way to run it anymore and killed off for
good.

I mean the new layouting code has not undergone widespread testing, so
it really doesn't make sense nuking the existing one for 5.3.0
already, while it has issues, at least those are known already. And
I'd like to wait for first alpha testing results with manually
enabling the switch (and comparing the results) before having it
turned on by default for the beta..

So 5.4 will definitely not run on Win XP anymore, and 5.3.x could, as
long as you don't force it to the new layouting code.

ciao
Christian
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-20 Thread Jan Iversen

> 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 we need to (unless I misunderstood things) add a setup variable as well as 
extra code (however little amount), and that is the limit for me.

XP still runs a lot of products, but most products run in old versions, so to 
me easy decision.

Let the 5.2 line be the last supported on windows XP.

rgds
jan I.


___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-20 Thread Tor Lillqvist
> 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 just do it and drop XP support. LO <= 5.2 will keep working for
them just fine.

But yeah, I know, the hardest thing in the FLOSS world is taking decisions
that might annoy somebody.

--tml
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-19 Thread Yousuf Philips

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 by then).

WDYT?


As XP still has between 6 and 9% of desktop market share, which is 
around the same amount of Windows 8/8.1 and Mac OS X, it is in the top 5 
desktop OSes and i wouldnt recommend alienating them any time soon.


https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10=0

http://gs.statcounter.com/#desktop-os-ww-monthly-201607-201607-bar

It would be useful to use the update ping stats to know what percentage 
of our user base are still on XP and if it isnt as high as the above 
stats perceive it to be, then it is worth dropping it sooner.



Regards,
Khaled


Yousuf
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-19 Thread Khaled Hosny
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 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 by then).

WDYT?

Regards,
Khaled
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-19 Thread Tor Lillqvist
> 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

2016-10-19 Thread yphilips
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.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/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

2016-10-19 Thread Milos Sramek
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 way to see if there are any
>> differences.
> This would be extremely helpful, and more so if it can run on Windows or
> Mac.
I can run the tests on Linux and Windows. I do not have Mac, but I think
that there should not be a problem with that.
On windows or mac one just converts/prints files by means of a script -
they are then compared on a system with running Python - in my case a
Linux machine.

I run Windows in a virtual machine, which has access to the directory,
where all data and scripts reside. So I even do not have to copy files.

I've checked the web and see that it is possible to install MAC on
virtual box:
https://techsviewer.com/how-to-install-mac-os-x-el-capitan-on-pc-on-virtualbox/
I'll try it

best
milos


>
>> My test documents use latin script except for a few ones in Chinese. So,
>> if you happen to have sume documents in Arabic I can add them to my test
>> set.
> I’ve a random collection of documents somewhere, I’ll clean it up and
> send it to you.
>
> Regards,
> Khaled
>
>
> ___
> LibreOffice mailing list
> LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


-- 
email & jabber: sramek.mi...@gmail.com

___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-18 Thread Milos Sramek
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 happen to have sume documents in Arabic I can add them to my test
set.

best
Milos



On 2016-10-17 21:30, 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 someone objects loudly.
>
> 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 default.
>
> There are too main issues with the new code:
> - Type 1 fonts are not supported. They can be supported with some
>   effort, but Type 1 fonts have been obsolete for more than 15 years and
>   I’d like to use this opportunity to drop support for them and cleanup
>   some of the ugly code we have.
> - 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
>   DirectWrite and modernise our Windows font rendering, but that is
>   another story.
>
> Regards,
> Khaled
> ___
> LibreOffice mailing list
> LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


-- 
Milos Sramek, msrame...@gmail.com




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-18 Thread Stephan van den Akker
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

2016-10-17 21:30 GMT+02:00 Khaled Hosny :
> 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 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 default.
>
> There are too main issues with the new code:
> - Type 1 fonts are not supported. They can be supported with some
>   effort, but Type 1 fonts have been obsolete for more than 15 years and
>   I’d like to use this opportunity to drop support for them and cleanup
>   some of the ugly code we have.
> - 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
>   DirectWrite and modernise our Windows font rendering, but that is
>   another story.
>
> Regards,
> Khaled
> ___
> LibreOffice mailing list
> LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-18 Thread Khaled Hosny
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 someone objects loudly.

I just pushed the code into master, here is the summary of changes:

 RepositoryExternal.mk   |  20 +--
 config_host.mk.in   |   1 -
 configure.ac|  47 +++---
 external/harfbuzz/ExternalProject_harfbuzz.mk   |   5 +
 vcl/CppunitTest_vcl_wmf_test.mk |   5 +-
 vcl/Library_vcl.mk  |   6 +-
 vcl/README.vars |   1 +
 vcl/headless/svptext.cxx|  10 +-
 vcl/inc/CommonSalLayout.hxx |  82 +++
 vcl/inc/headless/svpgdi.hxx |   3 +-
 vcl/{ => inc}/quartz/ctfonts.hxx|   6 +-
 vcl/inc/quartz/salgdi.h |  18 ++-
 vcl/inc/salgdi.hxx  |   6 +-
 vcl/inc/sallayout.hxx   |   6 +-
 vcl/{unx/generic/glyphs => inc}/scrptrun.h  |   4 +-
 vcl/inc/textrender.hxx  |   3 +-
 vcl/inc/unx/cairotextrender.hxx |   2 +-
 vcl/inc/unx/genpspgraphics.h|   4 +-
 vcl/inc/unx/glyphcache.hxx  |   4 +
 vcl/inc/unx/salgdi.h|   3 +-
 vcl/inc/win/salgdi.h|  11 +-
 vcl/{win/gdi => inc/win}/winlayout.hxx  | 283 
+++-
 vcl/quartz/ctfonts.cxx  |   6 +-
 vcl/quartz/ctlayout.cxx |   2 +-
 vcl/quartz/salgdi.cxx   | 212 
+++
 vcl/source/gdi/CommonSalLayout.cxx  | 784 
++
 vcl/source/gdi/sallayout.cxx|   6 +
 vcl/{unx/generic/glyphs => source/gdi}/scrptrun.cxx |   0
 vcl/unx/generic/gdi/cairotextrender.cxx |  28 +++-
 vcl/unx/generic/gdi/font.cxx|  10 +-
 vcl/unx/generic/glyphs/freetype_glyphcache.cxx  |   6 +-
 vcl/unx/generic/glyphs/gcach_layout.cxx |   3 +-
 vcl/unx/generic/print/genpspgraphics.cxx|   2 +-
 vcl/win/gdi/salfont.cxx |  29 +++-
 vcl/win/gdi/winlayout.cxx   | 429 
+-
 35 files changed, 1606 insertions(+), 441 deletions(-)

Regards,
Khaled
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-18 Thread Khaled Hosny
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 should be ready to be
> > merged on master. I’ll try merge it tomorrow night and hope for the
> > best, unless someone objects loudly.
> 
> Not sure whether the wording is to be taken literally or not.. But I'd
> brefer a non-merge way to add it..
> (aka rebase on top of mater rather than doing a merge)

Sure.

> > There are too main issues with the new code:
> > - Type 1 fonts are not supported. They can be supported with some
> >   effort, but Type 1 fonts have been obsolete for more than 15 years and
> >   I’d like to use this opportunity to drop support for them and cleanup
> >   some of the ugly code we have.
> 
> This is something that should be communitated clearly to QA and
> Marketing projects so they're aware as well..

I’m not very familiar with this, so let me know if there is anything
else I need to.

> > - We use a bit of DirectWrite to load fonts on Windows, so Windows XP is
> >   not supported as well.
> 
> Do you mean just with the new rendering (that could be toggled with
> the env-var), or not supported at all anymore?

I’m not very familiar with how things work on Windows, but we use
DirectWrite library which is available on Vista and higher, and that
code is built unconditional. My understanding is that is means the code
worn’t built on XP, and binaries built on other versions won’t run on it
as well.

Regards,
Khaled
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-18 Thread Khaled Hosny
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 would be extremely helpful, and more so if it can run on Windows or
Mac.

> My test documents use latin script except for a few ones in Chinese. So,
> if you happen to have sume documents in Arabic I can add them to my test
> set.

I’ve a random collection of documents somewhere, I’ll clean it up and
send it to you.

Regards,
Khaled


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-18 Thread Christian Lohmaier
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
> best, unless someone objects loudly.

Not sure whether the wording is to be taken literally or not.. But I'd
brefer a non-merge way to add it..
(aka rebase on top of mater rather than doing a merge)

> There are too main issues with the new code:
> - Type 1 fonts are not supported. They can be supported with some
>   effort, but Type 1 fonts have been obsolete for more than 15 years and
>   I’d like to use this opportunity to drop support for them and cleanup
>   some of the ugly code we have.

This is something that should be communitated clearly to QA and
Marketing projects so they're aware as well..

> - We use a bit of DirectWrite to load fonts on Windows, so Windows XP is
>   not supported as well.

Do you mean just with the new rendering (that could be toggled with
the env-var), or not supported at all anymore?

ciao
Christian
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-17 Thread Khaled Hosny
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 tried fixing this before,
but I couldn’t even figure out where character spacing is stored or when
it is applied.

Regards,
Khaled

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 09:47:12PM +0200, Stephan van den Akker wrote:
> 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
> 
> 2016-10-17 21:30 GMT+02:00 Khaled Hosny :
> > 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 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 default.
> >
> > There are too main issues with the new code:
> > - Type 1 fonts are not supported. They can be supported with some
> >   effort, but Type 1 fonts have been obsolete for more than 15 years and
> >   I’d like to use this opportunity to drop support for them and cleanup
> >   some of the ugly code we have.
> > - 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
> >   DirectWrite and modernise our Windows font rendering, but that is
> >   another story.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Khaled
> > ___
> > LibreOffice mailing list
> > LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

2016-10-17 Thread Khaled Hosny
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 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 default.

There are too main issues with the new code:
- Type 1 fonts are not supported. They can be supported with some
  effort, but Type 1 fonts have been obsolete for more than 15 years and
  I’d like to use this opportunity to drop support for them and cleanup
  some of the ugly code we have.
- 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
  DirectWrite and modernise our Windows font rendering, but that is
  another story.

Regards,
Khaled
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice