openoffice-api mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Hans Zybura" <hzyb...@zybura.com>
Subject RE: Extension - AOO 4.1.1 - MacOS 10.9.4
Date Wed, 10 Sep 2014 14:05:12 GMT
Thanks again. Some more comments below.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ariel Constenla-Haile [mailto:arielch@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 7:05 PM
> To: api@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Extension - AOO 4.1.1 - MacOS 10.9.4
> 
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:44:38AM +0200, Hans Zybura wrote:
> > Thank you, Ariel.
> >
> > meanwhile I've found the problem. We didn't have the new platform
> > token 'macosx_x86_64' in the description.xml of the mac version of our
> extension.
> 
> No, the problem, as stated in the bug, is that the platform in
description.xml
> is broken in MacOSX since 4.1; setting the platform to
> macosx_x86_64 won't work; 

I missed looking up  your link to
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124783

because I thought the information in the DevGuide

https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Extensions/Target_Pl
atform

should and would be valid and exhaustive. Highly important issue 124783 is
not even mentioned there, while a different, but comparatively minor issue
is.

> in fact, setting the platform to anything else
> than "all" will fail.

Oh! Since when is this known? Where else is this important piece of
information available? Issue 124783 only says that token macosx_x86_64  will
cause an error and prevent installation. It does not say that one can't use
any other token than "all". - OK, I see now that it follows logically, but
it's not very obvious, isn't it?

Shouldn't this fact be mentioned very explicitly in the DevGuide? And in the
'Known Issues' part of the Release notes for AOO 4.1 and 4.1.1?

>> Some more questions concerning 64-bit versions/plans:
>> 
> > 1. Is AOO 4.1.1 the first version, where this new token is necessary 
> > on MacOS? Or was it obligatory in 4.1.0 already (and it was by pure 
> > chance that we didn't have any customers complaining)?

> 4.1 is the version where OpenOffice changed from 32 bit to 64 bit in
MacOSX. As said before, the > platform is only necessary if your extension
is not multi-platform.

>> 2. Will there be a 64-bit version of AOO on Windows and a win_x86_64 
>> token anytime soon?

> No.
> 
> But you only need to set the platform in description.xml if your extension
is
> targeted to run on a specific platform. Please read
> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Extensions/Targ
> et_Platform

I had indeed looked into the DevGuide about target platforms, of course.
That is where I found the new token macosx_x86_64 in the first place. If
only there had been a hint to the issue in question!

> > Our extension is written in pure StarBasic and does not contain any
> > direct system calls, so we don't expect any problems by a change to a
64-bit
> AOO.
> 
> No, and you don't need to set the platform if your extension has only
> OOBasic code! 

This is a severe misjudgment - maybe due to a kind of "programming centered"
point of view. Code alone doesn't make a product. There are quite a lot of
other possible reasons to mark and distribute platform specific editions of
an extension  - in spite of full code compatibility. E.g. platform specific
non-code components included with an extension, product security, preventing
customers from installing the wrong thing for their platform, or
considerations concerning marketing and distribution, to name a few.

Regards, Hans Zybura


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: api-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: api-help@openoffice.apache.org


Mime
View raw message