openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jürgen Schmidt <>
Subject Re: Report Builder extension (was Re: [proposal] development for the first AOO release)
Date Fri, 11 Nov 2011 07:50:47 GMT
On 11/10/11 5:00 PM, Alexander Thurgood wrote:
> Le 10/11/11 16:16, Pedro Giffuni a écrit :
> Hi Pedro, Ariel,
> Oh I understand perfectly well why it is being done in this way, I make
> my living out of intellectual property so I would be the first one to
> say "IP clearance takes precedence" in line with the rules that Apache has.
> I also understand that it could still continue to be built separately,
> for those who have the time, energy and will to correct the inevitable
> bitrot build errors that will creep in over time because code has
> changed elsewhere, but no one thought to bother about adapting those
> code changes to keep this module buildable. In other words, it will
> become harder to build and maintain over time because it has been dropped.
> Nonetheless, even if one looks on the optimistic side, there still
> remain a few questions :
> (1) who in all honesty will do it ?
>   - if any of the Linux distribs are interested, they will package it
> with their own build of AOOo (assuming that some of them switch from
> LibreOffice to AOOo or just continue to provide both)

it always a question of who will do it. That's open source, if somebody 
feels it is important, takes the responsibility for it and just do it 
then it's fine for all if the work is contributed back. But you need 
always somebody who take care of it.

Wishes alone doesn't help here. And more general especially companies 
who simply use open source software and never contribute anything back 
should think about it.

> - what about distrib independent versions - obviously, there will be
> none from within AOOo itself, since it can not, so quo vadis ?
are you sure? Everybody can take the Apache source code and can provide 
a binary and can bundle some further stuff with this package and call it 
"MyPersonalRequirementsSatisfying Office". I think that is perfectly 
fine as long as the bugs for the additional code are filtered correctly.

I am sure we will see a binary version of a pure Apache OpenOffice and 
this will grow over time and will contain useful features that are more 
important or more useful for many users than for example a lost filter 
because of the license. And even dropped features can be put back if 
somebody takes care of it and provide it as an extension. But again it's 
always the same somebody have to take care of it.

> - what about Mac ?
> - what about Windows ?
mmh, i think that is on the plan. On Windows are probably more than 80% 
of our users.

> I think that realistically, resources are spread too thinly on the
> ground for this to happen at present.
help is always welcome

> (2) what kind of message does this convey to Joe Public ?
> - AOOo (aka OOo) is destined only for those who know how to build and code ?
no, but we have to do some work at the beginning and the plan is to 
provide replacements for all critical temporary dropped features.

> Somehow, I don't think that you'll hit your target audience with such an
> approach - a binary version that misses bits of what has become
> essential functionality for many will not sway people to switch from OOo
> to AOOo - in fact, it might well even make them switch to competing
> products.
i agree in some points but as i mentioned earlier our goal is to replace 
all important missing pieces over time. Most of the temporary dropped 
features are probably not important for many people. But sure some users 
will miss something.


> Perhaps someone will find a way of furthering the development of the
> original report designer instead, because that at least does form part
> of the SGA (it was already in the initial release of the OOo code all
> those years ago). I hope so, I really do.
> Alex

View raw message