openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jürgen Schmidt <>
Subject Re: questions about Base---do we need an embedded DB?
Date Tue, 26 Mar 2013 16:59:29 GMT
On 3/26/13 5:34 PM, Alexandro Colorado wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Jürgen Schmidt <>wrote:
>> On 3/26/13 3:35 PM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Rob Weir <> wrote:
>>>> My ordered preference would be 1, 3
>>> yeah, great *sarcasm*, let's add another bullet point to a microsoft
>>> presentation titled 'how Microsoft Office is better than
>>>".... OO.o lacks database? check!"
>> I don't see any sarcasm here but a valid order to address this problem.
>> Do we really want compete with MS? Or do we want provide an open source
>> and open standard based office productivity suite that can do most of
>> the daily tasks of common users of such an office suite? I personally
>> think we want the second and want help people who are open minded to
>> solve their problems first and want to save money for other things.
> I am amazed how you select your own questions and then answer them as if we
> have to choose one or the other. I think we want to compete with microsoft,
> we have done it for years. I dont think we want to stop competing with
> microsoft. That's why many users ask about us developing a mobile/cloud
> offering. Because they want to see a strong open source competition to the
> office suite.

Well my main point is to lower the expectation and focus on what is
possible. Sure everybody wants a free alternative to MS and we have
shown that we can be a good alternative and can compete in certain areas.

If you go to somebody and say hey use OpenOffice it is a replacement for
MS Office but for free. The expectation is high. But if you ask first
what do you have to do with an office suite and have you tried
OpenOffice? It can probably do what you need and it is an open source
and open standard based office suite where you don't have to pay any
license fee. ...

We will of course compete indirectly but I would set the expectation

> If we wanted the second, then Calligra would be by far more advanced to us,
> since they have a more developed suite with many more components that what
> we currently ship. Kexi is by far more developed than Base, and is somewhat
> more flexible than Base using SQLite as the embeded DB and MySQL as part of
> the QtDB module. Let alone other modules like Kivio (which users have also
> asked for a Visio-like module).

I don't get your point here. I don't know Calligra in detail but know
that it works well for certain users to fulfill their tasks. Perfect
they are happy with it and that's fine.

I am open to support anybody who is interested to work on a new
application or whatever feature is wanted and where we see demand.

But all this discussion come back to the question who will do the work?

Drawing big pictures of what we need is easy but not enough.


>> If MS is better in certain areas users have to ask if they need it and
>> if they depend on the feature. In case of companies it always possible
>> to have a mixed deployment of 95% OpenOffice and 5% percent MS Office or
>> something like that.
>> We are a very good and high quality alternative but not always a 1:1
>> replacement. It really depends what you have to do. I personally can
>> live perfectly with OpenOffice.
>>> My opinion is that maybe Sun put HSQLDB in there to fill in the need for
>> a
>>> resident database engine, which in the commercial offering (StarOffice)
>> was
>>> filled by Adabas D.
>>> One can still read the positive reviews of StarOffice where the database
>>> module is praised:
>>> ////
>>> * StarOffice Adabas (database application) is included (getting MS Access
>>> requires buying MS Office Pro) and is easier to use than MS Access.
>> Adabas
>>> integrates with other StarOffice apps so, for instance, users can easily
>>> create mail merge documents.
>>> ///
>>> So, if HSQLDB is not up to par, maybe the realistic solution is to find a
>>> database engine lightweight and powerful enough to take the role that
>>> Adabas D had in StarOffice?.
> I would think SQLite is powerful enough to handle this job, however I am
> not sure how license compatible is o if it gets the same treatment as
> python and other components shipped with the suite.
>>> FC
>>> PS: I read this whole thread as 'we don't want to maintain this code,
>> since
>>> we don't understand it, and we fear it's buggy'. But the solution in any
>>> case is replacing the database module for another, or improving the
>>> existing code, not making excuses for saying 'people don't use databases
>>> after all so it should be gone'.
> Actually spreadsheets shouldnt be used as database, so there is a strong
> need to easily migrate those huge spreadsheets into a database format that
> makes it more reliable. It has got so bad that MS decided to create a SQL
> language within Excel called DAO.
> It bares the question if Base should change to have a more spreadsheet
> centric aproach, meaning that we should include formulas into Base.
>> nobody said we don't want, the key point that nobody worked on it,
>> nobody maintains it, does improvements etc. We see of course demand for
>> it but on the other hand we also see that it makes only sense with some
>> degree of quality. Everything else can be more damaging for the project
>> at all.
>> I think it is not so hard to understand that a project driven by
>> volunteers need volunteers for the certain areas or code get
>> unmaintained, unstable, buggy over time or lacks for certain features
>> and improvements ...
>> Juergen
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message