openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Kovacs <>
Subject Re: [discussion] refactoring OpenOffice
Date Sun, 03 Mar 2019 18:12:34 GMT
Hello Jim,

I agree we should move together, that's why I started the conversation.
However I think we should not only focus on 4.2.0.  I think we should
not only work on STL transformation, and we should not only do the gmake
transformation. All three topics are quite concrete and important
efforts. And they are good steps. But I think we should also address the

The Software Architecture is something you will not see when you look at
one file or issue. The Architecture we have is responsible for the
fragile build system we have. It is also responsible that a lot of
Issues are hard to be fixed. But IMHO unless we start talking about it,
we will not get down to the root cause of it. And I say talking not
doing. This discussion is only to set up a process to think together on
architecture and create a plan.

I think this would also help coders, who are not that firm with our
code, but want to help on creating a fix. See we have per month round
about 1 person who shows up to do something. And we have maybe every
three of those is a coder. So far we could not bring anyone on board.
They leave because it is very hard to create a deliverable. The most
promising has been George with the MSVC update, but I am not hearing
from him.

So related to the STL Conversations. I would also only note the spots,
maybe goals and then find someone who will try it. Maybe this is a fail
tactics, but we need to grow. And my ressource is quite over stretched,
because I myself looking for pathes into OpenOffice.

I hope I made my point somehow.

On 02.03.19 16:16, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> FWIW, I agree. We've already seen how simple, obvious changes have a nasty ripple effect.
Having a major restructure "now" would, from what I can see, have a major impact on us being
able to release 4.2.0 in anything close to "soon"...
> I also have issues w/ fixing/restructuring things that work... dmake is weird, but it
does seem to work, and unless we can completely rework the entire build system, I'd prefer
to see us work on closing bugs and making releases and port to gbuild those parts that must
be updated.
> Of course, this is a volunteer project and no one can, or should, force someone to work
on stuff they don't want to or prevent someone from scratching an itch. I'd just like the
project to be working together with a more unified vision...
>> On Mar 1, 2019, at 10:31 PM, Patricia Shanahan <> wrote:
>> The OpenOffice build system is both complicated and fragile. If you do move things
around, you MUST test the ability to build and install for each supported OS.
>> To me, this change seems high risk for low benefit. I would far rather see any available
cycles put into replacing ad-hoc data structures with STL structures.
>> On 3/1/2019 11:05 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>> Hello all,
>>> I am really annoyed by the Code. I see repentance and to me a code
>>> concept is totally lacking.
>>> What I would like to do is a general cleanup / refactoring pass.
>>> I would like to start with similar features and move them together in
>>> the same module, maybe even merge them.
>>> As a process I suggest I post a mail with [refactor] in the subject. The
>>> Mail will contain what will be moved merged, I collect all references in
>>> the mail.
>>> If there is no objection within 3+ days I conduct the move. (+ because I
>>> need to find time to move and test the change.)
>>> Is this a process feasible?
>>> All the Best
>>> Peter
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message