incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andre Fischer ...@a-w-f.de>
Subject Re: GPL'd dictionaries (was Re: ftp.services.openoffice.org?)
Date Fri, 25 Nov 2011 14:16:58 GMT
On 25.11.2011 14:59, Mathias Bauer wrote:
> On 25.11.2011 10:38, Andre Fischer wrote:
>> Hi Mathias,
>>
>>
>> On 24.11.2011 18:04, Mathias Bauer wrote:
>>> Just a dumb question: why do we think that the dicts are source code?
>>> At least those without patches are distributed without any treatment.
>>> We just package them. So where is the difference between an MPL
>>> library and an MPL .dic file? Just the extension and the encoding of
>>> its content.
>>
>> When we are just packaging them, then why not just provide the ready
>> made extensions and either bundle them or place them on the extension
>> repository. Which, by the way, already contains more spell-checking
>> extensions than the dictionaries module?
>
> Mainly because we package some content from our side together with the
> dic files. That must be done somewhere, and until now it was desired
> that this "somewhere" is inside the OOo build process.

But what about the extensions in the repository that do not have a 
counterpart in the dictionaries module?  They have to come from 
somewhere, too.  I know, that it is a frequently used pattern in OOo to 
have at least two ways of doing things.  Maybe we can use this occasion 
to remove one?

-Andre

>
> Treating MPL dics as "source files" would require to do the packaging of
> the dictionary extensions elsewhere, in the same way as building the MPL
> binaries must be done elsewhere.
>
> I'm not convinced that this effort is needed, it is possible that we
> don't need to create dic files as "sources" in the same way as e.g. c++
> files. Again, it was just a suggestion, some room for thoughts.
>
> Regards,
> Mathias

Mime
View raw message