Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <4F9C4DE6.70109@apache.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2012 15:07:02 -0500
From: Pedro Giffuni <pfg@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64;
 rv:10.0.3) Gecko/20120328 Thunderbird/10.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: After AOO 3.4?
References: 
 <CAP-ksoiC9fti6TQsymksTcveS+L8VrZsujbdkCArBC+5gNuWfQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAP-ksoiC9fti6TQsymksTcveS+L8VrZsujbdkCArBC+5gNuWfQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello;

On 04/28/12 11:32, Rob Weir wrote:
> I'm already starting to get questions on what we'll be doing after AOO
> 3.4 is released.  Based on previous conversations on this list, I'm
> able to speak confidently about a few things:
>
> 1) We'll probably graduate to a Top Level Project
>
> 2) IBM says they will contribute Symphony source code after 3.4 is released
>
> 3) We have some initial feature ideas for AOO 4.0 on the wiki:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning
>
> 4) We also have some ideas listed for an AOO 4.1:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1+Feature+Planning
>
> Beyond that, do we have anything to say?

Well, we have to integrate some CWSs. I am interested in gnumake4
since it might help clean some issues in the BSD port. For the rest
I am not sure what is there or how stable it is so I would guess
we should tackle them slowly and leave most of them for "later".

We also have to update some components. Anything with an Apache
tag on it, like Apache Commons or Apache Lucene comes first
because working with other Apache projects is key for our
graduation. Some other components are important but involve a lot
of hard work: It would be really great if someone from ICU would
give a hand too.

The clang port is also rather important and would help the MacOSX
support.

Finally, I think we should continue cleaning/replacing some Category-B
software. For example, carrying an outdated version of Mozilla SeaMonkey
just for addressbook support, is a nonsense.

All in all, I think we should focus on stability and not on features.

Just my $0.02.

Pedro.