incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shenfeng Liu <>
Subject Re: Next steps for Symphony and AOO
Date Thu, 12 Jul 2012 07:03:06 GMT
  Thanks for your comments!
  Please see my comments below.

- Simon

2012/7/12 Andrea Pescetti <>

> On 05/07/2012 Shenfeng Liu wrote:
>> While per my reading from the discussion, we generally agreed that the
>> favorite way of integrating the values is to continuously merging Symphony
>> into AOO, feature by feature. ...
>> I also noticed that this thread is no longer as active as 2 weeks before.
>> So I suggest we close this topic
> Well, it is still a very big issue. People who have seen the
> Symphony-OpenOffice builds (those made available shortly after the code was
> granted) were really impressed in general, and have some reasonable
> expectations to see the OpenOffice interface evolve in that direction soon.
> What hasn't been discussed in detail, and the key issue to me, is how much
> "OpenOffice plus Symphony" would differ from "Symphony plus OpenOffice".

Ideally, finally there will be little difference between "OpenOffice plus
Symphony"and "Symphony plus OpenOffice" when we totally integrated the
values from both side. But I can see in 2 years or even longer time, we can
not make it. So there will be quite big differences.

For the unique value in Symphony code base, you can refer to the wiki with
brief introduction:
While for the unique value in current AOO code base, unfortunately I do not
have a completed list. I can list some of what I know below, people may add

 - Renaissance
 - Print interface
 - Extension API enhancement
 - Some Chart enhancement
 - Quick save in Calc editor
 - Some Calc usability improvements
 - Presentation auto-layout
 - Presentation Comments
 - Some fidelity improvements
 - Some infrastructure refactor works
 - ...

If we choose "Symphony plus OpenOffice", during our migration period, the
existing OpenOffice users certainly will feel the regression.

> The mission of this project is to produce an excellent free software
> office suite. The faster we can improve, the better. If rebasing on
> Symphony is just a technicality and will bring the same (or very similar)
> results of gradually merging Symphony into OpenOffice, then I wouldn't see
> any problems in going this way.
> Actually, there is one problem: this choice could make life harder for
> downstream products. Offering a basis for others to build upon is an
> extremely nice feature of the OpenOffice project, and it should be a
> priority; but this shouldn't happen at the expense of our mission.

> (Any possible decisions to rebase on Symphony will of course be
> accompanied by FUD, rants, disputes over the legacy of OpenOffice... But
> even the current discussion will be -or has been- very likely misused the
> same way, even if it's only words so far).

>From my personal feeling (I'm from Symphony team), all the discussion in
this mail thread was fact based. Even the "motion" people said, is
reasonable to me. And I believe every one's goal is, as you said, to
produce an excellent free software office suite. And all we are doing is
trying to find a better way. That's the reason I really like this
community! :)

> Regards,
>   Andrea.

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message