incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From jan iversen <jancasacon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: extensions and translations.
Date Sat, 27 Oct 2012 08:27:34 GMT
I agree with you, we should NOT put a new framework on extensions writer.

I was thinking along the lines of

make a new directory ./extras/extensions/source, with files <extension
name>.<known extension>

The extension writer must submit the file (we do not collect them) through
a committer.

This directory would then go into the normal l10n workflow, and the
resulting translation would go back into the same directory as <extension
name>.<langugage>.po

jan.

On 27 October 2012 03:53, Ariel Constenla-Haile <arielch@apache.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 01:17:33AM +0200, jan iversen wrote:
> > I see, I have to get used to this license issues (a long time ago I
> > believed open source was just open source, then I joined an apache
> project).
>
> It has nothing to do with licensing. Even if the extension code and all
> its dependencies are under the ALv2, why should OpenOffice include
> extensions by default in the install set? This goes against the concept
> of an extension.
>
> The fact that now there are three supported extensions is just
> a question of old Sun/Oracle decisions to release these as extension and
> not integrated as part of the application.
>
> >
> > never mind.
> >
> > Would it be to our advantage if we offered third party developers (that
> is
> > how I see extension developers) the possibility to register a language
> file
> > and get it translated as part of the language packs ?
>
> This will break several concepts and things. Mainly extension developers
> have complete freedom about when to release updates, how to integrate
> translation in their extensions (use the configuration API and XCU
> files, use the resource API and Java-property-like files, etc.), most
> important what license to choose, etc.
>
> In short, you will have to implement a new framework and force
> extensions developers to use it. Besides several concerns, legal
> concerns among them.
>
>
> > Or should we just say extension developers does not concern us (and help
> > AOO get more used) so we just look the other way ?
>
> Programmability and extensibility has always been a priority in
> OpenOffice, just read the Developer's Guide and other parts of the wiki.
>
> I tend to agree that it will be useful for an extension developer a way
> to submit a set of resource strings and get them translated, as long as
> the extension developer is not forced with release/legal/other concerns.
>
>
> Regards
> --
> Ariel Constenla-Haile
> La Plata, Argentina
>

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