openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rory O'Farrell <ofarr...@iol.ie>
Subject Re: [RELEASE] AOO.next = AOO 4.0
Date Fri, 23 Nov 2012 16:42:36 GMT
On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 11:21:51 -0500
Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Rory O'Farrell <ofarrwrk@iol.ie> wrote:
> > On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 08:53:38 -0500
> > Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Keith N. McKenna
> >> <keith.mckenna@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> > Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On 11/21/12 5:33 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Rob Weir wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Keith N. McKenna
> >> >>>> <keith.mckenna@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Regina Henschel wrote:
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Hi Jürgen,
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Jürgen Schmidt schrieb:
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Hi,
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> first of all I would like to volunteer again as
release manager for
> >> >>>>>>> our
> >> >>>>>>> next release if it's ok for our community.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> +1
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>> +1 on that from me also
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Second I would like to define with you what our
next release will be.
> >> >>>>>>> After various discussion and activities on the
mailing list and
> >> >>>>>>> also at
> >> >>>>>>> the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority
would support a
> >> >>>>>>> 4.0 version as our next release.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> I'm not in favor of an version 4.0 as next release.
The changes have
> >> >>>>>> listed below would justify a version "4.0". But I doubt,
that they are
> >> >>>>>> possible in a time frame, I see for the next release.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>> I am with Regina on this one. I do not see a Jan or Feb
time frame as
> >> >>>>> feasible for the design and implementation of a new and
still a
> >> >>>>> comfortable
> >> >>>>> bit of padding to deal with the inevitable gremlins that
will sneak
> >> >>>>> out of
> >> >>>>> the woodwork to assure the kind of quality release that
is expected of
> >> >>>>> OpenOffice and that we expect of ourselves.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Uh, Juergen never suggested January or Feburary as a time frame
for
> >> >>>> 4.0.  So I don't see how one can dismiss a 4.0 proposal as
being
> >> >>>> unfeasible based on dates that he never suggested.  Maybe we
should
> >> >>>> ask Juergen what timeframe he had in mind for 4.0?  Of course,
it
> >> >>>> might be possible to do both, provided we have volunteers willing
to
> >> >>>> own testing and release management for 3.5.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> -Rob
> >> >>>>
> >> >>> As I re-read the post you are correct Rob and I apologize to Juergen
for
> >> >>> reading to much between the lines. What timeframe were you considering
> >> >>> for a 4.0 release Juergan?
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >> Well I had indeed not February in mind but when we targeting on end
of
> >> >> March or April we will have more time.
> >> >>
> >> >> Maybe we can take first a look on what others have in mind to put in
the
> >> >> next release.
> >> >>
> >> >> Juergen
> >> >>
> >> > This sounds like a good idea. My concern is that we have enough time to
> >> > adequately the changes, especially the potential UI changes, and that we
> >> > address the end of life issues with the 3.x.x line. We do not want to spring
> >> > possibly major UI changes on end users without adequate warning.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Is there something users need to do to prepare for UI changes ? ;-)
> >>
> >> IMHO, if the changes are a bad idea we should never do them.  But if
> >> the changes are a good idea then let's get them done, tested and
> >> released without delay.  Yes, it will be a surprise for many end
> >> users.  As far as I can tell most users still don't know we've moved
> >> to Apache either.
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >> > Regards
> >> > Keith
> >> >
> >>
> >
> > My preference would be that the User should be able to switch between the traditional
interface and the new interface (whatever it mmight be) by setting some form of switch.  I
have no need or desire to learn a new interface just for the sake of having something trendy;
I'm used to what is there and know my way around it.  On the other hand, I understand that
there is a stratum of Users who must have bells and whistles and skins and all sorts of horrible
frills and colours.
> >
> 
> That's rather dismissive of UI changes that you have not seen yet.
> Some of us believe that the quality of the UI has a direct impact on
> how easy it is to use the product.  Some of us believe that the
> current UI was not born in a state of absolute grace and perfection.
> We're not just trying to be "trendy".  We're not proposing "horrible
> frills".  We wouldn't waste our time on a fashion statement.  If you
> have concrete concerns, then speak up.  But please don't be insulting.
> 
> -Rob
> 
> > --
> > Rory O'Farrell <ofarrwrk@iol.ie>
> 
Rob, you take me up wrongly.  I was only trying to make the point that there is a stratum
of Users whose computer is an "entertainment" machine, not a work machine. These often wish
change for the sake of change, good bad or indifferent, so long as there is change; often
their usual method of change is colour and visual noise.  

I certainly didn't insult any new AOO interface - how could I when it doesn't yet exist? 
Having been on this list for the past year, one can see the considerable thought and debate
that does go into changes to OpenOffice; a new interface will not come about lightly or trivially.
 But the new should not discard the old and the existing users who are used to that; if it
is reasonably possible to change an option setting and revert to the older interface, then
we have the best of both worlds
 
-- 
Rory O'Farrell <ofarrwrk@iol.ie>

Mime
View raw message