Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5ABB3D09A for ; Fri, 2 Nov 2012 08:41:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 55221 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2012 08:41:20 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 55034 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2012 08:41:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 55017 invoked by uid 99); 2 Nov 2012 08:41:19 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Nov 2012 08:41:19 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [208.113.200.5] (HELO homiemail-a79.g.dreamhost.com) (208.113.200.5) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Nov 2012 08:41:10 +0000 Received: from homiemail-a79.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a79.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C16B47D4070; Fri, 2 Nov 2012 01:40:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (unknown [151.67.110.126]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: andrea@pescetti.it) by homiemail-a79.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 123FB7D4059; Fri, 2 Nov 2012 01:40:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5093870D.3010605@apache.org> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2012 09:40:45 +0100 From: Andrea Pescetti User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20111108 Fedora/3.1.16-1.fc14 Thunderbird/3.1.16 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: AOO.Next IBM Priorities References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 01/11/2012 robert_weir wrote: > We (IBM) have consulted with customers, internal users, other IBM product > teams, on what our (IBM's) development priorities should be for the next > AOO release. Obviously, we're not the only ones with priorities or > interests or opinions. We don't make AOO decisions by ourselves. But we > want to be transparent about what our own priorities are Thank you for sharing. They are all good and needed contributions and they cover many of the main results from the Google Moderator user survey. There are still missing things that I've seen requested and that I would personally like to see in the product (a non-exhaustive list would include: better OOXML support, full or enhanced ODF 1.2 support, better defaults, better integration with the Extensions and Templates sites or in general better visibility for the additional resources, a refreshed visual identity not only in the interface...), and indeed it will be good to start collecting priorities on the wiki and assess feasibility of the underlying development. And then of course there's the community side: we are now able to engage localization volunteers but there is still work to do to be able to engage unaffiliated developers, so we might take that into consideration when discussing the new features. > releasing is PMC decision, not an IBM one. But we think that this work > could be completed and tested for a release in the March/April 2013 > time-frame. And the scope of the release might be significant enough to > warrant a "4.0" designation. Seems like this would be a good plan. Let's make it real! Regards, Andrea.