Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of ianrlynch@gmail.com designates
 209.85.216.54 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5093870D.3010605@apache.org>
References: 
 <OF4001E706.639542BF-ON85257AA9.00590116-85257AA9.005C165D@lotus.com>
	<5093870D.3010605@apache.org>
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 08:46:24 +0000
Message-ID: 
 <CAOap24+XU+uAHB3W++LbP9gKG-fm=0YJ698qcPK=sVLNbADzWA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: AOO.Next IBM Priorities
From: Ian Lynch <ianrlynch@gmail.com>
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec51dd7a5b53fb804cd7f2ba0

--bcaec51dd7a5b53fb804cd7f2ba0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 2 November 2012 08:40, Andrea Pescetti <pescetti@apache.org> wrote:

> 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,


I think the best filters possible are the highest priority. It is difficult
to use AOO with government documents because mostly they have complex table
structures for gathering data in docx format. This more than anything will
prevent take up.

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!
>

On that timescale we really need to get going if we are to have a
competition for branding for 4.0.


>
> Regards,
>   Andrea.
>

-- 
Ian

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ)

www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940

The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth,
Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and
Wales.

--bcaec51dd7a5b53fb804cd7f2ba0--