On Wednesday 23 November 2011 11:36:55 am Calvin Morrison wrote:
On 23 November 2011 11:26, Kristopher John Gamrat chaotickjg@gmail.comwrote:
On Wednesday 23 November 2011 11:19:05 am Darrell Anderson wrote:
I say we leave KOffice how it is, for people who need
it, then focus on
Loffice (i think this is already the plan?)
I'm ok with that, trying to bring koffice to par with office suites depeloped by huge teams is pointless. but _please_ leave it just as-is in TDE as long as there is not a viable, lightweight alternative. I remember a discussion awhile ago on trinity-users (?) where koffice2 was mentioned, which would eventually be based on qt4 only (_not_ kde4). maybe there's a chance to have something like that in awhile ?
werner p.s.: the existence of koffice 1.6.3 was one important argument for me to use TDE :) I know support for M$ formats in koffice (1.6) is bad, but recent versions can read the odf files that koffice produces, as does OO/LO, and google docs. that is enough 'compatibility' for me.
I agree we are unlikely to massage KO to compete with LO. I'm fine with
the idea of keeping KO as a light weight office suite --- and we advertise the apps as such. If we do that we should regularly fix usability bugs (ignore all but easy enhancement requests). If we go that route, then I think we should split the monster-sized package into individual packages in the source tree. That way people can pick and choose.
I don't think we will find a consensus opinion about how to handle KO.
Maintaining "as is" with reasonable bug fixes and letting people pick which apps they want to install is probably the best compromise. :)
I doubt we would ever compete with LO unless we separate KOffice from TDE completely.
I think the only "feature" we should add is a plugins system for users to be able to develop their own features. Other than that, I agree with doing only bug fixes.
-- Kristopher Gamrat Ark Linux webmaster http://www.arklinux.org/
There is an old saying that is used quite frequently in the archlinux development list.
"Patches Welcome"
So if anyone wants to update koffice, patch koffice, implement a plugin system for koffice. Go ahead! I am sure we will accept patches. But "deciding" what to do on the mailing list, then leaving the work to Timothy doesn't seem fair to me.
Nobody said we wouldn't help. I'd have already been submitting patches if I knew how to code.