I had a deep respect for you and all the work you did, and was even thinking to work with you a day. Reading what you wrote, my opinion changed.
>Ed and I still need to get started on upgrading to the OOo 2.0
>codebase and Mactel platform.
Remember, I have invited you to work together (more than one month ago), NeoOffice and OpenOffice.org Mac OS X port for OpenOffice.org2 native. You never aswered me, and you now declare you have not enough time...
I doesn't make sense to have two projects doing the same thing, and I have made you some propositions.
>These time constraints are futher compounded by the fact that
>due to the recent OOo 2.0 Cocoa vaporware announcement
>(which still hasn't been started after 2 months
Sorry, but this is WRONG : Work is in progress. We just want to work quietly, without useless pressure, doing things correctly. So please stop to write such things. I'm suprised to read such comments from your part.
BTW : I don't see the Mac port meeting announcement on Neo site ? This has been announced on dev@porting mailing list, the 7th november for the curious.
A Mac OS X port meeting is organized (more than 10 devs), 26/27 november, and be sure a roadmap an a status will be publied after.
> put a serious crimp in Neo/J's donation receipts.
I understand what means ... " how find money " ...
> As a result, I won't be able to continue working full-time on Neo/J and I will have to go get some paid work.
Remember, I have invited you to work together (more than one month ago), NeoOffice and OpenOffice.org Mac OS X port for OpenOffice.org2 native. You never aswered me, and you now declare you have not enough time...
I doesn't make sense to have two projects doing the same thing, and I have made you some propositions.
Since you can't seem to take a hint, let me spell it out very bluntly for you: I have zero desire to "start over" and work on a brand new Cocoa port within the OOo political framework. I did that as a paid Sun employee in 2000 and I have no desire to do it again.
ericbachard wrote:
Sorry, but this is WRONG : Work is in progress. We just want to work quietly, without useless pressure, doing things correctly. So please stop to write such things. I'm suprised to read such comments from your part.
Where's the code? I seen lots of talk but I have seen no commits. Until you have a working product in a testable state, you are still technically only in the planning stages and, by definition, software announced before it has been started is "vaporware." In other words, you currently have the intent to do a Cocoa port, but you haven't actually done it. This is the classic definition of vaporware.
ericbachard wrote:
BTW : I don't see the Mac port meeting announcement on Neo site ? This has been announced on dev@porting mailing list, the 7th november for the curious.
If you want to post your meeting, you are perfectly able to post your own meeting notice in any of our forums. Don't assume that I am tracking what you are doing because, frankly, I really don't care that much.
First, I think you are completely wrong, to persist to say we are working for Sun or whatever : we all are volunteers, and are working for a community project. I receive no money, and everything I won with Ooo has been reversed. And OpenOffice.org2 does not match SISSL anymore. What I proposed you (and Ed) was a constructive way to improve your work, but you persist to believe someting else, and write it to make the other believe that. That's all.
>Where's the code?
Not commited, because experimental. Do you commit all your experimental code ? ( where are your mactel changes, I don't see them in cvs ? ).
>I seen lots of talk but I have seen no commits.
Again : we want to work quietly. Organize work for a complete Team is hard. We all have a family, job in the real life, so it takes more time. Be patient : we will communicate the week after the meeting.
Were NeoOffice "usable" two months after the begining of Neo project?
A lot of important informations are already written in gsl archives, it takes some times too to read and analyse the content of approximatively ~1120 emails...
Last but not least, I perfectly know some people of NeoOffice are checking everything we say, everything we write, without never help really. The result is an unsane situation.
>Until you have a working product in a testable state, you are
>still technically only in the planning stages and, by definition,
>software announced before it has been started is "vaporware."
As I wrote in my recent interview, what we have does not use X11, and our work is not enough advanced. I don't want to say more.
>In other words, you currently have the intent to do a Cocoa port,
>but you haven't actually done it.
You perfectly know this cannot be done in two month, and this remark is not very friendly. Don't forget my first role in Mac OS X port is to organize and manage. This role is partially administrative, not only code relative. Since more than a year, I'm doing builds and fixes. Because I'm really interested in code, I'm learning/working code every day(mostly Cocoa, but C/C++ too , for "glu" code between C++ and native API).
FYI, your (interesting) changes in Neo are analysed, but because of license reasons, we have a to reimplement everything differently. The license problem is the most important reason why I asked you to work with us directly. Remember : everything under GPL is not usable on OOo.
>This is the classic definition of vaporware.
No, no and no. Have you a good reason to write this, excepted destructive intention ? Why are you systematically angry about us ?
Continue this discussion doesn't make sense : this is not my native language, and everything I write is always used against me. Waiting for a more constructive discussion from your part, end of topic for me.
First, I think you are completely wrong, to persist to say we are working for Sun or whatever : we all are volunteers, and are working for a community project. I receive no money, and everything I won with Ooo has been reversed. And OpenOffice.org2 does not match SISSL anymore. What I proposed you (and Ed) was a constructive way to improve your work, but you persist to believe someting else, and write it to make the other believe that. That's all.
Dear Eric,
While I respect what you are trying to do, you seem to be doing the same as what you accuse Patrick of. Perhaps it is because of language issues, but what I read from this is that you want Patrick and Ed to come on board and do it your way.
As far as I know, the big reason why they left the 'official' project is because they have a vision and an approach and want to do it their way. And everyone knows you are not working for Sun, and contribute in your own way, but Sun still runs much of the OOo show simply by weight of numbers. I asked Patrick several times if he would agree to put Neo under LGPL but he has never answered me on that. I just respect his choice in the matter.
As for the Mactel work, a lot of it was on 1.1.x and now abandoned (causing some nonlethal pride damage to Ed in the process). And both sides have experimental code waiting in the wings. That seems to be normal and nothing to grill each other about.
Earlier OOo ports have been announced. They have never gone very far, so some scepticism is deserved. For Patrick that means keeping and open mind and for Eric it means he has to produce something that shows he really means business.
Eric also seems to say that the Neo crew is free riding on the work of the OOo team. Which is partly true and has always been so. On the other hand, Patrick has donated patches back and Eric already said you examined NeoOffice code. I assume you learnt quite a bit from that.
I would appreciate therefore that both sides in this debate at least acknowledge they have make each other's life easier on the coding side of things. Regardless of the posturing that you or Patrick do, you still learn from each other's work. That is a good thing, even if it could be made much better by complete cooperation.
It is other things that stop that cooperation. Patrick does not want Sun to run off with the code. OOo porting initiatives eat into his funding. More recently, the flood of people trying out the OOo 2.0rc3 and coming here for support has been quite irritating. Eric is unhappy with having to reinvent the wheel and not being taken seriously. But rather than calling each other names, try to respect these positions and talk terms or talk procedures and get something done. Tit for tat messaging is useless.
Best wishes and good luck to all of you (we are in this together, after all),
Oscar _________________ "What do you think of Western Civilization?"
"I think it would be a good idea!"
- Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi
Note: I split these last few posts into a new topic ("Differing Development Methodologies" for lack of a better title), because they had nothing at all to do with the testing of Neo/J Performance Patches.
I put the new topic in Random Whatnot because it seemed more polite than "Ranting" and the topics covered do not fit cleanly into any other one forum.
Smokey
Edited to add a link back to the original topic for those who aren't clear how this topic diverged from the original. _________________ "[...] whether the duck drinks hot chocolate or coffee is irrelevant." -- ovvldc and sardisson in the NeoWiki
I had a deep respect for you and all the work you did, and was even thinking to work with you a day. Reading what you wrote, my opinion changed.
Eric: Put the EGO (yes I know all about this) away. Patrick and Ed tried to do a pure Cocoa port of OpenOffice 1.1.2 a long time ago and they abandoned it after discovering that they would have to completely rewrite OpenOffice from the ground up to support Cocoa vice VCL (they are NOT compatible and APPLE even says so.) What I see is a long term effort for you and your team to rewrite OpenOffice to be Mac compatible. Since I've been through this I will tell you what can happen. Sun decides that they want their own version of what you are doing and suddenly changes OpenOffice, forcing your team to constantly go through rebuild after rebuild until you either: Give all of your code to Sun, or: Abandon your efforts after a couple of years. I can see the downfall of this. As I said, I've been there, done that. And I will tell you that it gets very old, very fast. Staying with a Carbon based VCL compatible OpenOffice version makes a great deal of sense. Quck changes to a new version of Java (less than three months) and other changes as proposed by Sun can be incoporated into a new release without a major rewrite.
pluby wrote:
>Ed and I still need to get started on upgrading to the OOo 2.0
>codebase and Mactel platform.
ericbachard wrote:
Remember, I have invited you to work together (more than one month ago), NeoOffice and OpenOffice.org Mac OS X port for OpenOffice.org2 native. You never aswered me, and you now declare you have not enough time...
Was this a PUBLIC request or just a private e-mail? I have no memory of this happening.
ericbachard wrote:
I doesn't make sense to have two projects doing the same thing, and I have made you some propositions.
We are not 'doing the same thing'. You are planning on implementing a Cocoa based OpenOffice and Patrick/Ed/Dan/myself are planning on Carbon based version. This is will be a vastly different effort.
pluby wrote:
>These time constraints are futher compounded by the fact that
>due to the recent OOo 2.0 Cocoa vaporware announcement
>(which still hasn't been started after 2 months
ericbachard wrote:
Sorry, but this is WRONG : Work is in progress. We just want to work quietly, without useless pressure, doing things correctly. So please stop to write such things. I'm suprised to read such comments from your part.
In the name of Microsoft, you have vaporware. When I see a screen shot of a partly functioning OpenOffice2/Cocoa, my opinion will change. Even if you have only a static screen, that makes it a 'work in progress'.
ericbachard wrote:
BTW : I don't see the Mac port meeting announcement on Neo site ? This has been announced on dev@porting mailing list, the 7th november for the curious.
And I asked if there was going to be a webinar (web based seminar) for those of us who either don't have the time or money to attend a meeting in Europe. Do you plan on holding a similar meeting elsewhere? It appears that this project is only interested in those folks willing to support it who live in Europe (this is very, very snobish.)
pluby wrote:
> put a serious crimp in Neo/J's donation receipts.
ericbachard wrote:
I understand what means ... " how find money " ...
Do you develop in a vaccuum? Patrick has been working on Neo 60 hours a week. Since he has no 'real' form of employment, he has to rely on donations made by NeoOffice users. You, Eric, on the other hand, have a job, family, and other reasons to NOT work on your OpenOffice project. I have the same, but this may change in the near future (the job I'm on is running out of things for me to do.) I, unlike Patrick, receive a monthy retirement check and work because I like the job (and my employer and the contractee I work for are well aware of this.) Thus, if I loose my job, I have enough money to pay my bills and work on coding/builds.
pluby wrote:
> As a result, I won't be able to continue working full-time on Neo/J and I will have to go get some paid work.
Sadly, a premature announcement for a product that does not exist (even in a static screen shot) has almost killed off another product. This smacks of big industry and is very immature. (Yes, I said immature.) With the background knowledge of what is going on, I think the apology is not forthcoming from Patrick, Ed, et. al. because they did not do anything wrong. However, Eric, you owe a big public apology to Patrick because you just pulled his source of income so that he could work on NeoOffice full time to get it to a state where it supports Java 1.4 AND OpenOffice 1.1.5 (with OpenDocument support) which is a lot more that what I see of your efforts (and keeping them in hiding is ALSO a mark of big industry.)
So, are YOU going to join US or what? I don't think it should be the other way around.
>due to the recent OOo 2.0 Cocoa vaporware announcement
>(which still hasn't been started after 2 months
Sorry, but this is WRONG : Work is in progress. We just want to work quietly, without useless pressure, doing things correctly. So please stop to write such things. I'm suprised to read such comments from your part.
Well, no less a Mac luminary than John Gruber called it vaporware. Perhaps you should go berate him, too, and demand he get your approval before he posts anything to his blog about OOo.
Not commited, because experimental. Do you commit all your experimental code ? ( where are your mactel changes, I don't see them in cvs ? ).
Yes, I do commit all my experimental code. Essentially, I use the Neo CVS as my backup so I do very, very frequent commits. This approach has proved very useful for me as I not only have a detailed history of my work from the start, but an bugs or mistakes that I have made in the past are saved as well.
You may not be able to do that in OOo's CVS (different open-source projects have different standards of what is "commitable" code), but I have found this approach very helpful when debugging nasty bugs that started appearing whenever I change Java versions or a new Mac OS X version is released.
As for the Mactel code, that is all in the gcc4_x86_experimental_branch branch. I don't know if Ed committed anything since he was using the OOo 1.1.4 code and he abondoned this work. Other than Ed's work, no Mactel work has been done yet but, if and when Ed does it, it will be in the HEAD branch.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
