so why don't ya'll give me a place to upload the binaries and ya'll distribute it.
Sorry, you are doing me no favor. Getting it to compile is the cheap and easy part but you are offering to dump all of the bug fixing and support costs on me. Thanks. Seriously, if you want to distribute it, strip out the NeoOffice word mark and do your own distribution and support.
I have an Intel build (hint: the reason that it compiles fairly easily is that I already did a bunch of work chasing down and fixing endian issues) and I know that there are bugs in it that need to be fixed before it is releasable. Since support and bug fixing is about 80% of a costs (yes, fixing bugs is a lot of work) and I am already working full-time stabilizing our current release, I have no time to work on Mactel until after the PowerPC EAP.
Patrick
i think the work ya'll have doing on 2.0.2 is awesome, but i think releasing Mac Intel port now will probably do more good than harm. Perhaps, you will get more funds from supporters with an Intel port since MS Office still is using rosetta.
Why is getting the Intel port requireing so much work? X11/OOo 2.0.2 already works fine on Mac Intel and I thought most of your work was Java so why are you running into big endian problem problems?
i think the work ya'll have doing on 2.0.2 is awesome, but i think releasing Mac Intel port now will probably do more good than harm. Perhaps, you will get more funds from supporters with an Intel port since MS Office still is using rosetta.
If you really want to release something, you are welcome to excise the NeoOffice word mark and distribute your own version now or at any time. But I am not prepared to support it now and so I am not granting an exception to the trademark usage policy for this.
I'm already committed to working 12 hours a day 7 days a week for at least the next 6 weeks for the PowerPC port and I have no more time to give. I have no issue with someone like yourself putting their own name on it and distributing their own version, the only objection that I have is putting NeoOffice on something that I know that I cannot support so make sure that your users have a place to go to report their bugs or get support.
My view is that if you can support your distribution, that is good for both your distribution and NeoOffice. Since your code will be GPL, we can both share the code that we think is useful. Also, you can run your distribution how you see fit. By putting a different name on the distribution, you can always try things that I cannot afford to do.
Edit: For those of you that are worried about the poster "forking", please don't. I am clearly the bottleneck at this point in time and by having other people create distributions with their own names, they can target different user groups or try different features that Ed and I just don't have the time to do. Our focus on making things super-stable rather than getting things out fast. That meets many users' needs, but not all. The original poster, I assume, is trying to satisfy a different set of users' needs and I fully support the original poster doing that as long as any new support burden does not get pushed to me.
Joined: May 25, 2003 Posts: 4752 Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 8:13 pm Post subject:
While a significant portion of our work is in Java, we do equally significant parts that are not in Java and use ATSUI and other native interfaces, and that portion is growing. Another portion of the problem is that endianness within OOo proper is different on Intel machines, affecting fundamental things involved with drawing like bitmaps. If OOo and our own work were pure Java we wouldn't have problems, but we have to interface to native code and millions of lines of C++.
We'll release an Intel version when the bugs are worked out and it's of the same quality level that matches the PPC releases. Doing a buggy release or anything that detracts from fixing the bugs in our existing PPC release at this time will slow down the process for both platforms. It's always better to build your foundation on bedrock instead of quicksand.
To add on to Ed's statements, if you do decide to distribute an Intel release with your own product name on it, I'd recommend the following:
1. Be sure to get the HEAD branch of our code. I'm am committing bug fixes for bugs that probably exist on both platforms. I generally work through the crashing bugs first and worry about minor functionality bugs last. Once I fix a bug, it is in the GPL CVS tree so it is available to any derivative product.
2. Even though I am not working on the Intel code for a while, if you find an Intel bug (especially crashers), feel free to file the bug. I'll put a standard comment that this is low priority since we don't have a release out so that people don't get irritatted if I don't work on it right away, but when I do get a chance to work on it, I'll fix it if the bug is in the Neo code.
3. If you fix any bugs, let me know where your CVS repository is and I'll merge your code (and I will, of course, preserve your copyright on any code pulled from someone else's CVS repository) into the Neo code.
Also, for those who need to excise the NeoOffice word mark, here is the list of files that you need to change:
1. neojava/makefile - Replace all occurrences of "NeoOffice" with your product name. Note that some macros are named "*_DIR_*". Those macros should not have any spaces in them. Just follow the existing naming conventions already in the file and you should be safe.
2. neojava/etc/program/*.bmp - These two files need to be replaced with your own splash and about images since NeoOffice is embedded in these images.
After you excise, you will not need to rebuild the OOo portion of the build, but you will need to rebuild by deleting all of your neojava/build.neo_* files to force rebuilding of the code that might have NeoOffice.
While this seems like a hassle, it will actually give you an entry point in the code and, hopefully, will give you more comfort making changes to fit your user base.
Joined: May 25, 2003 Posts: 4752 Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 8:51 pm Post subject:
Also, don't forget that MS Office works just fine in Rosetta And MS Office really is worth the money, and if you're a student or teacher you can get it cheap and still be legit (and it comes with 3 keys, IIRC).
While Apple makes a big deal about apps being "native" or "Universal", for word processing docs it doesn't make a difference...they generally spend most all their time waiting for you to type.
Joined: May 25, 2003 Posts: 4752 Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:25 pm Post subject:
pluby wrote:
Also, for those who need to excise the NeoOffice word mark, here is the list of files that you need to change:
Please also remember to remove all references to "NeoLight" from the Spotlight plugin and its Info.plist as "NeoLight" is considered a trademark for which the right to claim prior right is established.
Joined: May 25, 2003 Posts: 4752 Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:52 pm Post subject:
Oh yeah, and based on current rates of bugs being filed, we expect to have enough time to focus on Intel. After some discussion, our target for a stable build is June-July (2006).
By this time we'll have been able to hopefully address the stream of bugs from EAP. Right now responding to those is the highest priority, and hopefully the response time has been adequate. If the bugrate starts to climb, however, this timeframe will be allowed to slip to allow PPC bugs to be fixed. The idea is to address all the issues found with PPC, then known Intel-specific issues, and after we do that we'll have something solid enough for release. Not only will this help us eliminate the Intel shift as a root cause of a bug but also it will make for a more solid release for Intel users who don't have the option of falling back on 1.2.2 Final.
Oh yeah, and based on current rates of bugs being filed, we expect to have enough time to focus on Intel. After some discussion, our target for a stable build is June-July (2006).
Joined: May 25, 2003 Posts: 4752 Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 8:07 pm Post subject:
No, June-July for a "stable" 2.0 Alpha Intel release. We won't be going "Final" on either platform for quite some time. I'm not even certain if we'll be able to do both platforms at the same time...it still may remain staggered releases for engineering's sake to help us pare things down to make bug hunting easier.
We hope to shim in native widgets into the 2.0 release which will definitely slow the progress to Final down (but make things look a lot better). Not sure if there are any other major feature additions that are still outstanding since right now I'm only focusing on the one.
No, June-July for a "stable" 2.0 Alpha Intel release.
Wow, that's great!
OPENSTEP wrote:
We hope to shim in native widgets into the 2.0 release which will definitely slow the progress to Final down (but make things look a lot better).
This will be cool. At that point, every other word processor on mac can suck it
OPENSTEP wrote:
Not sure if there are any other major feature additions that are still outstanding since right now I'm only focusing on the one.
ed
The only thing I can think of is a native filepicker. I know that's been a standby project for a while..
W
Edit: Oh, another question-- when Neo 2.0 goes Final.. will it be pretty even with the OO.o development? (Obviously it's always slightly behind..) Meaning, it'll be synced with the latest OO.o 2.x, right? There's no OO.o 3.0 coming out any time soon I presume...?
Joined: May 25, 2003 Posts: 4752 Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posted: Tue May 02, 2006 3:08 pm Post subject:
By the time Final ships there probably will be additional bugfixes that will be incorporated. If there are no further OOo revisions by that time, chances are we'll just stick with the latest solid tag.
I know of no solid plans for an OOo 3.0 or StarOffice 9. Although it's noted as a milestone in the OOo bugtracking system, its main use that I can tell is that it's the target for things that didn't get done for the 2.0 release.
Given that there's really no significant core development outside of Sun (IBM does not do theirs in an open source manner), it wouldn't surprise me if another really major revision to OOo/SO never sees the light of day. I suspect SO/OOo doesn't exactly look like a stellar performer on a corporate balance sheet (no pun intended). It really is a holdover from the "we can beat microsoft at their own game" days of Scott which are now long gone. Who knows where Lehman's axe will fall, but I wouldn't be surprised of SO/OOo makes a tempting target since it really doesn't fit with Sun's "core" business.
Given that there's really no significant core development outside of Sun (IBM does not do theirs in an open source manner), it wouldn't surprise me if another really major revision to OOo/SO never sees the light of day. I suspect SO/OOo doesn't exactly look like a stellar performer on a corporate balance sheet (no pun intended). It really is a holdover from the "we can beat microsoft at their own game" days of Scott which are now long gone. Who knows where Lehman's axe will fall, but I wouldn't be surprised of SO/OOo makes a tempting target since it really doesn't fit with Sun's "core" business.
ed
Very bad news if OOo gets axed But very good news if NO can finally catch up to OOo's latest version... and with aqua no less
I just signed up for the EAP Subscription. It is a way of donating since I don't have a PPC machine right now! It will be worth it when the Intel version is out...
All times are GMT - 7 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3Next
Page 2 of 3
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
)
And MS Office really is worth the money, and if you're a student or teacher you can get it cheap and still be legit (and it comes with 3 keys, IIRC).