| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jakeOSX
Ninja
Joined: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 1373
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:00 am Post subject: OO.o 2.0 /.ed |
|
i should probably just start a /. thread and keep replying to it...
anyway, they have a post about oo.o2.0 on slashdot, with lots of questions in the comments about OSX... so if you have time, pop over there and make some comments! (no registration required)
oh, apparently the regular OO.o guys don't have the wordperfect coversion yet. =) one up on Neo/J |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
sardisson
Town Crier
Joined: Feb 01, 2004
Posts: 4588
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:44 am Post subject: Re: OO.o 2.0 /.ed |
|
| jakeOSX wrote: | | oh, apparently the regular OO.o guys don't have the wordperfect coversion yet. =) |
Really? I thought that CWS got merged in one of the recent (m60-series) milestones. But we've had it for longer (since one of the early Alpha 2 patches). I think we're the first to have the experimental WP-Mac 3.5e (aka WPD4) support, though.
| jakeOSX wrote: | | one up on Neo/J |
That was my whole intent in getting involved with the libwpd project and bugging Fridrich and Patrick until it was committed and working wondefully  That, and having a migration path for my decade worth of WP 5, 6 and Mac 3.x and 3.5e docs 
Smokey |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OPENSTEP
The One
Joined: May 25, 2003
Posts: 4752
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
Yeah, I've been in a non-working mood today (text wrapping on printouts...) so spent some time doing similar things. Spent most of my time on writing this one.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=133368&cid=11138764
I scattered a few more through there too. I don't know why I try since, after all, it is /. with its great crew of ever so informed posters. And trinity seems slow, but still moderately happy, which is good...
ed |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jakeOSX
Ninja
Joined: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 1373
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:25 pm Post subject: |
|
well, if just one of those posters is a programming genius with some time on their hands...
who knows, stranger things have happened. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OPENSTEP
The One
Joined: May 25, 2003
Posts: 4752
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
I have no clue what you're talking about. Programmers with spare time never would denegrate themselves by reading /. comments. Oh wait... 
ed |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sardisson
Town Crier
Joined: Feb 01, 2004
Posts: 4588
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 3:13 pm Post subject: |
|
| OPENSTEP wrote: | | I scattered a few more through there too. I don't know why I try since, after all, it is /. with its great crew of ever so informed posters. And trinity seems slow, but still moderately happy, which is good... |
Good posts, as usual (yours, not the bozos). And it apparently netted a new donation. So that's worthwhile
One thing I'd like to have (enter the historian) is some "documentation" or trail on the rejected patches so we can throw solid evidence back at the FUD folks who think you and Patrick are forking things just for the heck of it rather than to make a working Mac version! Any idea where I can search to find some doco, and what the types of rejected patches might be besides the UTF patch? IssueZilla? I'm sure it's not as easy as searching for "patch rejected"....
Smokey |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ovvldc
Captain Naiobi
Joined: Sep 13, 2004
Posts: 2352
Location: Zürich, CH
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 3:31 pm Post subject: |
|
Speaking of OpenOffice.org 2.0, I got this message earlier:
| Quote: | Subject: [MacOSX] build of SRC680_m66 completed...excepted helpcontent2
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 4:05:41 AM EST
From: "eric.bachard" <eric.bachard@free.fr>
To: dev@porting.openoffice.org
Hi,
Just for the record, I have completed the Mac OS X build of the
SRC680_m66. Yes, it is possible. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OPENSTEP
The One
Joined: May 25, 2003
Posts: 4752
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
| sardisson wrote: | | Any idea where I can search to find some doco, and what the types of rejected patches might be besides the UTF patch? IssueZilla? |
Another Mac patch that was rejected was the Command-key modifier patch I originally submitted that opened up the possibility of having three modifier keys to support Mac keyboard shortcuts (Command, control, option) and for Solaris guys who have wanted to use Meta for ages. Got rejected, primary logic being because Windows didn't have a third modifier key.
That one for sure is living in IZ somewhere in ancient history. And I even spent lots of time polishing it up and was happy at being able to do something for the Solaris guys. OOo...where no good deed goes unpunished 
ed |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sardisson
Town Crier
Joined: Feb 01, 2004
Posts: 4588
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
IZ 11004?
Well, if I've found the right bug/patch, it's now "supposedly" targeted for 2.0 and would fix stuff for *Windows* folks, too. So that's three Sun-sponsored platforms and the most notable? port, and it's sitting around waiting, as the one guy in the /. thread said, until "the enthalpy of Satan's domain is reduced to the point where dihydrogen oxide becomes solid"....
I can't find Patrick's UTF patch anywhere, but it looks like there are *two* issues open, with patches sitting there, that attempt to fix parts of the problem, IZ 25416 and IZ 33373!
But I did get a lot of interesting reading on the porting list and have a folder full of links/clippings so I can do a "Why are you doing NeoOffice instead of an Aqua OpenOffice.org/Why are you not contributing your code back to OpenOffice.org?" entry in the wiki FAQ if it's warranted.
Smokey |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sardisson
Town Crier
Joined: Feb 01, 2004
Posts: 4588
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
And one other stupid question: why don't people (aka the usual suspects at OOo) scream bloody murder about other folks who "fork" OOo and don't put patches back. I mean, all OOo builds/platforms aren't benefitting from the 32bit icon stuff Ximian did (unless you add the patches manually, e.g. BrandX and Neo/C) and no one seems to care. Double standard because they're Linux and we're a non-free platform?
Smokey
(going to sleep before anger at the usual suspects consumes him once again) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ovvldc
Captain Naiobi
Joined: Sep 13, 2004
Posts: 2352
Location: Zürich, CH
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 8:31 am Post subject: |
|
[quote="OPENSTEP"] | sardisson wrote: | | That one for sure is living in IZ somewhere in ancient history. And I even spent lots of time polishing it up and was happy at being able to do something for the Solaris guys. OOo...where no good deed goes unpunished |
Actually, I ran into that patch recently. I cheked for open issues on the Mac platform. It is still out there. And hasn't seen a lot of action AFAICT :/. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
