Hi Ruediger, I am sorry, I missed a part of the mail when I was answering previously :-(
On Monday 08 October 2007 17:36, Rüdiger Timm wrote: > > This would tremendously decrease the learning curve for the new > > developers as well. Imagine someone who wants to start hacking on Calc. > > Instead of the monster 1.8G sources, he would have to handle 512MB. > > Additionally, the goal > > How should that work with your proposal? He would need everything > 'below' calc. Yes, but do we provide an easy way to show him/her what _exactly_ is below calc? I was overwhelmed when I saw the number of the modules for the first time [and there was much less of them at that time ;-)]. With the split, everything is much clearer - my ideal newcomer would tell himself/herself "OK, here is some bootstrap stuff, I don't care, some libs, maybe, but what I want is to hack on calc, so ooo-apps-calc. If I ever need something below, I'll learn that later." > Except he uses, what we provide anyway: download 'solver' > tarball and than check out just module 'sc'. That's exactly for the > purpose you mention. Well, if the potential contributor has to learn what is that 'solver', we again increase the learning curve. And using it? I tried it once when I started with OOo hacking (as a volunteer), and after having to have the same compiler & toolchain that was used for the solver generation, I just gave up and let my computer building for 24 hours. We have o3-build CD now; but our goal should be what the world outside uses - ./configure ; make ; make install, and ideally in each of the modules. ./configure in eg. ooo-apps-calc would just tell you "Sorry, you don't have ure, please build it first" if you don't have it yet. No need to go through tons of documentation to learn such a simple fact. [And of course - in the future it might very well happen that the user already has a sufficient version of URE in the system anyway ;-)] > > So - what do you think? ;-) ooo-l10n in the current proposal contains > > (in > > Personally, I do not like spitting up sources at all. But that's my very > personal opinion. I wonder why? ;-) We (OpenOffice.org) already distribute the sources split to binfilter, sdk, system, l10n and core, let's make the second step... > Besides this, I do not understand how your proposal could work (see > above). I hope I was clearer in the other mail to you; if not, I'll be happy to explain more. > So I would propose existing and well tested means to achieve > nearly the same goals. F.e., the build tool provides a possibility to > build distributed on several computers. May I ask for a documentation/wiki pointer, please? > > addition to the few modules) all the localize.sdf's - should we split > > this a bit as well? > > There already is work in progress on taking localize.sdf files out of > the modules and concentrate them in one place. Great, whom to ask about this, please? Regards, Jan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
