[discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Nicolas Mailhot wrote: On Mer 20 avril 2005 11:04, Philipp Lohmann - Sun Germany a écrit : Face it: the patch acceptance is not that bad, It's just there are not many patches. Quoting (from memory) a developper on a Linux list (answering why a feature had reverted to a suboptimal state after bei

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Quoting Joerg Barfurth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Nicolas Mailhot wrote: On Mer 20 avril 2005 11:04, Philipp Lohmann - Sun Germany a écrit : Face it: the patch acceptance is not that bad, It's just there are not many patches. Quoting (from memory) a developper on a Linux list (answering why a feature

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Hello Joerg, The OpenOffice.org project is rather restrictive about what is accepted on stable branches. Basically only bug fixes, ... There are several reasons for those policies. You have your reasons. But given this situation, is it surprising that volunteers don't contribute? People like to

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Which is why I like their version much better than the Sun one. It rocks! Just out of curiosity since I haven't played with that version myself, what additional features does it have? Cheers, Erwin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Hi, Alexandro Colorado wrote: [...] Welcome to Open Source 101: "Release Early, Release Often" http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ar01s04.html We do release about 1-2 milestone per week. I would call that often. Heiner -- Jens-Heiner Rechtien [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Hi, Alexandro Colorado wrote: Welcome to Open Source 101: "Release Early, Release Often" http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ar01s04.html That's what we are doing with the developer snapshots since years. May be they need some more visibility even if they are not in

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Stefan Taxhet wrote: Welcome to Open Source 101: "Release Early, Release Often" http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ar01s04.html That's what we are doing with the developer snapshots since years. May be they need some more visibility even if they are not in beta q

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

hello, >Stefan Taxhet wrote: > >>> Welcome to Open Source 101: "Release Early, Release Often" >>> >>> http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ ar01s04.html >> >> >> >> That's what we are doing with the developer snapshots since years. >> May be they need some more vis

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Louis Suarez-Potts wrote: A while ago, before you joined the community, we had this discussion, about releases, etc. We even formed a Release Committee. The result was the current schema, with "stable" being advertised for end users, and the development builds for testers and developers. With the

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Daniel Carrera wrote: A Testing branch would be a place where those things could appear. Ahhh, I get it. You're meaning a "testing/development" branch for the STABLE code, not anything to do with the main development (i.e. OOo2 in this case) brances. It's a different mind-set than we have at pre

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Justin Clift wrote: A Testing branch would be a place where those things could appear. Ahhh, I get it. You're meaning a "testing/development" branch for the STABLE code, not anything to do with the main development (i.e. OOo2 in this case) brances. Yeah, major code rewrites would stay in OOo2. Bu

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Daniel Carrera wrote: You have your reasons. But given this situation, is it surprising that volunteers don't contribute? People like to see their work being reviewed and accepted. They contribute something small, they see it goes well, so they contribute a little more. Give it time, and you hav

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Hi, * >Daniel Carrera wrote: >> You have your reasons. But given this situation, is it surprising >> that volunteers don't contribute? People like to see their work >> being reviewed and accepted. They contribute something small, they >> see it goes well, so they contribute a little more. Give it

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Louis Suarez-Potts wrote: another example of people feed-up with long release cycles: downloads for our beta/devel builds have exceeded the downloads for stable builds, this is because people are hungry for new features Hm. Not really sure where to go with your post, Nicu, you phrase it so tendent

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Daniel Carrera wrote: [...] I recently suggested that we could have a "testing" branch (name inspired by Debian). It'd be something between "stable" and "development". Right now, "stable" gets updated every 3-4 months, and new new features are added. Just bug fixes (some times). "Development" i

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Bernd Eilers wrote: And how do you envision the mechanisms to work for when and how something is integrated into that testing branch while ensuring that it would be "reasonably stable"? Some changes are fairly safe. For example, the word-count macro (I keep using it because I think it's a very g

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

And how do you envision the mechanisms to work for when and how something is integrated into that testing branch while ensuring that it would be "reasonably stable"? Some changes are fairly safe. For example, the word-count macro (I keep using it because I think it's a very good example). It's

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

uoting Nicu Buculei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Louis Suarez-Potts wrote: another example of people feed-up with long release cycles: downloads for our beta/devel builds have exceeded the downloads for stable builds, this is because people are hungry for new features Hm. Not really sure where to go with

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 17:20:01 +0300 Alexandro Colorado <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > uoting Nicu Buculei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Louis Suarez-Potts wrote: > >> > >>> another example of people feed-up with long release cycles: downloads > >>> for our beta/devel builds have exceeded the downloads

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Hi Jochen, OOo has not completely been ported to 64 bit architectures yet. That's a major effort btw., for several reasons. The ongoing work can be found on CWS ooo64bit02. Heiner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 17:20:01 +0300 Alexandro Colorado <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: uoting Nic

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Erwin Tenhumberg wrote: Some changes are fairly safe. For example, the word-count macro (I keep using it because I think it's a very good example). It's a fairly safe feature. It is not likely to cause chaos. The other example I used was, if I wanted to add a few functions to Calc. That's someth

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

thankya, will directly have a look into it :) On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 17:18:41 +0200 Jens-Heiner Rechtien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Jochen, > > OOo has not completely been ported to 64 bit architectures yet. That's a > major effort btw., for several reasons. > > The ongoing work can be foun

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

HI I like Erwin's idea, too; but >The OOo website has the unfortunate drawback that people need CVS >access, and have to sign the JCA. This may be reasonable for the core >product, but for a group of extensions, it can be a problem. What exactly is the problem with the JCA? FWIW, we act

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

cant find anything usefull at openoffice.org - howto get the cvs and take part ?? On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 18:09:04 +0200 "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > thankya, will directly have a look into it :) > > > On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 17:18:41 +0200 > Jens-Heiner Rechtien <[EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Louis Suarez-Potts wrote: What exactly is the problem with the JCA? FWIW, we actually do not much encounter the same resistance to it as we did with the old CA, which had no "joint" element. The JCA is a *joint* copyright assignment, it does not ask the user to give away his or her work, as she

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

That would work. If they could be made easy to install, and the documentation improved, this could really help. In my limited experience, the road-blocks I hit were documentation and installation. The OOo website has the unfortunate drawback that people need CVS access, and have to sign the JCA

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Hi I'll beat Pavel to the mark:-) >cant find anything usefull at openoffice.org - howto get the cvs and take part ?? Please observer our email guidelines: . We want people to bottom post and to prune nonessential stuff. By so doing, you make i

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Hi, CWS ooo64bit02 is a so called "child workspace", that's essentially a branch in the OOo CVS repository and more. Please see here: http://tools.openoffice.org/dev_docs/OOo_cws.html and here: http://tools.openoffice.org/dev_docs/ooo-cws-tools-doc.sxw or here: http://ooo.ximian.com/cws.html Hein

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Hi >Suppose you are a coder, or proto-coder, and are hesitantly thinking >of contributing to OOo. You probably don't trust Sun much. But perhaps >you'll provide a simple addon, and see how it goes. Now, it turns out >that you must allow Sun to also have ownership of your work, you must >print this

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Louis Suarez-Potts wrote: Besides yourself (and you are not a developer), By definition, anyone who hasn't signed the JCA is not a developer. So let's stick to a more useful concept, like "potential developer". Unless you mean to imply that I am unable to program, which is very rich comming from

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Erwin Tenhumberg wrote: The JCA is necessary, important, and not that uncommon. Just look at what our friends at Ximian/Novell are doing for Evolution: http://forge.novell.com/modules/xoopsfaq/?cat_id=30%23q60#q60 The JCA might be easier to sell if people are allowed to get started on simpler, sel

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Hi >Louis Suarez-Potts wrote: > >> Besides yourself (and you are not a developer), > >By definition, anyone who hasn't signed the JCA is not a developer. So >let's stick to a more useful concept, like "potential developer". >Unless you mean to imply that I am unable to program, which is very >rich

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Louis Suarez-Potts wrote: Uhm, I actually wasn't being hostile, That's not how I read it. But in any event, you have just defined "developer" as someone who is actively contributing to OOo's codebase. So asking how many developers don't contribute to the code is a self-defeating question. It's li

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Now, the basis for my opinion that the DMCA is a barrier is that (1) I think it's a barrier, (2) several people who are not coders but still produce other forms of content say it's a barrier, (3) I can think of one other potential developer (like me) who also won't sign the JCA and (4) based on

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Erwin Tenhumberg wrote: Now, the basis for my opinion that the DMCA is a barrier is that (1) I think it's a barrier, (2) several people who are not coders but still produce other forms of content say it's a barrier, (3) I can think of one other potential developer (like me) who also won't sign t

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Why JCA is considered evil? It is considered a backdoor permitting the receiver of JCA (being it Sun, Novell or somebody else) to circumvent GPL and to close the source of the project. If Sun wanted to close the source of the project, it could just stop committing any code. Just imagine Sun had d

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Erwin Tenhumberg wrote: Why JCA is considered evil? It is considered a backdoor permitting the receiver of JCA (being it Sun, Novell or somebody else) to circumvent GPL and to close the source of the project. If Sun wanted to close the source of the project, it could just stop committing any cod

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Nicu Buculei wrote: Erwin Tenhumberg wrote: Why JCA is considered evil? It is considered a backdoor permitting the receiver of JCA (being it Sun, Novell or somebody else) to circumvent GPL and to close the source of the project. Well, this is a *theoretical* situation of what *could* happen, I'm

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Erwin Tenhumberg wrote: If Sun wanted to close the source of the project, it could just stop committing any code. Just imagine Sun had done that after the release of OpenOffice.org 1.0, how many features would you have today? You are making the mistake of trying to convince *me* or *Nicu* that Sun

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Hi Daniel, Daniel Carrera wrote: Whooo hoo, you get to keep the copyright for your own work. Now that's a selling point Many OSS projects (almost all big ones faik) have some form of copyright assignment. Not all of them care as much for contributers' worries. Suppose you are a coder, or prot

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

On Jeu 21 avril 2005 21:40, Daniel Carrera a écrit : > > Louis Suarez-Potts wrote: > >> Besides yourself (and you are not a developer), > > By definition, anyone who hasn't signed the JCA is not a developer. So > let's stick to a more useful concept, like "potential developer". Unless > you mean t

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Joerg Barfurth wrote: Many OSS projects (almost all big ones faik) have some form of copyright assignment. Not all of them care as much for contributers' worries. Yes. But in my (limited) experience, I never saw them saying "giving us your copyright is ok because we let you keep it too". Suppos

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Hi Daniel, Daniel Carrera wrote: OTOH if you insist on using a license that prevents Sun from using your contribution in OOo, then that shows a very asymmetric attitude: That's a separate issue now. Let's not confuse (1) giving your copyright to Sun with (2) a particular choice of license. I wa

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

Ah, alright. Got it. Well... you have a point. We could require people to submit the addons "under the same license as OOo itself". I think many people would be receptive to that. It sounds reasonable, and it sounds Perl-ish. :-) Cheers, Daniel. Joerg Barfurth wrote: Hi Daniel, Daniel Carrera wr

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Reading through this mails i see that the list very active, and > discussing what to do to develop openoffice- and the work done with > OOo since it is existing is very impressing. I'm a user moving > towards maybe development or at least fixing now, since i want to use

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

On Fri, 2005-04-22 at 12:20 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > If you want to do this please take a look at the gnumeric featureset. > This if the one area where it leaves excel and calc in the dust. This was strongly put at Linux Conf Australia in the OOo miniconf as one of the major drawbacks toda

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

On Fri, 2005-04-22 at 06:25 -0400, Daniel Carrera wrote: > Joerg Barfurth wrote: > > > Many OSS projects (almost all big ones faik) have some form of copyright > > assignment. Not all of them care as much for contributers' worries. > > Yes. But in my (limited) experience, I never saw them saying

Re: [discuss] Patch acceptance [Was: Has sun sacked half its developers?]

On Fri, 2005-04-22 at 09:57 +0300, Nicu Buculei wrote: > 1. the company who has received JCA is copyright owner for the entire > source code, so it can release it under a new, closed, license. I personally do not believe it will happen. I do not care if this happens either. Extremely low risk