On Wednesday 23 November 2011 11:36:55 am Calvin Morrison wrote:
> On 23 November 2011 11:26, Kristopher John Gamrat <chaotickjg@...>wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday 23 November 2011 11:19:05 am Darrell Anderson wrote:
> > > > > I say we leave KOffice how it is, for people who need
> > > > it, then focus on
> > > > > Loffice (i think this is already the plan?)
> > > >
> > > > I'm ok with that, trying to bring koffice to par with
> > > > office suites depeloped
> > > > by huge teams is pointless.
> > > > but _please_ leave it just as-is in TDE as long as there is
> > > > not a viable,
> > > > lightweight alternative.
> > > > I remember a discussion awhile ago on trinity-users (?)
> > > > where koffice2 was
> > > > mentioned, which would eventually be based on qt4 only
> > > > (_not_ kde4).
> > > > maybe there's a chance to have something like that in
> > > > awhile ?
> > > >
> > > > werner
> > > > p.s.:
> > > > the existence of koffice 1.6.3 was one important argument
> > > > for me to use TDE :)
> > > > I know support for M$ formats in koffice (1.6) is bad, but
> > > > recent versions can
> > > > read the odf files that koffice produces, as does OO/LO,
> > > > and google docs.
> > > > that is enough 'compatibility' for me.
> > >
> > > I agree we are unlikely to massage KO to compete with LO. I'm fine with
> > the idea of keeping KO as a light weight office suite --- and we advertise
> > the apps as such. If we do that we should regularly fix usability bugs
> > (ignore all but easy enhancement requests). If we go that route, then I
> > think we should split the monster-sized package into individual packages in
> > the source tree. That way people can pick and choose.
> > >
> > > I don't think we will find a consensus opinion about how to handle KO.
> > Maintaining "as is" with reasonable bug fixes and letting people pick which
> > apps they want to install is probably the best compromise. :)
> >
> > I doubt we would ever compete with LO unless we separate KOffice from TDE
> > completely.
> >
> > I think the only "feature" we should add is a plugins system for users to
> > be able to develop their own features. Other than that, I agree with doing
> > only bug fixes.
> >
> > --
> > Kristopher Gamrat
> > Ark Linux webmaster
> > http://www.arklinux.org/
> >
>
> There is an old saying that is used quite frequently in the archlinux
> development list.
>
> "Patches Welcome"
>
> So if anyone wants to update koffice, patch koffice, implement a plugin
> system for koffice. Go ahead! I am sure we will accept patches. But
> "deciding" what to do on the mailing list, then leaving the work to Timothy
> doesn't seem fair to me.
Nobody said we wouldn't help. I'd have already been submitting patches if I knew how to code.
--
Kristopher Gamrat
Ark Linux webmaster
http://www.arklinux.org/
Attachments: