Re: [libreoffice-design] A new User paradigm for LibreOffice.

Hi Carl,

On 15 February 2012 20:37, 52midnight <info@52midnight.com> wrote:
> Thanks for an interesting and informative reply.

Sure.


> > I believe, with your script, you'd best go to the developer list at
> > [1] which is always quite enthusiastic about patches etc. As far as I
> > know there is quite some interest in automatic PDF conversion.
> OK, that certainly encourages me.

Cool. By the way, LibreOffice's installer contains a little Perl ...
so maybe you can coordinate with Tim on refactoring that. (Don't know
if you have cloned the "core" git repo already, but as you seem to be
a Linux user, building should be easy (if time-consuming) for you, see
also: [1].)


> Today's young developers face a crowded highway heading in a direction that
> many (myself included) do not like, and enclosed between walls to hide the
> open prospect. Turn-offs are few, and discouraged.

Note... I am not a developer (I can write some ifs and elses but
beyond that, I fail). So, there's not so much I can say about all
that. Also, this is the design (read pretty graphics and usable
interfaces) list which happens to be not quite so technical in
general.


> The comprehensive, mature code-base that is OO/LO is certainly a valuable
> inheritance, but defines and largely delimits the creative possibilities
> open to younger would-be explorers. It's always more exciting to devise and
> develop something brand new than to maintain and refine an established
> product.

Sure, but this community is founded around the principle of trying to
maintain the code base. Writing an office suite from scratch takes
years/decades, especially with a sub-50 core developers team.


> One result is that new versions now tend to be less useful or
> appealing than earlier versions, being the result of a need for novelty
> rather than a response to requirements.

There is software where that may be the case, LibreOffice however is
in my opinion not in that category, though. It's actually hard not to
find the rough edges.
And don't forget that often exactly those things that yesterday were
forgettable become the most decisive tomorrow.

> I believe that it
> is time for all Open Source developers to "take a break", to sit back and
> reflect on what they've achieved and inherited, and consider some
> alternative routes into the future, rather than being increasingly driven by
> corporate competition down corporate highways.

I usually don't mind the difference but "open source" and "free"
software are completely different things in this context. "Open
source" was always very commercially-friendly.
I'd rather not try commenting on what I believe in because that's not
the kind of argument I am prepared for right now. Suffice it to say,
it is vital for LibreOffice that companies like SUSE/Red
Hat/Canonical/... are involved in it. (TDF describes LibreOffice as
"free and open-source", btw.)


> If it's not too abstract a
> suggestion, I believe that Open Source needs to expand laterally rather than
> vertically.

I believe that is indeed too abstract for me... because as far as I
can see forking does happen a lot. (Don't know if you meant that.)


Regards,
Astron.


[1] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Native_Build

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to design+help@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted