Dan,I feel your point even if hidden. I understand your reaction but what you say is not an explanation nor a solution - it does not change the fact that the Base's documentation is to some extend misleading, uncomplete and not congruent with the programmed features. If you are The Dan that has worked with the docs you have done a good job so far, but it must be finished! And obviously you cannot do everything alone.
I personally can not help even if I wanted to: I am no programmer and I do not not know the inner build-up of nor the relationships between Base's features and finesses. I only am (was!) an user and can only contribute by proposing - and that I have done without results - as far as I know.
I try again:> if you cannot get Base working as a standalone "database" (like MSAccess) then take the Base module away from the LibO suite
> or replace the old embedded HDBSQL v1.8 with a modern xxxSQL> or make Base clearly an front-end (by totally removing the embedded part) and advice users to an specific "real" background database (MySQL, SQLite, etc) and give them an easy-to-use and really working software&docs for the connecting > reprogram LibO/Base so that a form can be built based on a query (not only on a table) and then write/complete docs about how to build forms and subforms manually (no wizard) > borrow the Report Builder from OO and make it (really!) working in LibO -- together with working docs about how-to > inform the user how to make a cover page (Mainform) for the database from where to open forms, reports, etc
That as a beginning.If or when Base works without problems and without bothering that list, I am lazy enough to start using the rest of the LibO-suite.
Best regards Pertti Rönnberg On 20.9.2012 14:37, Dan Lewis wrote:
The reality of documentation is that very few people are willing to help produce it. This is true of Base more so than the other components of LO. All of it is done by volunteers. If people want better documentation, they need to do something about it. That means personally testing various features and document what they find. It also means people stepping forward to work with others to make the documentation better by collaborating.--Dan On 09/20/2012 07:06 AM, Pertti Rönnberg wrote:Dear mr Webmaster,I agree with you about the risks with Microsoft's possible actions in the future -- let us hope we are wrong.I am afraid you got me wrong -- my fault.What I meant by the "break" in developing LibO, was that the LibO's developers for a while should stop proceeding. They must take one specific version of LibO (especially for Windows as the main OS) and make it absolutely free of bugs and failures -- and plus that make the documentations complete and understandable (and thus usable) for ordinary non-expert computer users.And then - after that - continue again.Why? Because I have been a Windows user since early -80 and installed OpenO decades ago. Last January this year I downloaded LibO (3.4.5) with the main intention to use Base -- but experienced that much problems - first with the installing & JRE and then with many basic functions and especially with the embedded HDBSQL and especially with the quite horrible unlogical documentations -- that I have given up. I am quite sure that I am not alone!Since January I have followed the discussions on this list and am getting even more convinced that LibO is not really meant for ordinary people as an alternative to MSO. It seems mainly to be a playground for a group of open-source enthusiasts with a language of their own.Whom are the new features and finesses meant for, when there is no general info about them and no guiding documentation until 3-4 version generations later? Meanwhile they have only caused problems.When I download a what-ever program for my needs, I want it to work and to work stable and smoothly. I have no need nor time to struggle with different problems, to investigate and test different workarounds -- nor asking for help and waiting perhaps days for an answer that might help if I only happen to understand the advice.Frustration can easily be limited by paying to Microsoft. Best regards Pertti Rönnberg On 19.9.2012 21:48, webmaster-Kracked_P_P wrote:I have not bought any MSO past MSO-2003. I moved to OpenOffice.org [as soon as it read/saved .doc files] till LO 3.3.0 came out. Then I moved to LO for all my systems, Windows and Linux.Now I create/update the NA-DVD [http://libreoffice-na.us/English-3.5-installs/index.html] project and a 773,000 American Spelling Dictionary for LO.On 09/19/2012 01:11 PM, John Clegg wrote:Which is why I started migrating 3 months ago! I haven't had to go back once.On Sep 19, 2012 4:57 PM, "webmaster-Kracked_P_P" <email@example.com <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>> wrote:No, it is not a good idea to take a break. But it is time to tell those people who do use MSO that they are changing their pricing policy and almost forcing their users to rent their products in the near future. It is time that the users start thinking about their long term use of MS's Office and other business software. You no longer will be able to buy their products in any reasonable price, for MS that is, and not know if you rent it for X dollars for the first year, it will not go up to 150% of X dollars in year two. You will then have to pay their "ransom" or you loose the ability to use the software on your computer. Then there is the multi-license discount - or should it be the end of the multi-license discount. Businesses with 50 or 100 computers will be required to but a single user license for every computer at $150+ per license. The rental agreement plan is not that much better of an option. So now you can say that every computer they own can have a copy of LO for free. Every updated or new version of LO will be free, unlike MSO's policy. No need to rent or buy anything office suite package anymore. FREE now and FREE in the future. MSO just wants to force a user to pay them over and over for the same software, for as long as you live. Then when you die, you heirs will be forced to pay MS's blood money for the rest of their lives. This maybe a good plan as a revenue generation, but not for the users. On 09/19/2012 11:22 AM, Pertti Rönnberg wrote: Hi LiBO folks and especially LibO developers Microsoft's desicion to start renting their software puts ordinary people (and companies) in a fortune with very uncertain costs ahead. Should it not be now - if ever! - the perfect time for the LibO devs to take a break in developing new features in the LibO suite and from a certain version start making all LibO's functions and its every existing feature working smoothly and and stable and free of problems and bugs -- from the very beginning: from installing (with or without JavaJRE), Base and its embedded HDBAQL and its Report Builder, all included. And to complete-update the guiding documents (esp. LibO Help) to an good working quality level so it is understandable and usable for every one. Better late than never if you want LibO to be really accepted! Regards Pertti Rönnberg On 19.9.2012 15:40, webmaster-Kracked_P_P wrote: YES!!! That is why I posted this info to the list. Now there is one more thing that it an advantage of LO over MSO. You do not have to rent it. I do not know how many people would be comfortable with renting software. I really would not trust MS not raising the rental fee for year two. Then there is the issue of having some code that MS will send to either give you another year of service or to disable MSO from being used. I would bet that there will be a "virus" that would be made and sent out that will disable such a built in enable/disable license code system. On 09/19/2012 12:23 AM, Anthony Easthope wrote: This doesn't really seem to be a good move by Microsoft as it would drive many people away it!. it is such a great thing that Lo exists Mirosław Zalewski <email@example.com <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>> wrote: On 18/09/2012 at 20:13, Doug <email@example.com <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>> wrote: Note, too, that the old argument, "I bought it, so it's mine," will be out the window--if it's rented, it clearly is not yours to copy, etc. As far as I remember, it was never yours. Most EULAs forbid e.g. reselling of box copy. They clearly state that they grant you right to use software, nothing more. -- Best regards Mirosław Zalewski -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: email@example.com <mailto:users%2Bhelp@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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: firstname.lastname@example.org <mailto:users%2Bhelp@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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
-- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: email@example.com 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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted