On Saturday 03 December 2011 16:10:06 Jaroslaw Staniek wrote: > On 3 December 2011 15:51, Sebastian Sauer <m...@dipe.org> wrote: > > On 12/02/2011 05:31 PM, C. Boemann wrote: > >> On Friday 02 December 2011 09:32:56 Boudewijn Rempt wrote: > >>> In Words, the following filters are broken because they convert to/from > >>> the > >>> old kwd format which was removed. They are still installed, though, and > >>> appear in the file dialog as options (and then don't work...) > >>> > >>> palmdocexport > >>> palmdocimport > >>> wmlexport > >>> wmlimport > >>> oowriterexport > >>> oowriterimport > >>> mswriteimport > >>> mswriteexport > >>> docbookexport > >>> wpimport > >>> wpexport > >>> rtfexport > >>> asciiexport > >>> amiproexport > >>> amiproimport > >>> htmlexport > >>> abiwordimport > >>> abiwordexport > >>> lateximport > >>> latexport > >>> starwriterimport > >>> htmlimport > >>> dcmimport > >>> > >>> At the very least, we shouldn't install them -- but should we compile > >>> them > >>> at all? Should the code even remain in the repositories? We've seen > >>> with doc, rtf and html that if we want to reinstate support for broken > >>> file formats, that we usually rewrite the complete filter > >>> > >>> > >>> Some of the broken formats, like ms-write are also listed in Words' > >>> desktop > >>> file: > >>> > >>> > >>> MimeType=application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text;application/vnd.oasis. > >>> open > >>> > >>> document.text-template;application/msword;application/rtf;text/plain;ap > >>> plic > >>> > >>> ation/x-mswrite;application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordproce > >>> ssin > >>> > >>> gml.document;application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessi > >>> ngml .template; > >>> > >>> > >>> X-Calligra-DefaultMimeTypes=application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text,app > >>> lica > >>> > >>> tion/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text-template,application/msword,applicatio > >>> n/rt > >>> > >>> f,text/plain,application/x-mswrite,application/vnd.openxmlformats-offic > >>> edoc > >>> > >>> ument.wordprocessingml.document,application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedo > >>> cume nt.wordprocessingml.template > >> > >> Yes I vote we remove them from the repository > > > > I would prefer to keep them + disable compile + add a comment why / what > > needs to be done so if someone steps in to add/extend a certain filter > > he/she could build up his work on an probably already the existing one. > > I wanted to propose that too as this is actually the way what I do > with obsolete but not yet replaced code. > But for others it would be enough to look in git history. If so, let's > create a tag for that revision. I don't have that big a problem keeping them around except I really question if they are ever going to be useful. And if so then it's just noise How about we remove, but tag as jaroslaw suggests, and then add a READM docment to filters instead describing to how to checkout that tag ?
_______________________________________________ calligra-devel mailing list calligra-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/calligra-devel
