>if an author of an extension is not interested to support AOO anymore we
>can't change it.

If extension is under some open source licence AND if author has no
interest to maintain his extension, what is problem that we made
corrections?

Regards,
Wlada


2013/10/28 Jürgen Schmidt <[email protected]>

> On 10/25/13 4:59 PM, Vladislav Stevanovic wrote:
> > I wrote: "(...) live AOO because nothing works there."
> > It should be:"(...) leave AOO because nothing works there."
>
> if an author of an extension is not interested to support AOO anymore we
> can't change it.
>
> Juergen
>
>
> >
> > Wlada
> >
> >
> > 2013/10/25 Vladislav Stevanovic <[email protected]>
> >
> >>
> >> Yes, we can do this. It must be marked in anyway. But the situation is
> >> more complex. AOO now suffer because users can not get functionality as
> >> they had before. If this extension is important for users work, why
> should
> >> someone think that user will stay on AOO? Next, there is also a bad
> >> marketnig for AOO, see
> >> http://www.dmaths.org/documentation/doku.php?id=presentation:en The
> >> message is clear: live AOO because nothing works there.
> >> To be honest, we create this situation, not users. At list, we must try
> to
> >> somehow fix this by pushing authors of extensions to make necessery
> >> changes, or, if it is possible, that we made some improvement in our
> code
> >> and fix this problem.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Wlada
> >>
> >>
> >> 2013/10/25 Jürgen Schmidt <[email protected]>
> >>
> >>> On 10/25/13 11:30 AM, janI wrote:
> >>>> On 25 October 2013 11:15, Vladislav Stevanovic <
> >>>> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> 2013/10/25 Jürgen Schmidt <[email protected]>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> we can simply define a rule that unmaintained extension will be
> >>> removed
> >>>>>> when the owner doesn't reply on mail requests.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That means we can send a mail to the owner and if he doesn't reply
> at
> >>>>>> all or is not willing to add these information, we remove the
> >>> extensions
> >>>>>> completely.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That is my opinion too, but you have people who still using previous
> >>>>> version of AOO or Ooo. We must have solution and for those people.
> >>> Maybe we
> >>>>> can do this in a few stages:
> >>>>> 1) We can marked all old extensions as incompatible for AOO4.0. In
> the
> >>> same
> >>>>> time, we will sent meil to the authors of this extensions with
> request
> >>> to
> >>>>> make changes for compatibility for AOO 4.0. in next 6 months. After
> >>> that
> >>>>> period, if job is not done, we will remove this extensions.
> >>>>>
> >>>> +1
> >>>
> >>> why should we make more noise than necessary, we should mark only
> >>> extensions where we know that they don't work
> >>>
> >>> Juergen
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> 2) Inside this period of 6 months, we will improved filter option for
> >>>>> searching by version of Oo. On every page on this site there will be
> >>> notice
> >>>>> that old extension will be completely removed in the end of 6 month.
> >>>>> (second option will be: removed in other place, something like
> >>> backstage;
> >>>>> it will not be visible in the regular pages like it is now).
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Can we not do something so that user will normally only "see" 4.0
> >>>> compatible packages ?
> >>>>
> >>>> maybe put non-compatible extensions in a archive section, just an
> idea.
> >>>>
> >>>> If we just filter people searching might not see an extension if the
> >>> name
> >>>> changed (like pdf).
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> 3) After 6 months, we will sent mail to the authors of extension
> again
> >>> that
> >>>>> we can offer another 7 days to do this changes, if not, we will
> remove
> >>> (or
> >>>>> move in some other place) this extension. In the mail, we can also
> say
> >>> that
> >>>>> we will be happy to see this changes, to keep this known extension in
> >>> live.
> >>>>> But, if that not happens, we will calling our community to make new
> >>> version
> >>>>> for AOO4.0. because it is our obligations to ensure the availability
> >>> of all
> >>>>> existing features.
> >>>>>
> >>>> I would do the move (not remove) without any further delay.
> >>>>
> >>>> rgds
> >>>> jan I.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Comment, please?
> >>>>> Regards,
> >>>>> Wlada
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

Reply via email to