You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com> on 2011/07/14 00:00:57 UTC
Symphony contribution
I'm sending this with my IBM "hat".
I'm going to be speaking at the ODF Plugfest in Berlin Friday
afternoon, and will be making some announcements. I wanted you to
hear this first, before anyone else knows.
You know about IBM Lotus Symphony, our free (as in beer) product which
is based on OOo. We're doing well with it, I think. Along with
various numerous interop, performance enhancements and functional/bug
fixes, we've done some significant work in the accessibility and user
interface in general. If you saw recently, PC Magazine gave Symphony
3.0 its "Editors' Choice Award" [1]. In the review they praised the
"interface that's been tweaked by IBM to make it by far the
user-friendliest no-cost productivity suite, and one's that's friendly
enough to rival the spacious and informative interface that Microsoft
created for Office 2010 and that Apple created for iWork '09." So the
UI enhancements are getting some notice.
However, we at IBM have not been exemplary community members when it
came to OpenOffice.org. This wasn't necessarily by design, but for
various reasons, that was the effect. Yes, we participated in various
community councils, and sponsored conferences and worked together on
standards. But when it came down to the code, we maintained Symphony
essentially as a fork, and although we occasionally contributed code
back, we did not do this well, or often.
We'd like to make some changes in how we do things, and the fresh
start at Apache is a good opportunity for this.
We will be doing the following:
First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
license. We'll also work with project members to prioritize which
pieces make sense to integrate into OpenOffice. For example, we've
already done a lot of work with replacing GPL/LPGL dependencies.
Using the Symphony code could help accelerate that work and get us to
an AOOo release faster. We've already converted the help files to
DITA, which could help accelerate that work, if we chose to go in that
direction.
Aside from the work that would help accelerate getting AOOo to our
first release, we've also added other features that I think we should
consider merging in. For example, the IAccessible2 work which helps
Symphony work better with assistive technology. I know an older
version of this work sits in an OOo CWS someplace, but it will be
easier to integrate that work if we start with our latest code. We've
also added VBA macro support, which is great for MS Office interop.
Also, as the PC Magazine review notes, we've done some really good UI
work. I invite you to download Symphony [2] and take a closer look at
this. Yes, it is different from what OOo has today. And a move of
that magnitude has an impact on documentation and translations as
well. But the feedback we've received from customers and reviewers
is very positive. Do we integrate parts of the Symphony UI? That is
something for the project to discuss and decide on.
Finally, we will be proposing [3] a new incubation project at Apache,
for the ODF Toolkit. These Java libraries enable new kinds of
lightweight document processing applications. We think this would
work well as an Apache project, and we look forward to moving that
into incubation and developing that complementary project forward.
So that's essentially what I'll be announcing on Friday. The above
contributions will occur over the next couple of months, starting with
the ODF Toolkit. I hope you see the exciting possibilities as much as
I do.
Regards,
-Rob
[1] http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2387439,00.asp
[2] http://symphony.lotus.com/
[3] http://odftoolkit.org/projects/odftoolkit/pages/ApacheProposal
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Donald Harbison <dp...@gmail.com>.
Of course, I share this hope. Much depends on how efficiently the PPMC is
able to organize and tackle the work items already discussed. Our mutual
success in the Apache project is a priority. My comment was only intended to
recognize the reality of the complexities involved which include fulfilling
existing commitments.
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Eike Rathke <oo...@erack.de> wrote:
> Hi Donald,
>
> On Wednesday, 2011-07-13 21:44:10 -0400, Donald Harbison wrote:
>
> > The intent here is to shift the primary development focus to Apache
> > OpenOffice over time.
>
> I appreciate. I hope the time in "over time" will be radically shortened
> ;-)
>
> Eike
>
> --
> PGP/OpenPGP/GnuPG encrypted mail preferred in all private communication.
> Key ID: 0x293C05FD - 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD
>
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Eike Rathke <oo...@erack.de>.
Hi Donald,
On Wednesday, 2011-07-13 21:44:10 -0400, Donald Harbison wrote:
> The intent here is to shift the primary development focus to Apache
> OpenOffice over time.
I appreciate. I hope the time in "over time" will be radically shortened ;-)
Eike
--
PGP/OpenPGP/GnuPG encrypted mail preferred in all private communication.
Key ID: 0x293C05FD - 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Exciting all around.
Enjoy!
Dave
On Jul 13, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Donald Harbison wrote:
> (With my IBM hat)....
>
> The intent here is to shift the primary development focus to Apache
> OpenOffice over time. Just as LibreOffice has business commitments to SuSE
> Linux Enterprise Desktop, and the other Linux distributions, so does IBM
> with Symphony and its user community. It would appear that both LibreOffice
> and Symphony share this challenge, as both packages have much in common with
> the future success of Apache OpenOffice.
>
> We are all undergoing a fairly radical re-planning excercise. The IBM intent
> is to 'get off the Symphony fork' within the frame of what's possible, by
> focusing our energies and resources on Apache OpenOffice working
> collaboratively and openly in the community. We invite LibreOffice to
> undergo a similar transformation.
>
> Transparency is key here, as we all agree.
>
> /don
>
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 8:07 PM, Simon Phipps <si...@webmink.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 13 Jul 2011, at 23:00, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>>> However, we at IBM have not been exemplary community members when it
>>> came to OpenOffice.org. This wasn't necessarily by design, but for
>>> various reasons, that was the effect. Yes, we participated in various
>>> community councils, and sponsored conferences and worked together on
>>> standards. But when it came down to the code, we maintained Symphony
>>> essentially as a fork, and although we occasionally contributed code
>>> back, we did not do this well, or often.
>>
>> Thanks for saying this, Rob. I for one appreciate the openness of this
>> statement.
>>
>>> First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
>>> Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
>>> license.
>>
>> While I'd not expect you to disclose secrets, can you say something about
>> IBM's future intent with this code? Do you intend to develop Symphony as an
>> open source project in the future, or is this a one-time code drop? It will
>> make a difference to our collective planning.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> S.
>>
>>
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Donald Harbison <dp...@gmail.com>.
(With my IBM hat)....
The intent here is to shift the primary development focus to Apache
OpenOffice over time. Just as LibreOffice has business commitments to SuSE
Linux Enterprise Desktop, and the other Linux distributions, so does IBM
with Symphony and its user community. It would appear that both LibreOffice
and Symphony share this challenge, as both packages have much in common with
the future success of Apache OpenOffice.
We are all undergoing a fairly radical re-planning excercise. The IBM intent
is to 'get off the Symphony fork' within the frame of what's possible, by
focusing our energies and resources on Apache OpenOffice working
collaboratively and openly in the community. We invite LibreOffice to
undergo a similar transformation.
Transparency is key here, as we all agree.
/don
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 8:07 PM, Simon Phipps <si...@webmink.com> wrote:
>
> On 13 Jul 2011, at 23:00, Rob Weir wrote:
>
> > However, we at IBM have not been exemplary community members when it
> > came to OpenOffice.org. This wasn't necessarily by design, but for
> > various reasons, that was the effect. Yes, we participated in various
> > community councils, and sponsored conferences and worked together on
> > standards. But when it came down to the code, we maintained Symphony
> > essentially as a fork, and although we occasionally contributed code
> > back, we did not do this well, or often.
>
> Thanks for saying this, Rob. I for one appreciate the openness of this
> statement.
>
> > First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
> > Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
> > license.
>
> While I'd not expect you to disclose secrets, can you say something about
> IBM's future intent with this code? Do you intend to develop Symphony as an
> open source project in the future, or is this a one-time code drop? It will
> make a difference to our collective planning.
>
> Thanks,
>
> S.
>
>
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Simon Phipps <si...@webmink.com>.
On 13 Jul 2011, at 23:00, Rob Weir wrote:
> However, we at IBM have not been exemplary community members when it
> came to OpenOffice.org. This wasn't necessarily by design, but for
> various reasons, that was the effect. Yes, we participated in various
> community councils, and sponsored conferences and worked together on
> standards. But when it came down to the code, we maintained Symphony
> essentially as a fork, and although we occasionally contributed code
> back, we did not do this well, or often.
Thanks for saying this, Rob. I for one appreciate the openness of this statement.
> First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
> Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
> license.
While I'd not expect you to disclose secrets, can you say something about IBM's future intent with this code? Do you intend to develop Symphony as an open source project in the future, or is this a one-time code drop? It will make a difference to our collective planning.
Thanks,
S.
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Ian Lynch <ia...@gmail.com>.
On 14 July 2011 08:31, Graham Lauder <yo...@openoffice.org> wrote:
Rob,
>
> The smile on my dial right now would dazzle a blind man. This has been
> a fervent wish of mine since Symphony launched (As any IBM staffer who
> was unfortunate enough to be cornered by me at whatever conf we both
> happen to be attending, will attest.)
>
> The Symphony UI is excellent and features many enhancements that I have
> long wished for in OOo. When you launched this ApacheOOo I had
> everything crossed that OOo under an Apache license would bring IBM and
> Symphony closer to the fold. Dancing about the place would be unseemly,
> so I'll have limit myself to a round of applause. Excited would be an
> understatement.
>
+1, this is great news.
--
Ian
Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ)
www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940
The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth,
Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and
Wales.
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Graham Lauder <yo...@openoffice.org>.
On Thu, 2011-07-14 at 00:00 +0200, Rob Weir wrote:
> I'm sending this with my IBM "hat".
> I'm going to be speaking at the ODF Plugfest in Berlin Friday
> afternoon, and will be making some announcements. I wanted you to
> hear this first, before anyone else knows.
Rob,
The smile on my dial right now would dazzle a blind man. This has been
a fervent wish of mine since Symphony launched (As any IBM staffer who
was unfortunate enough to be cornered by me at whatever conf we both
happen to be attending, will attest.)
The Symphony UI is excellent and features many enhancements that I have
long wished for in OOo. When you launched this ApacheOOo I had
everything crossed that OOo under an Apache license would bring IBM and
Symphony closer to the fold. Dancing about the place would be unseemly,
so I'll have limit myself to a round of applause. Excited would be an
understatement.
Cheers
GL
--
Graham Lauder,
OpenOffice.org MarCon (Marketing Contact) NZ
http://marketing.openoffice.org/contacts.html
OpenOffice.org Migration and training Consultant.
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 13 July 2011 23:00, Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com> wrote:
> However, we at IBM have not been exemplary community members when it
> came to OpenOffice.org.
HehHeh, careful that might appear as a quote in my Apache Way talk at
the plugfest ;-) *
Seriously though, this news sounds really exciting. I'll let the
committers here decide what it means to the OOo project. But as a
mentor I welcome the community focussed aspects of your plan. In
particular I appreciate that this mail does not assume the community
will adopt all the Symphony code without question. It is great that
you are leaving space for the community to decide on its own
priorities and offering support in implementing those priorities.
... snip lots of cool stuff about the proposed donations ...
> For example, the IAccessible2 work which helps
> Symphony work better with assistive technology.
Speaking personally I find this news really exciting. I'm now even
more grateful that some of the a11y folk we contacted in proposal
stage have signed up. I'm sure they will be keen to help evaluate
these aspects of the Symphony contributions.
Ross
* don't worry - I won't use that quote. I'll leave it to you to
communicate that message however you like.
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Arthur Buijs <ar...@artietee.nl>.
On 07/14/2011 12:00 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
> I'm sending this with my IBM "hat".
I'm answering with my OOo "t-shirt" on:
Great news to start a new day in Berlin.
It will be cool to see deveplopers from IBM working together with the
community to integrate 'their own part of the Symphony code' into AOOo.
--
Arthur
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Eike Rathke <oo...@erack.de>.
Hi Rob,
The contribution of the Symphony code is a great move.
Eike
--
PGP/OpenPGP/GnuPG encrypted mail preferred in all private communication.
Key ID: 0x293C05FD - 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3 9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by eric b <er...@free.fr>.
Hi Rob,
Le 14 juil. 11 à 00:00, Rob Weir a écrit :
> I'm sending this with my IBM "hat".
>
:)
> I'm going to be speaking
[ ...cut... ]
> We will be doing the following:
>
> First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
> Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
> license. We'll also work with project members to prioritize which
> pieces make sense to integrate into OpenOffice. For example, we've
> already done a lot of work with replacing GPL/LPGL dependencies.
> Using the Symphony code could help accelerate that work and get us
> to an AOOo release faster. We've already converted the help files to
> DITA, which could help accelerate that work, if we chose to go in
> that direction.
>
Wow, that's a great news, and I forwarded your mail on my blog. See :
http://eric.bachard.org/news
I'm eager to learn the improvement IBM did in the code. What about
make IRC ClassRooms about some of them ? e.g. invite the peopl who
worked on some feature, and let them explain us what they exactly
did, and so on.
Thanks,
Eric Bachard
--
qɔᴉɹə
Education Project:
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Education_Project
Projet OOo4Kids : http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page
L'association EducOOo : http://www.educoo.org
Blog : http://eric.bachard.org/news
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Wolf Halton <wo...@gmail.com>.
+1 great news, Rob.
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by imacat <im...@mail.imacat.idv.tw>.
That's really a great news! I've forward this message to our local
community. ^_*'
On 2011/07/14 06:00, Rob Weir said:
> I'm sending this with my IBM "hat".
>
> I'm going to be speaking at the ODF Plugfest in Berlin Friday
> afternoon, and will be making some announcements. I wanted you to
> hear this first, before anyone else knows.
>
> You know about IBM Lotus Symphony, our free (as in beer) product which
> is based on OOo. We're doing well with it, I think. Along with
> various numerous interop, performance enhancements and functional/bug
> fixes, we've done some significant work in the accessibility and user
> interface in general. If you saw recently, PC Magazine gave Symphony
> 3.0 its "Editors' Choice Award" [1]. In the review they praised the
> "interface that's been tweaked by IBM to make it by far the
> user-friendliest no-cost productivity suite, and one's that's friendly
> enough to rival the spacious and informative interface that Microsoft
> created for Office 2010 and that Apple created for iWork '09." So the
> UI enhancements are getting some notice.
>
> However, we at IBM have not been exemplary community members when it
> came to OpenOffice.org. This wasn't necessarily by design, but for
> various reasons, that was the effect. Yes, we participated in various
> community councils, and sponsored conferences and worked together on
> standards. But when it came down to the code, we maintained Symphony
> essentially as a fork, and although we occasionally contributed code
> back, we did not do this well, or often.
>
> We'd like to make some changes in how we do things, and the fresh
> start at Apache is a good opportunity for this.
>
> We will be doing the following:
>
> First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
> Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
> license. We'll also work with project members to prioritize which
> pieces make sense to integrate into OpenOffice. For example, we've
> already done a lot of work with replacing GPL/LPGL dependencies.
> Using the Symphony code could help accelerate that work and get us to
> an AOOo release faster. We've already converted the help files to
> DITA, which could help accelerate that work, if we chose to go in that
> direction.
>
> Aside from the work that would help accelerate getting AOOo to our
> first release, we've also added other features that I think we should
> consider merging in. For example, the IAccessible2 work which helps
> Symphony work better with assistive technology. I know an older
> version of this work sits in an OOo CWS someplace, but it will be
> easier to integrate that work if we start with our latest code. We've
> also added VBA macro support, which is great for MS Office interop.
>
> Also, as the PC Magazine review notes, we've done some really good UI
> work. I invite you to download Symphony [2] and take a closer look at
> this. Yes, it is different from what OOo has today. And a move of
> that magnitude has an impact on documentation and translations as
> well. But the feedback we've received from customers and reviewers
> is very positive. Do we integrate parts of the Symphony UI? That is
> something for the project to discuss and decide on.
>
> Finally, we will be proposing [3] a new incubation project at Apache,
> for the ODF Toolkit. These Java libraries enable new kinds of
> lightweight document processing applications. We think this would
> work well as an Apache project, and we look forward to moving that
> into incubation and developing that complementary project forward.
>
> So that's essentially what I'll be announcing on Friday. The above
> contributions will occur over the next couple of months, starting with
> the ODF Toolkit. I hope you see the exciting possibilities as much as
> I do.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
>
>
> [1] http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2387439,00.asp
>
> [2] http://symphony.lotus.com/
>
> [3] http://odftoolkit.org/projects/odftoolkit/pages/ApacheProposal
--
Best regards,
imacat ^_*' <im...@mail.imacat.idv.tw>
PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc
<<Woman's Voice>> News: http://www.wov.idv.tw/
Tavern IMACAT's http://www.imacat.idv.tw/
Woman in FOSS in Taiwan http://wofoss.blogspot.com/
OpenOffice.org http://www.openoffice.org/
EducOO/OOo4Kids Taiwan http://www.educoo.tw/
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Roberto Salomon <ro...@gmail.com>.
Rob,
That is definitely a great piece of news. Best of luck on your presentation
in Berlin.
--
Roberto Salomon
http://notaslivres.webhop.net
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 07/14/2011 07:46 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 1:48 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
>> Am 07/14/2011 12:00 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>
>>> I'm sending this with my IBM "hat".
>>>
>>> I'm going to be speaking at the ODF Plugfest in Berlin Friday
>>> afternoon, and will be making some announcements. I wanted you to
>>> hear this first, before anyone else knows.
>>
>> Great, thanks for this.
>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> We will be doing the following:
>>>
>>> First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
>>> Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
>>> license. We'll also work with project members to prioritize which
>>> pieces make sense to integrate into OpenOffice. For example, we've
>>> already done a lot of work with replacing GPL/LPGL dependencies.
>>> Using the Symphony code could help accelerate that work and get us to
>>> an AOOo release faster. We've already converted the help files to
>>> DITA, which could help accelerate that work, if we chose to go in that
>>> direction.
>>
>> This looks like a very big step as you giveup your separat development - at
>> least I understand it this way.
>>
>> Maybe you could tell us a bit more about when you plan to integrate the
>> selected code pieces? The reason for asking is the following:
>>
>> I hope that we first can stabilize the original OOo code to get the first
>> release done - the OOo 3.4 is (OK, was) already in Beta mode, so just a few
>> more fixes and then we would have our release. Now at Apache we may have to
>> work on some dependencies to eleminate which otherwise would prevent an
>> official release. But I think also this is doable within this year.
>>
>
> I agree with that priority. We don't want to disrupt progress toward
> the initial AOOo release.
Great, then both software to combine sounds like a very interesting
future. :-)
Marcus
>> After the release is done we can make the big step to integrate the Symphony
>> code and move towards a new release.
>>
>> An alternative would be to stabilize the 3.4 code and then branching, so
>> that we have a release branch (.../repos/asf/incubator/ooo/branches/ooo34)
>> and the normal dev branch (.../repos/asf/incubator/ooo/trunk/). Then it's
>> possible to work on both - if we have enough man power to do both in
>> parallel. ;-)
>>
>> I hope you have the same process in mind. Otherwise if you thought about to
>> integrate the Symphony stuff and then doing our first release at Apache, I
>> fear it will need much more time then just a few months.
>>
>>> For example, the IAccessible2 work which helps
>>> Symphony work better with assistive technology. I know an older
>>> version of this work sits in an OOo CWS someplace, but it will be
>>> easier to integrate that work if we start with our latest code.
>>
>> Malte is knowing this part best and I hope he can help to integrate this
>> well.
>>
>>> Also, as the PC Magazine review notes, we've done some really good UI
>>> work. I invite you to download Symphony [2] and take a closer look at
>>> this. Yes, it is different from what OOo has today. And a move of
>>> that magnitude has an impact on documentation and translations as
>>> well. But the feedback we've received from customers and reviewers
>>> is very positive. Do we integrate parts of the Symphony UI? That is
>>> something for the project to discuss and decide on.
>>
>> Shame on me as I don't know much about Symphony yet but looking at the
>> screenshots the tabbed documents looks like a great feature.
>>
>>> So that's essentially what I'll be announcing on Friday. The above
>>> contributions will occur over the next couple of months, starting with
>>> the ODF Toolkit. I hope you see the exciting possibilities as much as
>>> I do.
>>
>> Sure, I really do.
>>
>> Finally, I wish you much fun at Berlin, enjoy the beers and have save trips.
>> :-)
>>
>> Marcus
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com>.
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 1:48 AM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> Am 07/14/2011 12:00 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>
>> I'm sending this with my IBM "hat".
>>
>> I'm going to be speaking at the ODF Plugfest in Berlin Friday
>> afternoon, and will be making some announcements. I wanted you to
>> hear this first, before anyone else knows.
>
> Great, thanks for this.
>
>> [...]
>>
>> We will be doing the following:
>>
>> First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
>> Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
>> license. We'll also work with project members to prioritize which
>> pieces make sense to integrate into OpenOffice. For example, we've
>> already done a lot of work with replacing GPL/LPGL dependencies.
>> Using the Symphony code could help accelerate that work and get us to
>> an AOOo release faster. We've already converted the help files to
>> DITA, which could help accelerate that work, if we chose to go in that
>> direction.
>
> This looks like a very big step as you giveup your separat development - at
> least I understand it this way.
>
> Maybe you could tell us a bit more about when you plan to integrate the
> selected code pieces? The reason for asking is the following:
>
> I hope that we first can stabilize the original OOo code to get the first
> release done - the OOo 3.4 is (OK, was) already in Beta mode, so just a few
> more fixes and then we would have our release. Now at Apache we may have to
> work on some dependencies to eleminate which otherwise would prevent an
> official release. But I think also this is doable within this year.
>
I agree with that priority. We don't want to disrupt progress toward
the initial AOOo release.
> After the release is done we can make the big step to integrate the Symphony
> code and move towards a new release.
>
> An alternative would be to stabilize the 3.4 code and then branching, so
> that we have a release branch (.../repos/asf/incubator/ooo/branches/ooo34)
> and the normal dev branch (.../repos/asf/incubator/ooo/trunk/). Then it's
> possible to work on both - if we have enough man power to do both in
> parallel. ;-)
>
> I hope you have the same process in mind. Otherwise if you thought about to
> integrate the Symphony stuff and then doing our first release at Apache, I
> fear it will need much more time then just a few months.
>
>> For example, the IAccessible2 work which helps
>> Symphony work better with assistive technology. I know an older
>> version of this work sits in an OOo CWS someplace, but it will be
>> easier to integrate that work if we start with our latest code.
>
> Malte is knowing this part best and I hope he can help to integrate this
> well.
>
>> Also, as the PC Magazine review notes, we've done some really good UI
>> work. I invite you to download Symphony [2] and take a closer look at
>> this. Yes, it is different from what OOo has today. And a move of
>> that magnitude has an impact on documentation and translations as
>> well. But the feedback we've received from customers and reviewers
>> is very positive. Do we integrate parts of the Symphony UI? That is
>> something for the project to discuss and decide on.
>
> Shame on me as I don't know much about Symphony yet but looking at the
> screenshots the tabbed documents looks like a great feature.
>
>> So that's essentially what I'll be announcing on Friday. The above
>> contributions will occur over the next couple of months, starting with
>> the ODF Toolkit. I hope you see the exciting possibilities as much as
>> I do.
>
> Sure, I really do.
>
> Finally, I wish you much fun at Berlin, enjoy the beers and have save trips.
> :-)
>
> Marcus
>
>
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Rolf Eder <ed...@herrmannsdorfer.de>.
Am 14.07.2011 um 05:09 schrieb Yong Lin Ma:
> We are willing to contribute the whole Symphony to community.
Great news! Kudos to you, Rob and the IBM team!
> By far, we should focus on getting the first Apache OpenOffice release
> done.
As Marcus (OOo) said: Let's don't rush things. First a 3.4 build to get used to the Apache way and send a msg to users that OpenOffice is still alive.
> 3, A key performance improvement in Symphony is Async document loading for
> Writer and Presentation documents. User can see document content get
> displayed before the whole document content get loaded.
Would love to see that for Calc as well ...
--
Rolf
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Andy Brown <an...@the-martin-byrd.net>.
Rob Weir wrote:
> Looks like the list manager strips out attachments. That probably is
> a good idea. But you can view the screen shot I mentioned here:
>
> http://www.robweir.com/symphony-UI.png
>
> -Rob
Maybe only some types are allowed through, I have seen a couple of diff
files and scripts.
Andy
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com>.
Looks like the list manager strips out attachments. That probably is
a good idea. But you can view the screen shot I mentioned here:
http://www.robweir.com/symphony-UI.png
-Rob
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 7:54 PM, Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 7:20 AM, Malte Timmermann
> <ma...@gmx.com> wrote:
>> Hi Erik,
>>
>> thanks for clarifications :)
>>
>> Some questions below...
>>
>> On 14.07.2011 05:09, Yong Lin Ma wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>> We are willing to contribute the whole Symphony to community. The code
>>> would be available to the community. (The C++ part of Symphony, also
>>> the counterpart of OO.o in Symphony).
>>
>> Maybe I misinterpret "The C++ part", but does it mean you will contribute
>> the changes that Symphony needs in the OOo code base, but not the Symphony
>> "Application" itself?
>>
>> From what I know, the Application and all UI (the "chrome") is written in
>> Java, and just embeds the OOo applications. So not contributing the Java
>> part would mean that the "praised UI" that Rob mentioned wouldn't be part of
>> the contribution...
>>
>
> Hi Malte,
>
> Sorry for the delay in responding. I've been traveling to and from
> Berlin for the recent ODF Plugfest. I am just starting to catch up
> with my email.
>
> I'm attaching a screen shot of the Symphony UI that shows what parts
> we're contributing. As you can see, the Symphony UI has four areas of
> interest:
>
> 1) The outermost part, with the tabbed interface, is our customization
> of Eclipse, which we call "Expeditor"
>
> 2) Embedded in that we have a document editor window, which is our
> customized OOo
>
> 3) To the right of that is the properties panel. This is C++ code.
>
> 4) And to the right of that is the widget Panel, which is based on Eclipse.
>
> A red rectangle is drawn around the part that we can contribute, in
> C++ and without dragging along Eclipse as a dependency. I think this
> is the key UI improvement. It is especially good on wide screen
> monitors, since it makes good use of the available horizontal space.
>
>
>>> By far, we should focus on getting the first Apache OpenOffice release
>>> done.
>>
>> Right! :)
>>
>>> 3, A key performance improvement in Symphony is Async document loading for
>>> Writer and Presentation documents. User can see document content get
>>> displayed before the whole document content get loaded. It would be more
>>> difficult to integrate this into Apache OpenOffice than other features
>>> Symphony has
>>
>> Isn't this a feature that's completely implemented in the OOo code base?
>> My assumption would be that this has no dependencies on Symphony related
>> code - but of course I am just guessing, as I don't see a reason why such
>> dependency should exist.
>>
>> Last but not least I would like to add that it will be a pleasure for me to
>> continue working with your team on OOo! :)
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Malte.
>>
>>
>
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Malte Timmermann <ma...@gmx.com>.
Cool - thanks for clarification! :)
Malte.
On 19.07.2011 01:54, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 7:20 AM, Malte Timmermann
> <ma...@gmx.com> wrote:
>> Hi Erik,
>>
>> thanks for clarifications :)
>>
>> Some questions below...
>>
>> On 14.07.2011 05:09, Yong Lin Ma wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>> We are willing to contribute the whole Symphony to community. The code
>>> would be available to the community. (The C++ part of Symphony, also
>>> the counterpart of OO.o in Symphony).
>>
>> Maybe I misinterpret "The C++ part", but does it mean you will contribute
>> the changes that Symphony needs in the OOo code base, but not the Symphony
>> "Application" itself?
>>
>> From what I know, the Application and all UI (the "chrome") is written in
>> Java, and just embeds the OOo applications. So not contributing the Java
>> part would mean that the "praised UI" that Rob mentioned wouldn't be part of
>> the contribution...
>>
>
> Hi Malte,
>
> Sorry for the delay in responding. I've been traveling to and from
> Berlin for the recent ODF Plugfest. I am just starting to catch up
> with my email.
>
> I'm attaching a screen shot of the Symphony UI that shows what parts
> we're contributing. As you can see, the Symphony UI has four areas of
> interest:
>
> 1) The outermost part, with the tabbed interface, is our customization
> of Eclipse, which we call "Expeditor"
>
> 2) Embedded in that we have a document editor window, which is our
> customized OOo
>
> 3) To the right of that is the properties panel. This is C++ code.
>
> 4) And to the right of that is the widget Panel, which is based on Eclipse.
>
> A red rectangle is drawn around the part that we can contribute, in
> C++ and without dragging along Eclipse as a dependency. I think this
> is the key UI improvement. It is especially good on wide screen
> monitors, since it makes good use of the available horizontal space.
>
>
>>> By far, we should focus on getting the first Apache OpenOffice release
>>> done.
>>
>> Right! :)
>>
>>> 3, A key performance improvement in Symphony is Async document loading for
>>> Writer and Presentation documents. User can see document content get
>>> displayed before the whole document content get loaded. It would be more
>>> difficult to integrate this into Apache OpenOffice than other features
>>> Symphony has
>>
>> Isn't this a feature that's completely implemented in the OOo code base?
>> My assumption would be that this has no dependencies on Symphony related
>> code - but of course I am just guessing, as I don't see a reason why such
>> dependency should exist.
>>
>> Last but not least I would like to add that it will be a pleasure for me to
>> continue working with your team on OOo! :)
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Malte.
>>
>>
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com>.
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 7:20 AM, Malte Timmermann
<ma...@gmx.com> wrote:
> Hi Erik,
>
> thanks for clarifications :)
>
> Some questions below...
>
> On 14.07.2011 05:09, Yong Lin Ma wrote:
>>
>> ...
>> We are willing to contribute the whole Symphony to community. The code
>> would be available to the community. (The C++ part of Symphony, also
>> the counterpart of OO.o in Symphony).
>
> Maybe I misinterpret "The C++ part", but does it mean you will contribute
> the changes that Symphony needs in the OOo code base, but not the Symphony
> "Application" itself?
>
> From what I know, the Application and all UI (the "chrome") is written in
> Java, and just embeds the OOo applications. So not contributing the Java
> part would mean that the "praised UI" that Rob mentioned wouldn't be part of
> the contribution...
>
Hi Malte,
Sorry for the delay in responding. I've been traveling to and from
Berlin for the recent ODF Plugfest. I am just starting to catch up
with my email.
I'm attaching a screen shot of the Symphony UI that shows what parts
we're contributing. As you can see, the Symphony UI has four areas of
interest:
1) The outermost part, with the tabbed interface, is our customization
of Eclipse, which we call "Expeditor"
2) Embedded in that we have a document editor window, which is our
customized OOo
3) To the right of that is the properties panel. This is C++ code.
4) And to the right of that is the widget Panel, which is based on Eclipse.
A red rectangle is drawn around the part that we can contribute, in
C++ and without dragging along Eclipse as a dependency. I think this
is the key UI improvement. It is especially good on wide screen
monitors, since it makes good use of the available horizontal space.
>> By far, we should focus on getting the first Apache OpenOffice release
>> done.
>
> Right! :)
>
>> 3, A key performance improvement in Symphony is Async document loading for
>> Writer and Presentation documents. User can see document content get
>> displayed before the whole document content get loaded. It would be more
>> difficult to integrate this into Apache OpenOffice than other features
>> Symphony has
>
> Isn't this a feature that's completely implemented in the OOo code base?
> My assumption would be that this has no dependencies on Symphony related
> code - but of course I am just guessing, as I don't see a reason why such
> dependency should exist.
>
> Last but not least I would like to add that it will be a pleasure for me to
> continue working with your team on OOo! :)
>
> Best regards,
> Malte.
>
>
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Malte Timmermann <ma...@gmx.com>.
Hi Erik,
thanks for clarifications :)
Some questions below...
On 14.07.2011 05:09, Yong Lin Ma wrote:
> ...
> We are willing to contribute the whole Symphony to community. The code
> would be available to the community. (The C++ part of Symphony, also
> the counterpart of OO.o in Symphony).
Maybe I misinterpret "The C++ part", but does it mean you will
contribute the changes that Symphony needs in the OOo code base, but not
the Symphony "Application" itself?
From what I know, the Application and all UI (the "chrome") is written
in Java, and just embeds the OOo applications. So not contributing the
Java part would mean that the "praised UI" that Rob mentioned wouldn't
be part of the contribution...
> By far, we should focus on getting the first Apache OpenOffice release
> done.
Right! :)
> 3, A key performance improvement in Symphony is Async document loading for
> Writer and Presentation documents. User can see document content get
> displayed before the whole document content get loaded. It would be more
> difficult to integrate this into Apache OpenOffice than other features
> Symphony has
Isn't this a feature that's completely implemented in the OOo code base?
My assumption would be that this has no dependencies on Symphony related
code - but of course I am just guessing, as I don't see a reason why
such dependency should exist.
Last but not least I would like to add that it will be a pleasure for me
to continue working with your team on OOo! :)
Best regards,
Malte.
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Yong Lin Ma <ma...@cn.ibm.com>.
A few things I like to clarify.
We are not announcing giving up Symphony development. IBM has business
commitment with Symphony and its users.
We are willing to contribute the whole Symphony to community. The code
would be available to the community. (The C++ part of Symphony, also
the counterpart of OO.o in Symphony). Features/Fixes which can be accepted
by community will be integrated into Apache OpenOffice. Since we
are managing Symphony development with ClearCase/Clearquest, it would be
more easier for us to do the integration. But other committers definitely
can help and speed up the work.
By far, we should focus on getting the first Apache OpenOffice release
done.
A little technical background about Symphony
1, Symphony is based on both OpenOffice.org and Eclipse technologies. It
can be seen as an OpenOffice.org instance (C++) embedded in a Java window.
The menu/toolbars and the tab windows are all implemented with the help of
IBM Expeditor(Eclipse based technology). All the C++ libraries are
packaged
and managed by Eclipse plugins.
2, Symphony provide Java interface and lotus script interface for
application developer in development toolkit. OpenOffice.org extension
won't work in Symphony.
3, A key performance improvement in Symphony is Async document loading for
Writer and Presentation documents. User can see document content get
displayed before the whole document content get loaded. It would be more
difficult to integrate this into Apache OpenOffice than other features
Symphony has
Regards.
Erik Ma
Yong Lin Ma
Architect of IBM Lotus Symphony
Am 07/14/2011 12:00 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> I'm sending this with my IBM "hat".
>
> I'm going to be speaking at the ODF Plugfest in Berlin Friday
> afternoon, and will be making some announcements. I wanted you to
> hear this first, before anyone else knows.
Great, thanks for this.
> [...]
>
> We will be doing the following:
>
> First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
> Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
> license. We'll also work with project members to prioritize which
> pieces make sense to integrate into OpenOffice. For example, we've
> already done a lot of work with replacing GPL/LPGL dependencies.
> Using the Symphony code could help accelerate that work and get us to
> an AOOo release faster. We've already converted the help files to
> DITA, which could help accelerate that work, if we chose to go in that
> direction.
This looks like a very big step as you giveup your separat development -
at least I understand it this way.
Maybe you could tell us a bit more about when you plan to integrate the
selected code pieces? The reason for asking is the following:
I hope that we first can stabilize the original OOo code to get the
first release done - the OOo 3.4 is (OK, was) already in Beta mode, so
just a few more fixes and then we would have our release. Now at Apache
we may have to work on some dependencies to eleminate which otherwise
would prevent an official release. But I think also this is doable
within this year.
After the release is done we can make the big step to integrate the
Symphony code and move towards a new release.
An alternative would be to stabilize the 3.4 code and then branching, so
that we have a release branch
(.../repos/asf/incubator/ooo/branches/ooo34) and the normal dev branch
(.../repos/asf/incubator/ooo/trunk/). Then it's possible to work on both
- if we have enough man power to do both in parallel. ;-)
I hope you have the same process in mind. Otherwise if you thought about
to integrate the Symphony stuff and then doing our first release at
Apache, I fear it will need much more time then just a few months.
> For example, the IAccessible2 work which helps
> Symphony work better with assistive technology. I know an older
> version of this work sits in an OOo CWS someplace, but it will be
> easier to integrate that work if we start with our latest code.
Malte is knowing this part best and I hope he can help to integrate this
well.
> Also, as the PC Magazine review notes, we've done some really good UI
> work. I invite you to download Symphony [2] and take a closer look at
> this. Yes, it is different from what OOo has today. And a move of
> that magnitude has an impact on documentation and translations as
> well. But the feedback we've received from customers and reviewers
> is very positive. Do we integrate parts of the Symphony UI? That is
> something for the project to discuss and decide on.
Shame on me as I don't know much about Symphony yet but looking at the
screenshots the tabbed documents looks like a great feature.
> So that's essentially what I'll be announcing on Friday. The above
> contributions will occur over the next couple of months, starting with
> the ODF Toolkit. I hope you see the exciting possibilities as much as
> I do.
Sure, I really do.
Finally, I wish you much fun at Berlin, enjoy the beers and have save
trips. :-)
Marcus
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 07/14/2011 12:00 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> I'm sending this with my IBM "hat".
>
> I'm going to be speaking at the ODF Plugfest in Berlin Friday
> afternoon, and will be making some announcements. I wanted you to
> hear this first, before anyone else knows.
Great, thanks for this.
> [...]
>
> We will be doing the following:
>
> First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
> Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
> license. We'll also work with project members to prioritize which
> pieces make sense to integrate into OpenOffice. For example, we've
> already done a lot of work with replacing GPL/LPGL dependencies.
> Using the Symphony code could help accelerate that work and get us to
> an AOOo release faster. We've already converted the help files to
> DITA, which could help accelerate that work, if we chose to go in that
> direction.
This looks like a very big step as you giveup your separat development -
at least I understand it this way.
Maybe you could tell us a bit more about when you plan to integrate the
selected code pieces? The reason for asking is the following:
I hope that we first can stabilize the original OOo code to get the
first release done - the OOo 3.4 is (OK, was) already in Beta mode, so
just a few more fixes and then we would have our release. Now at Apache
we may have to work on some dependencies to eleminate which otherwise
would prevent an official release. But I think also this is doable
within this year.
After the release is done we can make the big step to integrate the
Symphony code and move towards a new release.
An alternative would be to stabilize the 3.4 code and then branching, so
that we have a release branch
(.../repos/asf/incubator/ooo/branches/ooo34) and the normal dev branch
(.../repos/asf/incubator/ooo/trunk/). Then it's possible to work on both
- if we have enough man power to do both in parallel. ;-)
I hope you have the same process in mind. Otherwise if you thought about
to integrate the Symphony stuff and then doing our first release at
Apache, I fear it will need much more time then just a few months.
> For example, the IAccessible2 work which helps
> Symphony work better with assistive technology. I know an older
> version of this work sits in an OOo CWS someplace, but it will be
> easier to integrate that work if we start with our latest code.
Malte is knowing this part best and I hope he can help to integrate this
well.
> Also, as the PC Magazine review notes, we've done some really good UI
> work. I invite you to download Symphony [2] and take a closer look at
> this. Yes, it is different from what OOo has today. And a move of
> that magnitude has an impact on documentation and translations as
> well. But the feedback we've received from customers and reviewers
> is very positive. Do we integrate parts of the Symphony UI? That is
> something for the project to discuss and decide on.
Shame on me as I don't know much about Symphony yet but looking at the
screenshots the tabbed documents looks like a great feature.
> So that's essentially what I'll be announcing on Friday. The above
> contributions will occur over the next couple of months, starting with
> the ODF Toolkit. I hope you see the exciting possibilities as much as
> I do.
Sure, I really do.
Finally, I wish you much fun at Berlin, enjoy the beers and have save
trips. :-)
Marcus
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Carl Marcum <cm...@apache.org>.
Rob,
That's great. A good deed indeed.
Good luck in Berlin.
Carl
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Steve Lee <st...@fullmeasure.co.uk>.
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Malte Timmermann
<ma...@gmx.com> wrote:
> I can (after my vacation) write about the IA2 migration details and status
> in a separate mail if someone is interested.
Malte
I would indeed be interested in a summary of the work and status.
Thanks
Steve Lee
OpenDirective
Re: Symphony contribution
Posted by Malte Timmermann <ma...@gmx.com>.
Hi Rob,
this is really interesting and great news! :)
Some comments inline...
On 14.07.2011 00:00, Rob Weir wrote:
> ...
> However, we at IBM have not been exemplary community members when it
> came to OpenOffice.org.
;)
> ..
> First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
> Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
> license. We'll also work with project members to prioritize which
> pieces make sense to integrate into OpenOffice. For example, we've
> already done a lot of work with replacing GPL/LPGL dependencies.
> Using the Symphony code could help accelerate that work and get us to
> an AOOo release faster.
Really helpful! - Any overview which (L)GPL dependencies are still in place?
> We've already converted the help files to
> DITA, which could help accelerate that work, if we chose to go in that
> direction.
Interesting option, especially now that we can we can expect a bigger
contribution here, instead of doing this from scratch.
> ...
> Aside from the work that would help accelerate getting AOOo to our
> first release, we've also added other features that I think we should
> consider merging in. For example, the IAccessible2 work which helps
> Symphony work better with assistive technology. I know an older
> version of this work sits in an OOo CWS someplace, but it will be
> easier to integrate that work if we start with our latest code.
The IA2 stuff that we have in OOo CWSes is based on Lotus Symphony 3,
contributed when Symphony was based on OOo 3.1 while OOo 3.3 was already
the current version. I doubt that the code base for Symphony was
upgraded meanwhile, or that there have been enhancements to IA2
implementations.
Believe me - getting IA2 in the OOo 3.4 code base was really a larger
effort than expected, for different reasons. Integration work is almost
complete and available in different CWSes, but not everything was
published yet.
I can (after my vacation) write about the IA2 migration details and
status in a separate mail if someone is interested.
> Finally, we will be proposing [3] a new incubation project at Apache,
> for the ODF Toolkit. These Java libraries enable new kinds of
> lightweight document processing applications. We think this would
> work well as an Apache project, and we look forward to moving that
> into incubation and developing that complementary project forward.
Not sure - how does this belong in an email about "Symphony
contribution"? I am sure Symphony, or at least Symphony Live, is a
consumer of that toolkit, but...
Also, I must admit that I didn't follow the older emails on this ODF
Toolkit discussion here, but how would that make a difference for AOOo?
ODF Toolkit already is an open source project with AL2, so for AOOo, it
doesn't make a difference where it is hosted.
I agree that it would be nice to have it here in parallel to AOOo, so we
have all the ODF power here, but I don't see it as a priority, compared
to get AOOo running.
> ... The above
> contributions will occur over the next couple of months, starting with
> the ODF Toolkit.
For getting AOOo running, it would be great if you could start with the
(L)GPL replacement stuff :)
Best regards,
Malte.