You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Robert Barbey <Ro...@acrolinx.com> on 2012/11/21 22:23:35 UTC

Maven plug-in for building extension description.xml files

Hi everyone,

as I mentioned earlier on this list, I'm working on a Writer extension in Java. We're using Maven as a build tool and I wanted to let Maven generate description.xml and update.xml files based on the information in the POM. That's why I started writing a Maven plug-in that can do that.

I convinced my CTO that it would be a good idea to donate this plug-in's sources once it's completed. I'd like to know what's necessary in terms of licensing. Is it sufficient to prepend a licensing statement to each source file or is more involved? Are they any formatting conventions I should know about? And what about package names?

Thanks for your help!

Best,
Robert

Re: Maven plug-in for building extension description.xml files

Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>.
On 11/21/12 11:31 PM, Robert Barbey wrote:
> Rob,
> 
> thanks for the quick answer. Unfortunately, I wasn't talking about the Writer extension but about the Maven plug-in. It hasn't been decided yet whether the extension will be publicly available.
> 

no problem, more important is that the extension works smoothly and
integrate well in the office. As you mentioned it is a very specialized
extension and a server backend is necessary to run it. From this
perspective it makes probably more sense to publish it via the extension
repository.

Regarding the package name, this is a very interesting question that we
should clarify in general.

Historical we had chosen "com.sun.star..." for the Java UNO core API's
as well as the IDL type definitions that goes 1:1 in a package or
namespace structure.

We can't simply change the existing packages/namespaces because it's
simply a lot of work and it is probably also a good idea to add new IDL
types in the existing modules to avoid confusion.

But we can think about completely new things and here two options come
into my mind

org.openoffice....

org.apache.openoffice

I would prefer the first and shorter one. Any opinions?

Juergen



> Sorry for the confusion!
> 
> Robert
> 
> 
> On Nov 21, 2012, at 10:37 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Robert Barbey
>> <Ro...@acrolinx.com> wrote:
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> as I mentioned earlier on this list, I'm working on a Writer extension in Java. We're using Maven as a build tool and I wanted to let Maven generate description.xml and update.xml files based on the information in the POM. That's why I started writing a Maven plug-in that can do that.
>>>
>>> I convinced my CTO that it would be a good idea to donate this plug-in's sources once it's completed. I'd like to know what's necessary in terms of licensing. Is it sufficient to prepend a licensing statement to each source file or is more involved? Are they any formatting conventions I should know about? And what about package names?
>>>
>>
>> So two options:
>>
>> 1) Make your extension be open source at Apache, for distribution
>> within an OpenOffice release
>>
>> 2) Make it open source elsewhere, like on SourceForge, and distribute
>> it on our extensions website:  http://extensions.openoffice.org/
>>
>> Key insight is that for #2 you can have any license you want.  Of
>> course, we think the Apache License is a fine license.
>>
>> For #1 we'd want to first have a discussion on the list on what your
>> extension does and whether it makes sense to be part of the project.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>>
>>> Thanks for your help!
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Robert
>>>
>

Re: Maven plug-in for building extension description.xml files

Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Robert Barbey
<Ro...@acrolinx.com> wrote:
> Rob,
>
> thanks for the quick answer. Unfortunately, I wasn't talking about the Writer extension but about the Maven plug-in. It hasn't been decided yet whether the extension will be publicly available.
>
> Sorry for the confusion!
>

(cc'ing the API list, since they may be interested in this as well.)

Hi Robert,

OK. I get it now. So the audience for this would be OpenOffice
extension authors who use Maven.  But it is independent of Acrolinx.
It could be included our SDK, for example.

In that case, the requirements for source file headers are here:
http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html

Package names would ideally be: org.apache.openoffice

-Rob

> Robert
>
>
> On Nov 21, 2012, at 10:37 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Robert Barbey
>> <Ro...@acrolinx.com> wrote:
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> as I mentioned earlier on this list, I'm working on a Writer extension in Java. We're using Maven as a build tool and I wanted to let Maven generate description.xml and update.xml files based on the information in the POM. That's why I started writing a Maven plug-in that can do that.
>>>
>>> I convinced my CTO that it would be a good idea to donate this plug-in's sources once it's completed. I'd like to know what's necessary in terms of licensing. Is it sufficient to prepend a licensing statement to each source file or is more involved? Are they any formatting conventions I should know about? And what about package names?
>>>
>>
>> So two options:
>>
>> 1) Make your extension be open source at Apache, for distribution
>> within an OpenOffice release
>>
>> 2) Make it open source elsewhere, like on SourceForge, and distribute
>> it on our extensions website:  http://extensions.openoffice.org/
>>
>> Key insight is that for #2 you can have any license you want.  Of
>> course, we think the Apache License is a fine license.
>>
>> For #1 we'd want to first have a discussion on the list on what your
>> extension does and whether it makes sense to be part of the project.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>>
>>> Thanks for your help!
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Robert
>>>
>

Re: Maven plug-in for building extension description.xml files

Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Robert Barbey
<Ro...@acrolinx.com> wrote:
> Rob,
>
> thanks for the quick answer. Unfortunately, I wasn't talking about the Writer extension but about the Maven plug-in. It hasn't been decided yet whether the extension will be publicly available.
>
> Sorry for the confusion!
>

(cc'ing the API list, since they may be interested in this as well.)

Hi Robert,

OK. I get it now. So the audience for this would be OpenOffice
extension authors who use Maven.  But it is independent of Acrolinx.
It could be included our SDK, for example.

In that case, the requirements for source file headers are here:
http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html

Package names would ideally be: org.apache.openoffice

-Rob

> Robert
>
>
> On Nov 21, 2012, at 10:37 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Robert Barbey
>> <Ro...@acrolinx.com> wrote:
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> as I mentioned earlier on this list, I'm working on a Writer extension in Java. We're using Maven as a build tool and I wanted to let Maven generate description.xml and update.xml files based on the information in the POM. That's why I started writing a Maven plug-in that can do that.
>>>
>>> I convinced my CTO that it would be a good idea to donate this plug-in's sources once it's completed. I'd like to know what's necessary in terms of licensing. Is it sufficient to prepend a licensing statement to each source file or is more involved? Are they any formatting conventions I should know about? And what about package names?
>>>
>>
>> So two options:
>>
>> 1) Make your extension be open source at Apache, for distribution
>> within an OpenOffice release
>>
>> 2) Make it open source elsewhere, like on SourceForge, and distribute
>> it on our extensions website:  http://extensions.openoffice.org/
>>
>> Key insight is that for #2 you can have any license you want.  Of
>> course, we think the Apache License is a fine license.
>>
>> For #1 we'd want to first have a discussion on the list on what your
>> extension does and whether it makes sense to be part of the project.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>>
>>> Thanks for your help!
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Robert
>>>
>

Re: Maven plug-in for building extension description.xml files

Posted by Robert Barbey <Ro...@acrolinx.com>.
Rob,

thanks for the quick answer. Unfortunately, I wasn't talking about the Writer extension but about the Maven plug-in. It hasn't been decided yet whether the extension will be publicly available.

Sorry for the confusion!

Robert


On Nov 21, 2012, at 10:37 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Robert Barbey
> <Ro...@acrolinx.com> wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>> 
>> as I mentioned earlier on this list, I'm working on a Writer extension in Java. We're using Maven as a build tool and I wanted to let Maven generate description.xml and update.xml files based on the information in the POM. That's why I started writing a Maven plug-in that can do that.
>> 
>> I convinced my CTO that it would be a good idea to donate this plug-in's sources once it's completed. I'd like to know what's necessary in terms of licensing. Is it sufficient to prepend a licensing statement to each source file or is more involved? Are they any formatting conventions I should know about? And what about package names?
>> 
> 
> So two options:
> 
> 1) Make your extension be open source at Apache, for distribution
> within an OpenOffice release
> 
> 2) Make it open source elsewhere, like on SourceForge, and distribute
> it on our extensions website:  http://extensions.openoffice.org/
> 
> Key insight is that for #2 you can have any license you want.  Of
> course, we think the Apache License is a fine license.
> 
> For #1 we'd want to first have a discussion on the list on what your
> extension does and whether it makes sense to be part of the project.
> 
> Regards
> 
> -Rob
> 
> 
> 
>> Thanks for your help!
>> 
>> Best,
>> Robert
>>

Re: Maven plug-in for building extension description.xml files

Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Robert Barbey
<Ro...@acrolinx.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> as I mentioned earlier on this list, I'm working on a Writer extension in Java. We're using Maven as a build tool and I wanted to let Maven generate description.xml and update.xml files based on the information in the POM. That's why I started writing a Maven plug-in that can do that.
>
> I convinced my CTO that it would be a good idea to donate this plug-in's sources once it's completed. I'd like to know what's necessary in terms of licensing. Is it sufficient to prepend a licensing statement to each source file or is more involved? Are they any formatting conventions I should know about? And what about package names?
>

So two options:

1) Make your extension be open source at Apache, for distribution
within an OpenOffice release

2) Make it open source elsewhere, like on SourceForge, and distribute
it on our extensions website:  http://extensions.openoffice.org/

Key insight is that for #2 you can have any license you want.  Of
course, we think the Apache License is a fine license.

For #1 we'd want to first have a discussion on the list on what your
extension does and whether it makes sense to be part of the project.

Regards

-Rob



> Thanks for your help!
>
> Best,
> Robert
>