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 <ro...@apache.org> on 2013/02/09 18:40:18 UTC
Changes that Impact Backwards Compatibility
I've added a new section to the 4.0 Release Notes for tracking changes
that impact backwards compatibility:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Notes
This would include changes to the public interfaces of AOO, including
incompatible changes to API's (including spreadsheet functions), file
formats, etc.
I think we all acknowledge that a major release like 4.0 is an
opportunity to make incompatible changes, but I hope we also agree
that this is not a free-for-all where we can indiscriminately break
compatibility. We need to think carefully about where we break
compatibility, have good reasons for it, and have a plan for how we
communicate such changes to users and application developers. The
later, especially, need advance notice.
Personally, I consider any changes that break compatibility to be
"controversial" and think that lazy consensus should be sought on this
list before committing it.
Regards,
-Rob
Re: Changes that Impact Backwards Compatibility
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 1:17 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: janI <ja...@apache.org>
> Date: 9 February 2013 19:17
> Subject: Re: Changes that Impact Backwards Compatibility
> To: janI <ja...@apache.org>
>
>
> Stupid browser .... sorry for that.
>
>
>
> On 9 February 2013 19:15, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi.
>>
>> When do you expect a feature to enter the list.
>> 1) Before development
>> 2) Before committing to trunk (e.g. committed in a branch)
>> 3) after QA.
>>
It is not to track AOO 4.0 stuff that "might happen". So I wouldn't
put items in their before development happens. But I'd put items in
there after the code is checked in.
-- this can be a guide for QA to know what areas to concentrate on
-- It tells doc what new items to document
-- We could have a blog post drawing attention to changes in API's
that extension authors and others should be aware of, so they have
time to update their apps.
Note: we can easily produce a report before AOO 4.0 is released,
looking at Bugzilla and Subversion logs, to get a list of bugs fixed,
etc. But it is better IMHO to get the important items written down as
soon as they happen, so we can better coordinate.
-Rob
>> The reason for my question, is that I work on l10n tools, which I hope
>> will make it to 4.0, The tools have a high effect on the translation
>> process:
>> a) the sdf files will no longer exist
>> b) there will only be 2x45 files
>>
> c) help and ui will not be seperate projects.
>
> The first part is available in branch l10n but not integrated in build, or
> tested yet.
>
> Rgds
> Jan I.
>
>
>>
>>
>> On 9 February 2013 18:40, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I've added a new section to the 4.0 Release Notes for tracking changes
>>> that impact backwards compatibility:
>>>
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Notes
>>>
>>> This would include changes to the public interfaces of AOO, including
>>> incompatible changes to API's (including spreadsheet functions), file
>>> formats, etc.
>>>
>>> I think we all acknowledge that a major release like 4.0 is an
>>> opportunity to make incompatible changes, but I hope we also agree
>>> that this is not a free-for-all where we can indiscriminately break
>>> compatibility. We need to think carefully about where we break
>>> compatibility, have good reasons for it, and have a plan for how we
>>> communicate such changes to users and application developers. The
>>> later, especially, need advance notice.
>>>
>>> Personally, I consider any changes that break compatibility to be
>>> "controversial" and think that lazy consensus should be sought on this
>>> list before committing it.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>
>>
Changes that Impact Backwards Compatibility
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: janI <ja...@apache.org>
Date: 9 February 2013 19:17
Subject: Re: Changes that Impact Backwards Compatibility
To: janI <ja...@apache.org>
Stupid browser .... sorry for that.
On 9 February 2013 19:15, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> When do you expect a feature to enter the list.
> 1) Before development
> 2) Before committing to trunk (e.g. committed in a branch)
> 3) after QA.
>
> The reason for my question, is that I work on l10n tools, which I hope
> will make it to 4.0, The tools have a high effect on the translation
> process:
> a) the sdf files will no longer exist
> b) there will only be 2x45 files
>
c) help and ui will not be seperate projects.
The first part is available in branch l10n but not integrated in build, or
tested yet.
Rgds
Jan I.
>
>
> On 9 February 2013 18:40, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I've added a new section to the 4.0 Release Notes for tracking changes
>> that impact backwards compatibility:
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Notes
>>
>> This would include changes to the public interfaces of AOO, including
>> incompatible changes to API's (including spreadsheet functions), file
>> formats, etc.
>>
>> I think we all acknowledge that a major release like 4.0 is an
>> opportunity to make incompatible changes, but I hope we also agree
>> that this is not a free-for-all where we can indiscriminately break
>> compatibility. We need to think carefully about where we break
>> compatibility, have good reasons for it, and have a plan for how we
>> communicate such changes to users and application developers. The
>> later, especially, need advance notice.
>>
>> Personally, I consider any changes that break compatibility to be
>> "controversial" and think that lazy consensus should be sought on this
>> list before committing it.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>
>
Re: Changes that Impact Backwards Compatibility
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
Hi.
When do you expect a feature to enter the list.
1) Before development
2) Before committing to trunk (e.g. committed in a branch)
3) after QA.
The reason for my question, is that I work on l10n tools, which I hope will
make it to 4.0, The tools have a high effect on the translation process:
a) the sdf files will no longer exist
b) t
On 9 February 2013 18:40, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> I've added a new section to the 4.0 Release Notes for tracking changes
> that impact backwards compatibility:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Notes
>
> This would include changes to the public interfaces of AOO, including
> incompatible changes to API's (including spreadsheet functions), file
> formats, etc.
>
> I think we all acknowledge that a major release like 4.0 is an
> opportunity to make incompatible changes, but I hope we also agree
> that this is not a free-for-all where we can indiscriminately break
> compatibility. We need to think carefully about where we break
> compatibility, have good reasons for it, and have a plan for how we
> communicate such changes to users and application developers. The
> later, especially, need advance notice.
>
> Personally, I consider any changes that break compatibility to be
> "controversial" and think that lazy consensus should be sought on this
> list before committing it.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
Re: Changes that Impact Backwards Compatibility
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>> I have added a "Calc and OpenFormat Support" subsection there,
>> with description of the proposed change to have POWER(0,0) produce
>> an error value (#VALUE!) instead of 1, the current result.
>> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=114430
I've just opened a separate discussion about this proposed change, so
that we are all aware of it.
> For example, instead of 5 paragraphs on the
> topic, I would simply say:
> "POWER(0,0) returns the #VALUE! error. Previous versions returned 1.
> See Bugzilla Issue #114430."
I agree. Let's keep the release notes short and give pointers instead.
Regards,
Andrea.
Re: Changes that Impact Backwards Compatibility
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <or...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks for adding this.
>
> I have added a "Calc and OpenFormat Support" subsection there,
> with description of the proposed change to have POWER(0,0) produce
> an error value (#VALUE!) instead of 1, the current result. That
> is explained on the Release Notes and at the Bugzilla Issue #114430
> at <https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=114430>.
>
Thanks. I'll plan on editing this down when we get closer to the
release, and before we translate them. IMHO Release Notes should be
succinct and to the point. For example, instead of 5 paragraphs on the
topic, I would simply say:
"POWER(0,0) returns the #VALUE! error. Previous versions returned 1.
See Bugzilla Issue #114430."
If the reader wants more details they can find them in the linked BZ
issue. But out of sympathy for the eventual translators, let's keep
the Release Notes succinct.
-Rob
> - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
> Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 09:40
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Changes that Impact Backwards Compatibility
>
> I've added a new section to the 4.0 Release Notes for tracking changes
> that impact backwards compatibility:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Notes
>
> This would include changes to the public interfaces of AOO, including
> incompatible changes to API's (including spreadsheet functions), file
> formats, etc.
>
> I think we all acknowledge that a major release like 4.0 is an
> opportunity to make incompatible changes, but I hope we also agree
> that this is not a free-for-all where we can indiscriminately break
> compatibility. We need to think carefully about where we break
> compatibility, have good reasons for it, and have a plan for how we
> communicate such changes to users and application developers. The
> later, especially, need advance notice.
>
> Personally, I consider any changes that break compatibility to be
> "controversial" and think that lazy consensus should be sought on this
> list before committing it.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
RE: Changes that Impact Backwards Compatibility
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <or...@apache.org>.
Thanks for adding this.
I have added a "Calc and OpenFormat Support" subsection there,
with description of the proposed change to have POWER(0,0) produce
an error value (#VALUE!) instead of 1, the current result. That
is explained on the Release Notes and at the Bugzilla Issue #114430
at <https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=114430>.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 09:40
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Changes that Impact Backwards Compatibility
I've added a new section to the 4.0 Release Notes for tracking changes
that impact backwards compatibility:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Notes
This would include changes to the public interfaces of AOO, including
incompatible changes to API's (including spreadsheet functions), file
formats, etc.
I think we all acknowledge that a major release like 4.0 is an
opportunity to make incompatible changes, but I hope we also agree
that this is not a free-for-all where we can indiscriminately break
compatibility. We need to think carefully about where we break
compatibility, have good reasons for it, and have a plan for how we
communicate such changes to users and application developers. The
later, especially, need advance notice.
Personally, I consider any changes that break compatibility to be
"controversial" and think that lazy consensus should be sought on this
list before committing it.
Regards,
-Rob