Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2010 Archives by date, by thread · List index

On 11/23/2010 02:59 PM, Marc Paré wrote:
Le 2010-11-23 14:44, Harold Fuchs a écrit :

"Marc Paré" <> wrote in message
Le 2010-11-23 12:33, Nathan a écrit :
On 11/23/2010 05:37 AM, Rainer Bielefeld wrote:
Marc Paré schrieb:

[...] IMO, the user
should always be left in control of the extensions. If they are so
necessary, then they should be coded in and not be called extensions.


I have a non removable Zulu hyphenation dictionary from 2008, but no


This isnt practical with the user base we service. Each user has
different expectations and needs from LibO, there for each user may
different plugins, extensions, templates, etc etc. This is giving the
user true control and choice. With that said, the popularity of plugins
in itself(automatic installation, removal, and updating) will be
beneficial to LibO in the general scheme of things.


But then there needs to be
- a *proper* management system so that one's extensions are not blown
away by new versions
- a *proper* scheme for notifying a user when a new [sub-[sub-]...
version of LO invalidates an extension
- a scheme whereby a user can easily remove *any* extension, even those
that came *in the box" with LO
- a scheme whereby a user can easily re-install *any* extension that
came *in the box* with LO and was removed by the above scheme.
- a *proper* scheme whereby users can request notification of upgrades
to *individual* extensions

My main "relationship" with extensions has come from using Firefox. Yes,
extensions are great but it is nevertheless extremely frustrating when
an upgrade to FF comes along that invalidates an extension one has been
relying on for quite a while. LO really must try to avoid this if it is
to rely on extensions in the future.

The same points apply to templates, plugins etc.

Agreed on this as well. We are in the process of re-building the distro.
Now is the time to start fine tuning the process of all of these
external pieces by which they function. It is important to document
clearly the problems and suggest a remedy and someone will step up to
the plate and help fix it. We presently have approximately 90 devs
(according to a blog somewhere) working on the distro, so once the first
official version if out and the pressure is off the devs, they will have
a lot to pick from as well as to prioritize.

It would be nice if someone on this thread assembled all of the
documentation on one post here once the discussions has concluded. If
the subject to the thread does not fit, feel free to move it to a
subject line that best suits the discussion. These discussions will
surely get lost as the subject line does not even discuss extensions.
IMO if you are trying to make a credible statement, I would create a new
thread with a more descriptive subject line and continue the discussion

Just keep fine tuning suggestions and someone will help present it to
the right people.


I would like to chime in. for the record I will use the term Extensions vaguely but am ultimately referring to plugins/add-ons/extensions/ etc etc.

I think, in the world of extensions there are some issues present in very popular open source apps That LibO could attempt to solve to create a seamless user experience. The example listed above was excellent regarding updating the main app and having extensions that are non compatible with newer versions. Heres what I have in mind.

1. How extensions are chosen for Core inclusion. (I think this should be done by user statics, the most used extensions should get consideration for core inclusion)

2. Balancing the core app with the appropriate number of extensions. Some projects leave everything to extensions, leaving the user to install 10 - 20 at a time making a lot of work.

3. Extension licensing, very complex.

4. Core developers contributing to extensions.

5. Plugin repo clean up. I think each time a new version of Lib0 is released, when extensions are deemed to be unusable, the developer can either update the extension or have it removed from the listing, moving it to a archived listing if you will.

After typing this up, I've found myself pondering the idea of extensions in an office Suite. Mostly, can an office suite be extended? How? If any of the current features were removed for a fresh install to be offered as an extension, would this create a bad user experience? If we keep all current features in core, what else would there be to extend?

Thanks for your time,
Nathan Heafner

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.