Talk:ReleaseNotes/4.0

From The Document Foundation Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Deleting of support for StarOffice 1.0-5.0 is yet another reason to not use LO. Idiot's move, to be honest, and that idiot is there to make things worse.

Apache contributions

Somme Apache OpenOffice 's code may be used in LibreOffice 4.0, specialy for ODF 1.2 new features:

Confirmed in bugzilla's comments: tdf#41214

These functions are from an OpenOffice.org CWS and were not developed as part of Apache OpenOffice; they should be credited to OpenOffice.org and/or Oracle and/or the student intern that actually worked on it -- Mst (talk) 2013-02-07T18:24:52 (UTC)

tdf#33365

RAND() in Apache OpenOffice trunk is an independent implementation using a different algorithm from the one used in LO 4.0 -- Mst (talk) 2013-02-07T18:24:52 (UTC)

I can't understand the code and unconfirm or not if LibreOffice use Apache OpenOffice's code for it.

One more, Apache Open Office give some help for:

  • Calc:
    • Enhanced chart visualisation - better quality rendering / print and PDF export of charts (Armin Le-Grand - Apache)
  • Draw:
    • Linecap improvements - adding rounded caps (ends) to lines, see right-click Line ▸ Corner and Cap Styles (Regina Henschel, Armin Le-Grand - Apache)
    • Shear transforms for GraphicObjects, and shear + properties for OLE Objects (Armin Le-Grand - Apache)
    • Multi-image support in ODF allowing a bitmap + SVG representation eg. (Armin Le-Grand - Apache)
  • Options / General
    • New Regular Expression Engine (Herbert Duerr - Apache)
      • We now use the ICU regular expression engine instead of a custom version. This solves several "find and replace" bugs, and is faster and smaller. We have compatibility code to map old-style word boundary syntax \> and \< to \b while upgrading. Read more about the ICU regexp engine. Japanese users should be aware that some more advanced transliterations may behave differently.

I think it would be a great idea to list it in specific chapiter.

We do not categorize features in release notes by "developed by Red Hat", "developed by SuSE", "developed by John Doe", because our users probably don't care about that and presumably find a classification by functional area more helpful; also all features are properly credited; why do you think we need a category for Apache? -- Mst (talk) 2013-02-07T18:24:52 (UTC)
There are a number of problems with presenting the information in a compelling way - and I think this wiki page is not an ideal place to do that anyhow - it is really the source material for the page that ends up on our website next to the release itself. We have tried to categorise the information by something the user cares and knows about: "component" ie. writer/calc/impress etc. - many end-users are not terribly interested in the source of each feature: though we clearly label those that came from the Apache project. I'm not certain that some of the features you list didn't come from code pre-existing the creation of AOO too. Anyhow - my take is that what we have is fairly credited and reasonably well organized (Michael).
It's a good argument. Thanks for your answers. --Vulcain (talk) 2013-02-19T10:07:18 (UTC)