12:13 a.m.
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 20:32:22 -0500
From: John Thacker <thacker(a)math.cornell.edu>
Subject: Re: fedora-devel-list Digest, Vol 12, Issue 104
To: fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com
Message-ID: <20050301013222.GA31096(a)thacker.dyndns.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 01:18:01PM +1100, Martin Sevior wrote:
>
> The AbiWord community is as vibrant as ever. We committed over 300,000
> LOC of changes to the code base over 14 months to produce AbiWord-2.2.
> We implemented all sorts of cool stuff that neither MS Word or OOo has.
> We implemented features that make the users job of creating documents
> easier and more fun. We want that code to be seen and used and
> appreciated by as many people as possible. We're in a position to be
> widely deployed across heterogenic communities like Universities and
> Schools since we have Windows, Mac and Linux clients.
I otherwise like the program, but it's an incredible PIA for me to use
because of its absolutely horrible CJK support. So I essentially never
use it, even though a few years ago Japanese support (on Linux) went from
"completely unavailable" to "laughably horrible." OOo has very
nice,
mature, professional CJK features.
http://bugzilla.abisource.com/buglist.cgi?keywords=cjk
Now I see that someone made it "not totally suck" on MacOSX recently,
so maybe there's hope yet for AbiWord.
See the post from today.
http://www.abisource.com/mailinglists/abiword-dev/2005/Mar/0002.html
Join in. Be part of the solution. As I said we're a grass roots
organisation that responds to real people with real problems.
We're VERY responsive to people with patches.
AbiWord takes less than 10 minutes to build from scratch on a modern
computer so the threshold for testing stuff is not high. Just testing
and telling us what works for CJK and what doesn't is really useful.
Cheers
Martin
11:34 p.m.
New subject: fedora-devel-list Digest, Vol 12, Issue 108
On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 05:13:40PM +1100, Martin Sevior wrote:
See the post from today.
http://www.abisource.com/mailinglists/abiword-dev/2005/Mar/0002.html
Join in. Be part of the solution. As I said we're a grass roots
organisation that responds to real people with real problems.
We're VERY responsive to people with patches.
I have made some comments and bugs in Bugzilla in the past, part of which
resulted in some things getting fixed, and other ones which have been left
for years with "well, none of us who hack on this regularly are CJK users"
comments. I know that it's a nasty cycle where CJK users won't use your
program so much, which makes it harder for things to get fixed. I also
know that all your custom widgets make it difficult to get the same
level of support (and I know why you have those custom widgets too).
However, I am willing to trust that things will improve, and I look
forward to it, as Abiword does have a lot of nice features, as you said.
Personally, though, I don't have the time to hack on Abiword now.
Still, given all that, OOo right now does use a free license, and FC
current attempts to only have one application *in Core* (as opposed to
Extras) for each job. And given that, it's hard for me to support
Abiword over the equally free OOo *right now* in Core as the default
with the lack of workable CJK support. In the future, it might be different,
but right now if you're going to choose one, it has to be the one that
CJK users can actually use. It's not like being in Extras means not being
available at all. (Now gnumeric I like more than the OOo Calc-- but shipping
OOo Writer tends to push toward making Calc the default as well.)
John Thacker
1:47 a.m.
New subject: fedora-devel-list Digest, Vol 12, Issue 108
John Thacker writes:
Still, given all that, OOo right now does use a free license, and FC
current attempts to only have one application *in Core* (as opposed to
Extras) for each job. And given that, it's hard for me to support
Abiword over the equally free OOo *right now* in Core as the default
with the lack of workable CJK support.
That's fine. For you OO.o is the right solution. Just remember that
there are others for whom the opposite is true. Abiword does some things
that OO.o can't do, and thus for them, that's the right solution. For
me, there's no question that Abiword/Gnumeric are a better combination
than OO.o. But it seems there's little point in arguing about it now.
AFAICT, the decision has already been made, and FC4 will ship with them
in Extras. Let's just hope someone sees the light and puts them back
into Core for FC5.
Tet
8:39 a.m.
New subject: fedora-devel-list Digest, Vol 12, Issue 108
tir, 01.03.2005 kl. 08.47 skrev Tet:
John Thacker writes:
>Still, given all that, OOo right now does use a free license, and FC
>current attempts to only have one application *in Core* (as opposed to
>Extras) for each job. And given that, it's hard for me to support
>Abiword over the equally free OOo *right now* in Core as the default
>with the lack of workable CJK support.
That's fine. For you OO.o is the right solution. Just remember that
there are others for whom the opposite is true. Abiword does some things
that OO.o can't do, and thus for them, that's the right solution. For
me, there's no question that Abiword/Gnumeric are a better combination
than OO.o. But it seems there's little point in arguing about it now.
AFAICT, the decision has already been made, and FC4 will ship with them
in Extras. Let's just hope someone sees the light and puts them back
into Core for FC5.
As far as i understand, extras is open for non-rh devs to maintain - and
if (example) AbiWord was maintained by somebody who used AbiWord
reguraly, and maybe even was an AbiWord developer - wouldn't that
possibly give a better AbiWord than somebody who never used it exept
fiering it up to check that "yum, it still starts" after recompiling,
but never sees any bugs etc. ?
Kyrre
7011
days inactive
7012
days old
3 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
John Thacker -
Kyrre Ness Sjobak -
Martin Sevior -
Tet