[gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: office-ext ?

[gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: office-ext ?

[Andreas K. Huettel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 448 bytes --]


Hiya, 

there's a growing culture of libreoffice extensions, and (with the help of an 
eclass prepared by scarabeus) it would be nice to get some of them into the 
portage tree. Now we have to decide where to put them.

Suggestion: new category office-ext

What do you think?

Cheers, Andreas

-- 
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer 
kde (team lead), sci, tex, arm, printing
dilfridge@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: office-ext ?

[Michael Orlitzky]

On 05/05/12 14:40, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> 
> Hiya, 
> 
> there's a growing culture of libreoffice extensions, and (with the help of an 
> eclass prepared by scarabeus) it would be nice to get some of them into the 
> portage tree. Now we have to decide where to put them.
> 
> Suggestion: new category office-ext
> 
> What do you think?

No preference myself, but we already have e.g. app-emacs and www-apache
which (I guess?) reflect the fact that emacs lies under app-foo and
apache under www-bar.

That would suggest app-libreoffice?

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: office-ext ?

[Krzysztof Pawlik]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 866 bytes --]

On 05/05/12 21:01, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 05/05/12 14:40, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>>
>> Hiya, 
>>
>> there's a growing culture of libreoffice extensions, and (with the help of an 
>> eclass prepared by scarabeus) it would be nice to get some of them into the 
>> portage tree. Now we have to decide where to put them.
>>
>> Suggestion: new category office-ext
>>
>> What do you think?
> 
> No preference myself, but we already have e.g. app-emacs and www-apache
> which (I guess?) reflect the fact that emacs lies under app-foo and
> apache under www-bar.
> 
> That would suggest app-libreoffice?

+1 on app-libreoffice if they are only for LibreOffice. Can those extensions
work with app-office/openoffice-bin?

-- 
Krzysztof Pawlik  <nelchael at gentoo.org>  key id: 0xF6A80E46
desktop-misc, java, vim, kernel, python, apache...


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 554 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: office-ext ?

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 452 bytes --]

On Sat, 5 May 2012 20:40:47 +0200
"Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@gentoo.org> wrote:

> there's a growing culture of libreoffice extensions, and (with the
> help of an eclass prepared by scarabeus) it would be nice to get some
> of them into the portage tree. Now we have to decide where to put
> them.
> 
> Suggestion: new category office-ext
> 
> What do you think?

office-plugins, to follow suit.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 316 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: office-ext ?

[Markos Chandras]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 05/05/2012 08:04 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sat, 5 May 2012 20:40:47 +0200 "Andreas K. Huettel"
> <dilfridge@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>> there's a growing culture of libreoffice extensions, and (with
>> the help of an eclass prepared by scarabeus) it would be nice to
>> get some of them into the portage tree. Now we have to decide
>> where to put them.
>> 
>> Suggestion: new category office-ext
>> 
>> What do you think?
> 
> office-plugins, to follow suit.
> 
This may be confusing as people would expect these plugins to work
with both {open,libre}office packages. If these plugins are just for
libreoffice then I would prefer app-libreoffice like other people have
already suggested

- -- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
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=6GG+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: office-ext?

[Andreas K. Huettel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1316 bytes --]

Am Samstag, 5. Mai 2012, 23:15:46 schrieb Markos Chandras:
> On 05/05/2012 08:04 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Sat, 5 May 2012 20:40:47 +0200 "Andreas K. Huettel"
> > 
> > <dilfridge@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >> there's a growing culture of libreoffice extensions, and (with
> >> the help of an eclass prepared by scarabeus) it would be nice to
> >> get some of them into the portage tree. Now we have to decide
> >> where to put them.
> >> 
> >> Suggestion: new category office-ext
> >> 
> >> What do you think?
> > 
> > office-plugins, to follow suit.
> 
> This may be confusing as people would expect these plugins to work
> with both {open,libre}office packages. If these plugins are just for
> libreoffice then I would prefer app-libreoffice like other people have
> already suggested

I've collected information and the extensions (should) work with any office 
variant, openoffice and libreoffice. To be more precise, they should work with 
anything that uses the so-called "uno bridge". 

This is why I like the new category "office-plugins" best... and would like to 
implement that one. 

Any additional objections?

Cheers, Andreas


-- 
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer 
kde (team lead), sci, tex, arm, printing
dilfridge@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: office-ext?

[Ulrich Mueller]

>>>>> On Sun, 6 May 2012, Andreas K Huettel wrote:

> I've collected information and the extensions (should) work with any
> office variant, openoffice and libreoffice. To be more precise, they
> should work with anything that uses the so-called "uno bridge".

> This is why I like the new category "office-plugins" best... and
> would like to implement that one.

Is there any chance that there will be more than one or two office-*
categories in future? If not, I think that we shouldn't introduce a
new category prefix for this. The category should be named app-*
instead.

How about app-ooo, following the naming of the virtual?

Ulrich

Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: office-ext?

[Andreas K. Huettel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1118 bytes --]

> >>>>> On Sun, 6 May 2012, Andreas K Huettel wrote:
> > I've collected information and the extensions (should) work with any
> > office variant, openoffice and libreoffice. To be more precise, they
> > should work with anything that uses the so-called "uno bridge".
> > 
> > This is why I like the new category "office-plugins" best... and
> > would like to implement that one.
> 
> Is there any chance that there will be more than one or two office-*
> categories in future? If not, I think that we shouldn't introduce a
> new category prefix for this. The category should be named app-*
> instead.
> 
> How about app-ooo, following the naming of the virtual?
> 
> Ulrich

Well... we're already breaking that rule by having lxde-base, perl-core, sec-
policy... and kde-*, rox-*, xfce-* exist only twice. So I would not handle 
this requirement too strongly. 

(I could e.g. imagine categories office-templates, office-filters, but that's 
right now pure speculation.)

app-ooo kind of minimizes the "ah yes I know what goes there" effect.


-- 
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer
kde, sci, arm, tex, printing

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: app-officeext

[Andreas K. Huettel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 935 bytes --]

> > > I've collected information and the extensions (should) work with any
> > > office variant, openoffice and libreoffice. To be more precise, they
> > > should work with anything that uses the so-called "uno bridge".
> > > 
> > > This is why I like the new category "office-plugins" best... and
> > > would like to implement that one.
> > 
> > Is there any chance that there will be more than one or two office-*
> > categories in future? If not, I think that we shouldn't introduce a
> > new category prefix for this. The category should be named app-*
> > instead.

After some discussion with Ulrich on IRC, we settled on the name 
	"app-officeext", 
which we'll be able to fill with a couple of hundred (open|libre)office 
extensions then... :) I guess this is a compromise that we all can live with.

So, I'll implement that tonight.

Cheers, 
Andreas

-- 
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer
kde, sci, arm, tex, printing

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: app-officeext

[Andreas K. Huettel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 662 bytes --]

Am Dienstag 08 Mai 2012, 12:30:04 schrieb Andreas K. Huettel:
> 
> After some discussion with Ulrich on IRC, we settled on the name
> 	"app-officeext",
> which we'll be able to fill with a couple of hundred (open|libre)office
> extensions then... :) I guess this is a compromise that we all can live
> with.
> 
> So, I'll implement that tonight.
> 

And committed. 

There's already a first package in there, app-officeext/texmaths - a LaTeX 
replacement for the LO formula editor, generating embedded svg. Give it a try, 
it's really cool! 

-- 

Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer 
dilfridge@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: New category for (libre)office extensions: app-officeext

[Jörg Schaible]

Andreas K. Huettel wrote:

> Am Dienstag 08 Mai 2012, 12:30:04 schrieb Andreas K. Huettel:
>> 
>> After some discussion with Ulrich on IRC, we settled on the name
>> "app-officeext",
>> which we'll be able to fill with a couple of hundred (open|libre)office
>> extensions then... :) I guess this is a compromise that we all can live
>> with.
>> 
>> So, I'll implement that tonight.
>> 
> 
> And committed.
> 
> There's already a first package in there, app-officeext/texmaths - a LaTeX
> replacement for the LO formula editor, generating embedded svg. Give it a
> try, it's really cool!

There's also app-office/ooextras since a long time.

- Jörg

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: office-ext?

[Luca Barbato]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 06/05/12 09:06, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> Am Samstag, 5. Mai 2012, 23:15:46 schrieb Markos Chandras:
>> On 05/05/2012 08:04 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> On Sat, 5 May 2012 20:40:47 +0200 "Andreas K. Huettel"
>>>
>>> <dilfridge@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>> there's a growing culture of libreoffice extensions, and (with
>>>> the help of an eclass prepared by scarabeus) it would be nice to
>>>> get some of them into the portage tree. Now we have to decide
>>>> where to put them.
>>>>
>>>> Suggestion: new category office-ext
>>>>
>>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> office-plugins, to follow suit.
>>
>> This may be confusing as people would expect these plugins to work
>> with both {open,libre}office packages. If these plugins are just for
>> libreoffice then I would prefer app-libreoffice like other people have
>> already suggested
> 
> I've collected information and the extensions (should) work with any office 
> variant, openoffice and libreoffice. To be more precise, they should work with 
> anything that uses the so-called "uno bridge". 
> 
> This is why I like the new category "office-plugins" best... and would like to 
> implement that one. 
> 
> Any additional objections?

I prefer app-plugins even if it is broader.

lu

- -- 

Luca Barbato
Gentoo/linux
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk+myw0ACgkQ6Ex4woTpDjTVJwCfZjNrwt9WXj6JlELPLwF60kj2
wl4An3EM5GaEvUTsVRbTlVIP+puoQz35
=nn8m
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: office-ext?

[Jeroen Roovers]

On Sun, 6 May 2012 18:06:35 +0200
"Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@gentoo.org> wrote:

> I've collected information and the extensions (should) work with any
> office variant, openoffice and libreoffice. To be more precise, they
> should work with anything that uses the so-called "uno bridge". 

uno-plugins/*


     jer