Man.. do I have to repeat everything again?
----- Messaggio originale ----- > Da: Rob Weir <> > And so it is clear, my technical objection is: > > Backwards compatibility of spreadsheet documents, and calculations > specifically, is critical. If AOO 4.0 returns results that are even a > penny different than earlier versions than this would be a severe > defect. If we found such a defect even the day before a major release > we would probably treat it as a "stop ship" blocking issue. Any > change that breaks backwards compatibility is a technical issue. > Breaking backwards compatibility is acceptable for 4.0 Release given that we are attempting to comply with a stricter standard. If it were prohibited to do such changes then other Apache Projects would be in big trouble: look at Apache Lucene: http://lucene.apache.org/core/4_1_0/changes/Changes.html The same number of compatibility-related changes than optimizations! > Fact: Pedro's patch changes the results of spreadsheet calculations > in OpenOffice, introducing an error where there was not one before. > OOo already has plenty of functions that give backwards incompatible results with previous versions of OOo and Symphony (which is rather crappy). atanh, asinh, erf, everything in SAL has needed continued revisions. > Finally, treating 0^0 == 1 is very common in programming languages and > spreadsheets, being the value returned by OpenOffice since 1.0, as > well as by Calligra Sheets, Google Docs, Symphony, LibreOffice, Java, > C, and .NET. Anyone arguing that the value is incorrect faces a > mountain of contrary opinion and practice. > So far you have failed to produce an example of reasonable use where such incompatibility is evident. Oh, and Microsoft Excel, which holds a bigger market share than all the above mentioned alternatives is evidently buried within such mountain. :). Is this really the best you got? Why not take my offer and give it a two weeks thought? You may come up with something more elaborate. Pedro.
