On 11/04/2016 03:13 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 12:12:21PM +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
On 11/04/2016 11:20 AM, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
Also, would going through officecfg and looking for deprecated and
actually no-op configuration thingies be a good Easy Hack?
At least in principle, the tree of available configuration items is part of
the stable interface, accessible from 3rd party code. So at least some
removals could be delicate.
I guess we then need some kind of feature flag that is internal to
LibreOffice, akin to what major web browsers now do for experimental
features.
For example I hate the experimental features flag, it puts a bunch of
totally unrelated features under the same room, and too coarse in
general. I was thinking we should kill it and have individual options
for each experimental feature, but configuration options being a part
of stable interface kills the whole idea.
Removal of configuration items isn't something that never happens. And
configmgr handles unknown items gracefully when reading stale .xcu/.xcd
files, and 3rd party code programmatically accessing such items can be
made robust too, by catching the relevant exceptions. So removing
configuration items isn't a stubborn no-no. I wrote the original mail
mainly to raise awareness (if necessary) that configuration items
shouldn't come and go too arbitrarily.
(For experimental features, another option would be to use a single
configuration property of type string-list, and each experimental
feature is assigned a unique string token.)
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
