On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 09:30:14PM +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> Currently the new layout is off by default and can be enabled at runtime
> by setting SAL_USE_COMMON_LAYOUT env variable. After merging with
> master, I’m going to wait a week or so for any potential build issues
> then swap the defaul
ka
Cc: libreoffice-dev
Subject: Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch
Had we already dropped support for XP, it would have been an embarrassing
demonstration and reflected badly on us.
The only ones that should be embarrassed are those still running XP. Also, who
are these "us"
> The point is there are a lot of people out there for whatever reason still
> us XP. Despite what you keep suggesting, dropping XP won’t do anything to
> change them.
>
Dropping XP support in future LO versions won't do anything to existing LO
versions that will continue to work nicely for them.
, dropping XP won’t do anything to change
them.
From: tlillqv...@gmail.com on behalf of Tor Lillqvist
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 2:13 PM
To: slacka
Cc: libreoffice-dev
Subject: Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch
Had we already dropped support for XP, it would have
> Had we already dropped support for XP, it would have been an embarrassing
> demonstration and reflected badly on us.
>
The only ones that should be embarrassed are those still running XP. Also,
who are these "us" you are speaking for?
--tml
___
LibreO
rging-feature-commonsallayout-branch-tp4197400p4198948.html
Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 04:01:22AM +0400, Yousuf Philips wrote:
> You know the saying, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", and most people dont
> consider XP broke (me included) even if MS isnt officially supporting it.
Its not broke -- it simply doesnt exist anymore. That is what "end of lif
On 10/20/2016 11:07 AM, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
Is there any reason to believe that those clueless people who hold on to
it will change their mind in any significant number by the time LO 5.4
comes out? Or LO 5.5? They will hold on to it as long as the machine
keeps working.
You know the saying, "
On 20/10/16 05:14, Yousuf Philips wrote:
> On 10/20/2016 02:34 AM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
>> So that is not as bad as I thought it would be. We can have a runtime
>> check for 5.3 that forces disable CommonSalLayout for Windows XP. We can
>> then communicate in advance that we are dropping Windows XP
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 09:30:14PM +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> - We use a bit of DirectWrite to load fonts on Windows, so Windows XP is
> not supported as well. Again it can be fixed with some effort, but I
> don’t think anyone will miss XP. Ideally we should do a full switch to
> DirectWrit
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 06:40:08AM -0700, V Stuart Foote wrote:
> On Windows 8.1 & 10 builds (32-bit master TB62) and the Alpha1 build,
> HARFBUZZ unified text is having some issues with OpenGL rendering. With
> default GPU rendering it is doing pretty well.
>
> See tdf#103365 - Text isn't showi
on <https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103365>
--
View this message in context:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Merging-feature-commonsallayout-branch-tp4197400p4197843.html
Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
LibreOffi
> You know the saying, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", and most people
> dont consider XP broke (me included)
By the same token, they should then also consider LibreOffice 5.2 not
broken, and hold on to that.
--tml
___
LibreOffice mailing list
Libre
Hi *,
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Jan Iversen
wrote:
>
> I would like to support tml in this view.
>
> If 5.3 happened to run in XP without additional code, no harm done in
> supporting XP.
>
> But we need to (unless I misunderstood things) add a setup variable as well
> as extra code (howev
> On 20 Oct 2016, at 09:07, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>
>
> I'd say just do it and drop XP support. LO <= 5.2 will keep working for them
> just fine.
I would like to support tml in this view.
If 5.3 happened to run in XP without additional code, no harm done in
supporting XP.
But we need to (u
> As XP still has between 6 and 9% of desktop market share,
Is there any reason to believe that those clueless people who hold on to it
will change their mind in any significant number by the time LO 5.4 comes
out? Or LO 5.5? They will hold on to it as long as the machine keeps
working.
I'd say
On 10/20/2016 02:34 AM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
So that is not as bad as I thought it would be. We can have a runtime
check for 5.3 that forces disable CommonSalLayout for Windows XP. We can
then communicate in advance that we are dropping Windows XP support in
5.4 (since we will remove the old code
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 03:11:25PM -0700, yphilips wrote:
> So cloph asked in QA about testing SAL_USE_COMMON_LAYOUT on windows XP and i
> did and it crashed on startup, so unless we want to alienate XP users from
> running 5.3, we'd likely need to put in a flag to disable it for XP.
So that is no
> unless we want to alienate XP users from
> running 5.3,
What would be so wrong in that?
--tml
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
n.org/Merging-feature-commonsallayout-branch-tp4197400p4197639.html
Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
On 2016-10-18 18:36, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 09:06:42AM +0200, Milos Sramek wrote:
>> Dear Khaled,
>>
>> do you think that extensive comparison of rendering of numerous
>> documents with and without the new layout engine makes sense?
>> If yes, I can run my tests in such a way
Dear Khaled,
do you think that extensive comparison of rendering of numerous
documents with and without the new layout engine makes sense?
If yes, I can run my tests in such a way to see if there are any
differences.
My test documents use latin script except for a few ones in Chinese. So,
if you
Congratulations when this gets merged! It's a big chunk of work.
One question is on my mind that I was meaning to ask before: Is issue
tdf#66819 "Setting additional spacing between characters does not
prevent automatic ligature substitution." solved in this branch?
Greetings,
Stephan
2016-10-17
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 09:30:14PM +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> I believe that feature/commonsallayout (AKA unified text layout) is now
> feature complete with no known major bugs, and should be ready to be
> merged on master. I’ll try merge it tomorrow night and hope for the
> best, unless someone
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:05:14PM +0200, 'Christian Lohmaier' via Khaled Hosny
wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> > I believe that feature/commonsallayout (AKA unified text layout) is now
> > feature complete with no known major bugs, and should be ready to be
> > me
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 09:06:42AM +0200, Milos Sramek wrote:
> Dear Khaled,
>
> do you think that extensive comparison of rendering of numerous
> documents with and without the new layout engine makes sense?
> If yes, I can run my tests in such a way to see if there are any
> differences.
This w
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> I believe that feature/commonsallayout (AKA unified text layout) is now
> feature complete with no known major bugs, and should be ready to be
> merged on master. I’ll try merge it tomorrow night and hope for the
> best, unless someone objects
Not directly, but you can now control OpenType features using the same
syntax used for OpenType features.
It should be easy to turn of ligatures in VCL when characters spacing is
used, except that character spacing is not applied by VCL but by the
client and we have no clue about it at all. I trie
I believe that feature/commonsallayout (AKA unified text layout) is now
feature complete with no known major bugs, and should be ready to be
merged on master. I’ll try merge it tomorrow night and hope for the
best, unless someone objects loudly.
Currently the new layout is off by default and can b
29 matches
Mail list logo
