It's nice to see a software project keeping with a sane version number system (major.minor.release; major number change = architectural changes), and it's nice to see them working on fixing a pile of bugs and trying some new approaches in their architecture, instead of just introducing a meaningless UI change.
I would've really liked them to introduce a new more modern UI with this release. I like these UI mock-ups here, with the left sidebar. I think that's a good idea (the symbols above should be in white, too, though):
If I were them I'd try to release the new UI in the same time with the release for mobile, and try to make it a bit more unified, at least in style, since tablets and PC's might need their UI's optimized for each.
I have no real knowledge of this situation, but I guarantee they are not using GTK everywhere. Cross platform support (especially with GTK3) is not nearly good enough.
My understanding of LibreOffice was that it existed as a fork purely as a response to Oracle exerting excessive control over the project. Now that Oracle has relinquished OpenOffice.org, can anyone shed some light on what the stated goals of LibreOffice actually are? How are they distinct from OpenOffice.org?
Well, basically, LibreOffice forked while OpenOffice was languishing under Oracle and no one knew what would happen. Since then, it has actually generally had more development than OpenOffice; there was a long period of time in which OpenOffice development halted while it was being moved over to Apache, and relicensed under the Apache license. In the meantime, LibreOffice was receiving active development and new features, and many distros started shipping it because it was actually shipping and ready while Apache OpenOffice was still being held up in bureaucracy.
Now that Apache OpenOffice is starting to ship and receive development (much in the form of porting features from Lotus Symphony, which has also been donated to the Apache project), they are being developed pretty much independently. There's a certain amount of acrimony between the projects, which is unfortunate. But there's also the unfortunate case that due to licens issues, it would be hard to merge the projects. LibreOffice is licensed under the LGPLv3, while OpenOffice has been relicensed under the Apache License (Oracle allowed their portions to be relicensed, and some of what remained from third-parties was thrown out or rewritten). This means that LibreOffice can incorporate code from OpenOffice, while OpenOffice cannot incorporate code from LibreOffice (at least, without work to turn it into separate libraries or changing the license back to LGPL).
So, due to the acrimony between the projects, and licensing issues, they are pretty much developing independently now, with some code moving between them when possible.
I guess you stopped after the first four paragraphs. The fifth reads:
"In other words, LibreOffice is becoming more than just an OpenOffice fork, but an independent office suite in its own right. At the same time, OpenOffice has been struggling. OpenOffice makes no bones that "Volunteers [are] needed in all areas"."
This isn't an answer, but you could equally ask the opposite question about what makes OpenOffice.org distinct from LibreOffice, given that LibreOffice was a community-led project before OpenOffice.org was.
We'll see. If revision tracking finally works properly (ie. interchange of Word 97 .doc files with revision tracking doesn't just end up corrupting horribly) then it might be useful. Until then, it's not a usable substitute for Word. I've ended up bringing work home to edit on Windows, because LibreOffice trashed my document.
Of course it would be nice if we didn't use Word format (and obsolete Word format at that), in this way, but that's life in corporateville. Engineering shall toe the party line.
This is the thing the project actually recommends: use the shiny new version if you want new and shiny, use the previous version if you want stability.
LibreOffice: Going to be very a very good desktop office-suite real soon now, just need to sort out these technical issues. Call back in a year, will you?
Ofcourse, in a year, you'll all be using web-based office suites anyway.
[+] [-] thaumaturgy|13 years ago|reply
It's nice to see a software project keeping with a sane version number system (major.minor.release; major number change = architectural changes), and it's nice to see them working on fixing a pile of bugs and trying some new approaches in their architecture, instead of just introducing a meaningless UI change.
[+] [-] ajanuary|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nextparadigms|13 years ago|reply
http://pauloup.deviantart.com/gallery/28216273#/d37dx4a
The light one looks good, too:
http://pauloup.deviantart.com/art/LibreOffice-UI-Mock-up-lig...
If I were them I'd try to release the new UI in the same time with the release for mobile, and try to make it a bit more unified, at least in style, since tablets and PC's might need their UI's optimized for each.
[+] [-] chris_wot|13 years ago|reply
However, I don't agree with the UI mockups. They look very, very confusing.
[+] [-] Camillo|13 years ago|reply
Also: they use GTK tools for designing the UI, but are they actually using GTK to implement it? Is its Mac support good enough now?
[+] [-] streptomycin|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bokchoi|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Herald_MJ|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lambda|13 years ago|reply
Now that Apache OpenOffice is starting to ship and receive development (much in the form of porting features from Lotus Symphony, which has also been donated to the Apache project), they are being developed pretty much independently. There's a certain amount of acrimony between the projects, which is unfortunate. But there's also the unfortunate case that due to licens issues, it would be hard to merge the projects. LibreOffice is licensed under the LGPLv3, while OpenOffice has been relicensed under the Apache License (Oracle allowed their portions to be relicensed, and some of what remained from third-parties was thrown out or rewritten). This means that LibreOffice can incorporate code from OpenOffice, while OpenOffice cannot incorporate code from LibreOffice (at least, without work to turn it into separate libraries or changing the license back to LGPL).
So, due to the acrimony between the projects, and licensing issues, they are pretty much developing independently now, with some code moving between them when possible.
[+] [-] dfc|13 years ago|reply
"In other words, LibreOffice is becoming more than just an OpenOffice fork, but an independent office suite in its own right. At the same time, OpenOffice has been struggling. OpenOffice makes no bones that "Volunteers [are] needed in all areas"."
[+] [-] streptomycin|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jrabone|13 years ago|reply
Of course it would be nice if we didn't use Word format (and obsolete Word format at that), in this way, but that's life in corporateville. Engineering shall toe the party line.
[+] [-] cowmix|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stephen_g|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ars|13 years ago|reply
New releases after a redesign always have bugs, and since there are no user visible changes, it's all negative and no positive for the users.
I'll be skipping this release for at least half a year.
[+] [-] davidgerard|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chris_wot|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Nux|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Joe_Knapp|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] guilloche|13 years ago|reply
>On Linux, however, LibreOffice will continue to be under the LPGLv3.
I am confused, are the licenses (LGPL & MPL) for source code? the small part of linux specific code is LGPL-licensed (not MPL)?
[+] [-] chris_wot|13 years ago|reply
Seriously, LibreOffice is starting to feel very advanced! I'm wondering how long it will take before it will surpass Microsoft Office!
[+] [-] sparx|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ZeroGravitas|13 years ago|reply
http://libreoffice.hu/2012/11/29/logo/
http://libreoffice.hu/2012/12/12/logo-for-desktop-publishing...
[+] [-] josteink|13 years ago|reply
Ofcourse, in a year, you'll all be using web-based office suites anyway.
[+] [-] Revisor|13 years ago|reply
I see no advantage in web-based office suites. LibreOffice + Dropbox is all our small office needs.