Developer comments
Unfortunately, since the final release of OpenOffice 3 was delayed, there was not enough testing time to include it by default in Intrepid.
OpenOffice 3.0.1, to be released on Dec. 2, is a bugfix only release and should prove to be much more stable than the current release. This release will be available on the backport repository.
More infos: http://www.tectonic.co.za/?p=3447
509
votes
|
|
538
0
29
|
|
|
|
|
Propose your solution
Attachments
No attachments.
Duplicates
Comments
|
|
We all want OpenOffice.org 3.0, however it is kind of late, and we don't want to end up with something broken.
Either way, OpenOffice.org 3.0 will be available as backports I guess. I look forward to it. OOo3 is great! :)
|
cheesehead
(Brainstorm admin)
wrote on the 15 Oct 08 at 21:56
|
|
|
-1 Absolutely Not...until it's been properly tested (and fixed) with intrepid. That's what backports are for.
Bleeding-edge is not an adequate reason to add untested upgrades into a new release, especially when backports, debs/PPA, and other easy methods of getting it before 9.04 are conveniently available. Stability of the release is more important, and the whole point of Ubuntu's very successful release strategy.
|
|
|
of course yes, what are you talking (with all respect) cheesehead, if we are going to be always fearfull about this things, so it will never be an os like mac, it just have to be as easy as installing a new software.
ahh, and something else: please the last version of gimp must be by default too in intrepid ibex
|
|
|
|
For god's sake... If they doesn't put openoffice 3.0 on intrepid, the first think that everyone will gonna do after install Intrepid final version is download and install openoffice 3.0. It's not a Alpha or a Beta version, it's a final version, considered stable. That's enought....
|
|
Faryshta
wrote on the 16 Oct 08 at 04:19
|
|
|
I am wondering...
Why developers haven't tag this as already done?
|
|
Emacs23
wrote on the 16 Oct 08 at 05:09
|
|
|
|
Open office is not needed.
|
|
|
You know... Linux Kernel stable, GNOME/GTK stable, OpenOffice stable, why there would be bugs hard to fix? I don't think that's gonna happen, and 14 days would be necessary to get this working like a charm.
And, like slsolaris said, The Gimp should be upgraded in Ubuntu repositories...! I know that the more stable, the better, but if we just keep thinking about that, we are going to always have a 100% stable OS, but with old software (just like Debian!), instead of a 98% stable OS (using final version and stable-claimed by other devs), with newest software, full of new enhancements!
What do you rather to have?
|
|
|
|
Emacs23 it is really true, but it could be a suggestion to open office team, they must put their attention on this bugs
|
|
|
Emacs23, you could then submit and idea here are Brainstorm to remove OpenOffice and put something better.
Or you can send your suggestions to OO devs.
Ok? Ok.
:)
|
|
|
Official hungarian translation is VERY POOR.
The translation from FSF.hu is currently not done.
|
|
|
|
How many times is this idea going to be duplicated?
|
|
|
I think we are still in a time window of opportunity to show MS-Office2003 users that default ubuntu 8.10 can open MS-Office2007 files without installing anything more than a clean install and without buy the MS-Office.
BETTER YET:
We can boot from ubuntu live-CD open some MS-Office 2007 (received by mail) files and save it in MS-Office2003 compatible files, so that every one can benefict from ubuntu 8.10 even without installing any sofware in hard disk ;)
|
|
|
|
look at the last developer comment
|
|
|
chipbennett, I couldn't find any similar idea, so I think it's not duplicated.
If devs got some real attention to that and implemented OpenOffice 3.0 in Ubuntu Intrepid 8.10, this would be a great surprise for everybody, for the community and commercially!
|
|
|
I don't consider these ideas as duplicates :(
Anyway, I'm sure that Ubuntu 9.04 will have OpenOffice 3, but why wait 6 months in something that can be done now?
As I said, if this be done, Ubuntu will gain a lot of bonus-users :P
This implies in a larger community, Ubuntu better-known, more money to Canonical, etc etc etc
|
|
|
@vitorgatti:
We would also lose some users for whom like stability, not bleeding edge. OpenOffice.org 3 may be called "stable", but that doesn't mean that it is. OpenOffice.org X.Y.0 has usually been buggy, and that is why a 3.0.1 release is planned. We wouldn't wait 6 months, it can be packaged and put in the backport repos after Intrepid opens, and there are PPAs already for it. So for the people who want OpenOffice.org 3, they can install it. Otherwise, people can wait until its been thoroughly tested.
|
|
plun
wrote on the 16 Oct 08 at 21:31
|
|
|
It is tested since August when Calc opened his ppa
It is tested upstream, thousand of testers.
Mandriva and Fedora also testing and both will include OO-3
Mandriva 2009 is already out.
So for me this is just strange, for the moment I have both ppa and OpenOffice final (from OO) installed without any issues.
Debian Lenny is maybe a better choice for them with zero bug tolerance.
|
|
stoffel
wrote on the 16 Oct 08 at 23:12
|
|
|
|
-1: OpenOffice.org 3.0 was released too late for good testing. I don't mind though if it is added as a package called "OpenOffice.org 3.0 Unsupported/Untested" as an optional package that can be installed next to the latest OOo release that underwent good testing.
|
|
cyphax
wrote on the 17 Oct 08 at 18:41
|
|
|
Oh please. Ubuntu has shipped with software that was either in BETA (Firefox 3, and that was in a LTS no less) or not done (pulseaudio, X/XRandR) in general before, and now OO.o 3 is FINAL and STABLE, but it's too "late"?
Well, fine, ignore the community then, suit yourself, but Ubuntu 8.10 isn't gonna look much better than 8.04 this way.
|
|
|
@cyphax:
I - and a lot of community members - agree with you.
That said, if the decision has already been made, then OO.o 3.0 won't be in Intrepid final. Although alternate means exist to use 3.0 in Intrepid, I don't see that decision changing at this point.
Who knows? Maybe I'm wrong...
|
|
|
that's what I was thinking too, cyphax
Firefox Beta5 came by default with Ubuntu 8.04
aMule CVS came in the repositories
and OpenOffice 3.0 Final, can't be inserted?
also, why OpenOffice beta was already being tested with Ubuntu 8.10 to be ready to come by default, just like was done with Firefox 3?
:(
|
|
|
If there is no significant additional risk of losing data with OOo 3 not fully tested in Ubuntu I would put it in intrepid; perform the most critical tests (if any) and leave the minor ones for the first weeks after october 30.
The idea of backports repository is not enough user friendly I think. Probably most of the ubuntu users don't have a clue what /etc/apt/sources.list is, where it is, and how to edit it. Giving them OOo 2.4 will cause disappointment.
|
|
|
the idea of synchronizing the efforts of FOSS community to provide all the major releases at a time seems to me increasingly useful.
additionally, a bigger marketing wave would be created.
(double posting + offtopic. no mercy.)
|
|
|
|
Don't be so anxious. Let the devs work out the bugs before shipping OOo3. 15 days is not enough time to ensure that there are no showstopper or security bugs in OOo3. If you need it that badly, then backport.
|
|
cyphax
wrote on the 18 Oct 08 at 16:13
|
|
|
"Don't be so anxious. Let the devs work out the bugs before shipping OOo3. 15 days is not enough time to ensure that there are no showstopper or security bugs in OOo3. If you need it that badly, then backport."
You are talking about the prototype of a beta release. Actually, wait, I take that back: that's what an ALPHA release is for. OpenOffice.org 3 has been tested and it's been well over 15 days. I've had OpenOffice 3 for months I think, beta. It's ridiculous to think they just pooped out this final out of the blue. Which is more than I can say for some of the software shipped with 8.04. Which is my entire point: I didn't mind Firefox 3 beta shipping with Ubuntu, the reasoning for that is that they didn't want the old, soon to be replaced Firefox 2 in their release cause it's gotta be supported. Now, replace "Firefox" with "OpenOffice.org" (heh, coincidentally you can even leave the version numbers alone) and there you go.
You know what, if Ubuntu is going to be conservative on this kind of thing, I'll go find a distribution that's more cutting edge, cause I simply prefer that myself. But now they're being inconsistent about it and that's frustrating.
|
|
|
-1
We really do not need untested software in a default installation. Even if it is in beta, it is still not fully tested, nor guaranteed to be bug free.
|
|
|
@steveydoteu:
It's not beta. It was final-released a week ago.
It had been in beta for a significant length of time prior to release.
I'm not saying that there aren't or mightn't be any showstopper bugs; I'm just saying that the argument that it hasn't had time to be tested is specious.
I would add to those arguing the Firefox 3 beta in 8.04 analogy; Firefox, as the default web browser, is much more "mission critical" than OpenOffice.org.
Maybe that just means that the FF betas warranted much more beta testing than OO.o?
|
|
Popoi
wrote on the 20 Oct 08 at 13:51
|
|
|
|
Not to include Oo3 would be very unpopular.
|
|
|
OpenOffice 3.0 really needs to be in Hardy. It's one of the most important piece of software in the whole distro, right up there with GNOME and Firefox.
It would be a wrong move to not include it by default in 8.10
|
|
|
> You are talking about the prototype of a beta release.
> Actually, wait, I take that back: that's what an ALPHA
> release is for. OpenOffice.org 3 has been tested and it's
> been well over 15 days.
15 days is not considered stable, sorry.
> You know what, if Ubuntu is going to be conservative on
> this kind of thing, I'll go find a distribution that's
> more cutting edge, cause I simply prefer that myself.
I suggest Fedora. I use both and Fedora is very cutting edge, some call it 'bleeding edge'. The Fedora mailing list is also very helpful and while it assumes a higher level of competency than the Ubuntu list, so long as you know to google before asking a question you will get along.
> But now they're being inconsistent about it and that's
> frustrating.
I agree 100%. I was very much against Fx3 in Hardy.
|
|
cjav
wrote on the 21 Oct 08 at 15:19
|
|
|
>> But now they're being inconsistent about it and that's
>> frustrating.
>I agree 100%. I was very much against Fx3 in Hardy.
I guess the difference here is that Hardy was a LTS, meaning that is they didn't include Firefox 3, there wouldn't be Firefox 3 for at least 3 years in many users Desktops.
But even that way I do think Openoffice 3 should be available at least through backports.
|
|
|
> 15 days is not considered stable, sorry.
OpenOffice 3.0 has been at the beta stage for 6 months, and at the release candidate stage for almost two months. With such a long RC period, OOo3 should be plenty stable. I really don't see how the "major showstoppers" that everybody seems to fear would escape an 00o scale (how many tens of thoudands of people have tested?) 2-month long release candidate.
Seriously, this "It might not be stable enough" sounds more like "We didn't want to spend time to properly integrate the beta/RC into intrepid (like we did with Firefox in Hardy), and now we don't have time to do it anymore" to me.
|
|
|
> OpenOffice 3.0 has been at the beta stage for 6 months,
> and at the release candidate stage for almost two months.
> With such a long RC period, OOo3 should be plenty stable.
That is not considered stable in software development, sorry.
|
|
|
|
Oh, then how can an OS that churns out new versions every 6 months ever be considered stable?
|
|
cyphax
wrote on the 22 Oct 08 at 06:16
|
|
|
"15 days is not considered stable, sorry. "
It is a stable release as opposed to a developer/testing (alpha/beta) release.
"I suggest Fedora. I use both and Fedora is very cutting edge, some call it 'bleeding edge'. The Fedora mailing list is also very helpful and while it assumes a higher level of competency than the Ubuntu list, so long as you know to google before asking a question you will get along."
I might try Fedora but to be brutally honest: I like Ubuntu and I'd rather see it improve than to switch to different distributions everytime I'm disappointed. Which is what this whole site is about. :)
I had no problems with Fx3 beta in Gutsy by the way. The problem they faced is that they had 2 options and they both sucked. I am in the end glad that they went with the beta because Mozilla's beta's are generally pretty good. But, so are OpenOffice's.
"I guess the difference here is that Hardy was a LTS, meaning that is they didn't include Firefox 3, there wouldn't be Firefox 3 for at least 3 years in many users Desktops."
That is both a huge argument for and against including a beta. The up and coming Intrepid is no LTS which means the arguments of being an LTS do not apply, they pretty much cancel each other out. Yes, it doesn't have the same long TTL, on the other hand, that means they need not be as strict as they should be with an LTS. And since they weren't that strict with Gutsy, I don't see a reason not to include OO.o 3. They promised it'd be there in the first place, anyway.
|
|
|
Whoa, this idea is getting popular...!
I'd like to see any Dev's comment about that.
There is really no good reason to not include OOo 3.0 in Ubuntu Intrepid 8.10.
Look what was done to Firefox in Ubuntu Hardy 8.04: BETA.
And what is STILL done with aMule in Hardy: SVN.
And... can't OpenOffice 3.0 FINAL be included in Intrepid 8.10? Why?
...
|
|
jed
wrote on the 22 Oct 08 at 18:30
|
|
|
What can I say ... the reason that Ubuntu has become so popular is because it chose to give people more of what they wanted ... otherwise it would still be as popular as pure Debian.
The lack of OpenOffice 3.0 is just the kind of stagnant thinking and approach that made people move from Debian to Ubuntu. OpenOffice is not a beta release with big ghostly dark bugs waiting to kill any Linux distribution that chooses to include it ... get real guys, your not arguing from some well thought out principles here, you've just made up your mind up and are trying to justify your stagnant thinking with FUD about OpenOffice 3.0.
Give people what they want ...
In the meantime, I've removed my old OpenOffice and installed it from the download from the website, runs a treat :o)
|
|
|
In all honesty, I'm still split on this one. Of course I personally would like to be using the latest OOo without installing 20-something debs, but I can understand why the developers want to play this conservative and protect their reputation for stable releases and a predictable release schedule.
For those who say that the devs "didn't want to spend time to properly integrate the beta/RC into intrepid (like we did with Firefox in Hardy)," there was basically no choice with Firefox in Hardy. Hardy is an LTS release and Firefox 2 wasn't going to be supported until the end of the Hardy support. It was less then ideal, but it was necessary to keep the LTS promise.
Another scenario: GNOME 2.23 (a developer version of 2.24) was included in the Intrepid Betas, even though 2.24 Final wasn't released until after the freeze. This is because GNOME meets their release dates. Even in September, OOo3 was still scheduled to be released on the 22nd, which got bumped back to the 30th, which got bumped back to early October, which got bumped back to mid October. There was never a guarantee that the final version would even be out before Intrepid's final release.
When OOo finally came out, there really wasn't enough time to test it against dependencies (even though the release is probably stable enough on its own).
On the other hand, a good number of Ubuntu users are probably going to install it anyway, so it would be nice if it could be officially supported. Even though it breaks protocol, it would be nice if there could be an 8.10.1 which would include OOo3 after a few extra weeks of testing.
Just my .02. Either way, I think the answer from the devs is a pretty clear "no." There's plenty of discussion here: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openoffice.org/+bug/267376
|
|
|
"the reason that Ubuntu has become so popular is because it chose to give people more of what they wanted ... The lack of OpenOffice 3.0 is just the kind of stagnant thinking and approach that made people move from Debian to Ubuntu."
I have to disagree. Part of what makes Ubuntu so popular is the fact that it is stable and things are supposed to "just work." This comes from months of testing before final releases. The feature freeze was at the end of August for a reason, and OOo3 missed that freeze by a long shot.
If you really want to be upset at someone, I would choose the OOo developers for frequently missing their release date targets.
|
|
|
|
+1 It's the full release.
|
|
|
"I have to disagree. Part of what makes Ubuntu so popular is the fact that it is stable and things are supposed to "just work." This comes from months of testing before final releases. The feature freeze was at the end of August for a reason, and OOo3 missed that freeze by a long shot."
Ubuntu has bent the rules on this before for other features they really wanted included. What is so different about this release? It's not even a LTS release!
|
|
|
|
Yes, OOO 3.0 in the final release please. +1 to the suggestion.
|
|
|
Open Office 2.4 had bugs, nothing is completely bug free, however one could consider that newer stable releases have fewer bugs then previous stable versions!
I say, go Open Office 3.0! It is something we all have been waiting fore and will give Ubuntu the edge!
|
|
|
i need openoffice 3.0 in intrepid.
go go go openoffice 3.0 ....!!!
|
|
|
Thanks for the update, Developer.
Having OO.o 3.0.1 in Backports a month after Intrepid is released sounds like a pretty reasonable compromise.
Will it also make it into the Hardy backports?
|
|
cyphax
wrote on the 23 Oct 08 at 21:01
|
|
|
"I have to disagree. Part of what makes Ubuntu so popular is the fact that it is stable and things are supposed to "just work."
Oh, in that case Ubuntu has failed dearly in the last few releases. Badly. Seriously. Okay let me give you a list of things that are supposed to just work, but really really don't, and that's just my own situation:
- using external monitor on my laptops. Yes, 2 of them.
- my Wacom Graphire 4 doesn't work great. I can GET it to work, but that's "just work" for ME, and not the Ubuntu promise.
- sound, well.. heh. If I have a Firefox tab open with a Youtube video, I can't play music on Audacious or Rhythmbox. I dunno what caused this, the switch to seriously UNtested PulseAudio perhaps? Which coincidentally Wine isn't supporting because it's buggy and not mature, but Ubuntu adopted it anyway. Note that I was able to play music + a video at the same time with sound in Windows 95.
- If I want to surely crash my system, I'll go ahead and hibernate. On both laptops I have here, that is. Same goes for stand by. STAND BY! Not a very exotic function yes? But OpenOffice.org hasn't been out long enough, let's not include it.
If OpenOffice 3 was a few weeks late, why not delay Ubuntu a few weeks? Hmm? Instead, we get an outdated Office suite, hardly a small deal if you ask me.
|
|
cyphax
wrote on the 23 Oct 08 at 21:01
|
|
|
"I have to disagree. Part of what makes Ubuntu so popular is the fact that it is stable and things are supposed to "just work."
Oh, in that case Ubuntu has failed dearly in the last few releases. Badly. Seriously. Okay let me give you a list of things that are supposed to just work, but really really don't, and that's just my own situation:
- using external monitor on my laptops. Yes, 2 of them.
- my Wacom Graphire 4 doesn't work great. I can GET it to work, but that's "just work" for ME, and not the Ubuntu promise.
- sound, well.. heh. If I have a Firefox tab open with a Youtube video, I can't play music on Audacious or Rhythmbox. I dunno what caused this, the switch to seriously UNtested PulseAudio perhaps? Which coincidentally Wine isn't supporting because it's buggy and not mature, but Ubuntu adopted it anyway. Note that I was able to play music + a video at the same time with sound in Windows 95.
- If I want to surely crash my system, I'll go ahead and hibernate. On both laptops I have here, that is. Same goes for stand by. STAND BY! Not a very exotic function yes? But OpenOffice.org hasn't been out long enough, let's not include it.
If OpenOffice 3 was a few weeks late, why not delay Ubuntu a few weeks? Hmm? Instead, we get an outdated Office suite, hardly a small deal if you ask me.
|
|
|
I understand that Canonical wants the software to be rigorously tested and 100% safe before deploying it, but perhaps they can make an exception for OpenOffice 3.
Ubuntu has a huge asset - a free and highly intuitive software repository. If Canonical becomes too cautious in deploying software to the repository, the repository will actually become a hindrance to users.
So please, make an exception. Satisfied users at the cost of marginally less secure software. Sounds like a good deal to me.
|
|
|
Woops... sorry for digging this dudes... I hope it wasn't too irritating to have so much traffic to this page... I didn't think it would go popular, honest.
I just wanted to bookmark the quick instructions for installing OOo3 and the current status of the idea. I didn't realize so many diggers would come hauling in.
As always, thanks for making Ubuntu GNU/Linux awesome!! You guys ROCK!!!
|
|
|
|
dudes and chicks that is... my mistake
|
|
Faryshta
wrote on the 24 Oct 08 at 21:59
|
|
|
I wont call it mistake, at least they gave a final answer.
Well done boy (or girl, I cant know).
|
|
|
these days I'm using OOo 3.0.0 and I can assure that it crashes almost constantly.
maybe with new documents it is stable, but at least working with older documents, which is my case, is painfully unstable.
now I think delaying was a good idea.
|
Post your comment
|
