minutes of ESC call ...
mstahl at redhat.com
Sat Nov 10 12:05:02 PST 2012
On 10/11/12 17:46, Michael Meeks wrote:
> Hi Alex,
> On Sat, 2012-11-10 at 10:51 +0100, Alex Thurgood wrote:
>> I see your points and concerns. Couldn't we have, as a potential
>> alternative, a hack (easy or not, I wouldn't know) to replace the
>> current implementations with something more manageable (if indeed that
>> is possible, and however that might be defined) ?
> I'd love to see those pieces split out to be extensions that you can
> download & use if you want to (personally). That's presumably quite some
> chunk of work though.
that would be possible, but there are some open questions as to how to
best accomplish it: the problem is that non-URE jars are used, which is
not allowed for extensions. but that seems fixable: the used jars seem
to be the external "bsh" / "rhino" and internal "ScriptingFramework",
the ScriptProviderForPython is already an extension so there is some
prior art on how to do it. also, until commit
a72a7dc500ffd57662e8b9be61e4676266861c33 the java ones were extensions too.
the following options come to mind:
1) add ScriptFramework.jar to the URE
this would require maintaining binary compatibility; i have no idea
if that is appropriate here
2) have 3 extensions and duplicate the ScriptFramework jar in each of
them; would that actually work if you install more than one of them?
3) have 1 extension that contains ScriptFramework plus all 3 script
option 3 appears most appealing to me.
More information about the LibreOffice