[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#284487: Disabling KDE/Gnome Filechooser is a drawback



[ CC'ing the two with complained before you already ;) ]

Hi,

Am Dienstag, 4. Januar 2005 10:33 schrieb Sebastian Schaffert:
> I find the latest change to disable the KDE/Gnome filechoosers
> unacceptable, because this was a major advantage introduced in the
> previous openoffice.org upgrade.

They are broken. Try opening files with non-ASCII charcters saved bafore from 
somewhere else.

See http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=280638. This applies to 
the Gtk Fpicker too. And it is *not* just about documents you create yourself 
(you could use no non-ASCII-chars) but what is with documents you get?
.oO ( docs with german umlauts for example )

Additionally, the Gtk fpicker is broken in many ways
(no way to enter a path (well, there's some unintuitive strg-whatever 
combination), ftp:// and webdav:// iirc didn't work (OOo can open files over 
FTP or WebDAV and it was no problem to open it with the OpenOffice.org 
filepicker)

So I disabled it per default.

> In particular with the KDE filechooser you benefit from KDE's io slaves
> and your personal system configuration. No sensible user would
> deliberately disable the KDE file chooser in Openoffice when running KDE
> as desktop, so disabling it by default is IMO unacceptable.

Then they can enable it.

> However, I see the point with using xfce, therefore I'd suggest to make
> three packages out of the current two:
>
> openoffice.org-gnome
> openoffice.org-kde
> openoffice.org-gtk

Where the packages containing the fpickers will still be unable to open many 
older files. And then? Would you need to disable those file pickers then? 
What is the difference to now then?

Regards,

Rene
-- 
 .''`.  René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
 : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
 `. `'  rene@debian.org | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73
   `-   Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB  7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73



Reply to: