Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
34 messages Options
Next » 12
Khaled Hosny Khaled Hosny
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Stephan van den Akker Stephan van den Akker
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

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 21:30 GMT+02:00 Khaled Hosny <[hidden email]>:

> 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 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 default.
>
> There are too main issues with the new code:
> - Type 1 fonts are not supported. They can be supported with some
>   effort, but Type 1 fonts have been obsolete for more than 15 years and
>   I’d like to use this opportunity to drop support for them and cleanup
>   some of the ugly code we have.
> - 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
>   DirectWrite and modernise our Windows font rendering, but that is
>   another story.
>
> Regards,
> Khaled
> _______________________________________________
> LibreOffice mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Khaled Hosny Khaled Hosny
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Milos Sramek Milos Sramek
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

In reply to this post by Khaled Hosny
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 happen to have sume documents in Arabic I can add them to my test
set.

best
Milos



On 2016-10-17 21:30, 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 loudly.
>
> 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 default.
>
> There are too main issues with the new code:
> - Type 1 fonts are not supported. They can be supported with some
>   effort, but Type 1 fonts have been obsolete for more than 15 years and
>   I’d like to use this opportunity to drop support for them and cleanup
>   some of the ugly code we have.
> - 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
>   DirectWrite and modernise our Windows font rendering, but that is
>   another story.
>
> Regards,
> Khaled
> _______________________________________________
> LibreOffice mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

--
Milos Sramek, [hidden email]



_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

signature.asc (484 bytes) Download Attachment
Christian Lohmaier-3 Christian Lohmaier-3
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

In reply to this post by Khaled Hosny
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Khaled Hosny <[hidden email]> 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 loudly.

Not sure whether the wording is to be taken literally or not.. But I'd
brefer a non-merge way to add it..
(aka rebase on top of mater rather than doing a merge)

> There are too main issues with the new code:
> - Type 1 fonts are not supported. They can be supported with some
>   effort, but Type 1 fonts have been obsolete for more than 15 years and
>   I’d like to use this opportunity to drop support for them and cleanup
>   some of the ugly code we have.

This is something that should be communitated clearly to QA and
Marketing projects so they're aware as well..

> - We use a bit of DirectWrite to load fonts on Windows, so Windows XP is
>   not supported as well.

Do you mean just with the new rendering (that could be toggled with
the env-var), or not supported at all anymore?

ciao
Christian
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Khaled Hosny Khaled Hosny
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

In reply to this post by Milos Sramek
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Khaled Hosny Khaled Hosny
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

In reply to this post by Christian Lohmaier-3
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Khaled Hosny Khaled Hosny
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

In reply to this post by Khaled Hosny
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Milos Sramek Milos Sramek
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

In reply to this post by Khaled Hosny
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 to see if there are any
differences.
This would be extremely helpful, and more so if it can run on Windows or
Mac.
I can run the tests on Linux and Windows. I do not have Mac, but I think that there should not be a problem with that.
On windows or mac one just converts/prints files by means of a script - they are then compared on a system with running Python - in my case a Linux machine.

I run Windows in a virtual machine, which has access to the directory, where all data and scripts reside. So I even do not have to copy files.

I've checked the web and see that it is possible to install MAC on virtual box: https://techsviewer.com/how-to-install-mac-os-x-el-capitan-on-pc-on-virtualbox/ I'll try it

best
milos



My test documents use latin script except for a few ones in Chinese. So,
if you happen to have sume documents in Arabic I can add them to my test
set.
I’ve a random collection of documents somewhere, I’ll clean it up and
send it to you.

Regards,
Khaled


_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


-- 
email & jabber: [hidden email]

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
yphilips yphilips
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

In reply to this post by Khaled Hosny
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.
Tor Lillqvist-2 Tor Lillqvist-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch


unless we want to alienate XP users from
running 5.3, 

What would be so wrong in that?

--tml
 

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Khaled Hosny Khaled Hosny
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

In reply to this post by yphilips
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
yphilips yphilips
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

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 by then).
>
> WDYT?

As XP still has between 6 and 9% of desktop market share, which is
around the same amount of Windows 8/8.1 and Mac OS X, it is in the top 5
desktop OSes and i wouldnt recommend alienating them any time soon.

https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0

http://gs.statcounter.com/#desktop-os-ww-monthly-201607-201607-bar

It would be useful to use the update ping stats to know what percentage
of our user base are still on XP and if it isnt as high as the above
stats perceive it to be, then it is worth dropping it sooner.

> Regards,
> Khaled

Yousuf
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Tor Lillqvist-2 Tor Lillqvist-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch


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 just do it and drop XP support. LO <= 5.2 will keep working for them just fine.

But yeah, I know, the hardest thing in the FLOSS world is taking decisions that might annoy somebody.

--tml
 

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
jan iversen jan iversen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch


On 20 Oct 2016, at 09:07, Tor Lillqvist <[hidden email]> 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 (unless I misunderstood things) add a setup variable as well as extra code (however little amount), and that is the limit for me.

XP still runs a lot of products, but most products run in old versions, so to me easy decision.

Let the 5.2 line be the last supported on windows XP.

rgds
jan I.



_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Christian Lohmaier-3 Christian Lohmaier-3
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

Hi *,

On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Jan Iversen
<[hidden email]> 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 (however little amount), and that is the limit for me.

Nah, other way round, until now that new feature has to be enabled
with the environment variable (and maybe will be switched to default
un upcoming builds leading to 5.3.0

So I think removing the old layouting code for 5.3.0 is out of the
question, so the old layouting code will be available anyway, so all
that's needed for 5.3 is to always use the old way and not harfbuzz.

> Let the 5.2 line be the last supported on windows XP.

I did understand Khaled's post as the old codepath would be nuked for
5.4, then there would be no way to run it anymore and killed off for
good.

I mean the new layouting code has not undergone widespread testing, so
it really doesn't make sense nuking the existing one for 5.3.0
already, while it has issues, at least those are known already. And
I'd like to wait for first alpha testing results with manually
enabling the switch (and comparing the results) before having it
turned on by default for the beta..

So 5.4 will definitely not run on Win XP anymore, and 5.3.x could, as
long as you don't force it to the new layouting code.

ciao
Christian
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
yphilips yphilips
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

In reply to this post by Tor Lillqvist-2
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, "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. XP is a lighter weight OS, so many people wont upgrade
because their hardware cant handle it. On the other hand, you still have
governments paying microsoft to still support it XP, so XP isnt going
away anytime soon.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/london-metropolitan-police-windows-xp-updates/
http://bgr.com/2015/06/24/windows-xp-support-us-navy-millions/

There are a number of Mac users who arent above OS X 10.8 for various
reasons, but as LO's Mac user base isnt as large as Windows, dropping
the support there in favour of a better toolchain and functionality does
make sense.

> But yeah, I know, the hardest thing in the FLOSS world is taking
> decisions that might annoy somebody.

Users will always be annoyed with things changing, even if it is for the
better.

> --tml

Yousuf
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Tor Lillqvist-2 Tor Lillqvist-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch


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
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
V Stuart Foote V Stuart Foote
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

In reply to this post by Khaled Hosny
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 showing in the new commonsallayout if OpenGL is on
Khaled Hosny Khaled Hosny
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch

CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Next » 12