Apache OpenOffice (AOO) Bugzilla – Issue 45709
Minimize the Java (JRE) needs
Last modified: 2013-02-07 22:38:49 UTC
as review http://www.xminc.com/mt/archives/000275.html too many things need JRE on manipulating image. we need also to reduce it as in previous version or even less. and The JRE missing window opens 7 times and you have to click ok each time. It is really anonying user. why not enough only 1 time ?
Created attachment 24130 [details] screenshot of JRE needed
.
reassigned
http://software.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=05/03/22/204244 What are the objections to using Java? Some might argue against Schönheit's characterization of C++ as complex or Java as being not slow. However, technical arguments are in many ways beside the point. Objections to Java tend to be based less on technical merits than on FOSS philosophy on the one hand and the possible consequences for the future of OpenOffice.org on the other. One of the few technical arguments against OpenOffice.org's use of Java is that it undermines the project's goal to be a cross-platform office suite. Many operating systems currently supported, including FreeBSD and GNU/Linux for the PowerPC, have no official version of Java. Those who wish to use OOo 2.0 on such platforms must use GNU/Linux emulation or work with an often incomplete free Java implementation. Either way, the new requirement places new pressures on the already overworked teams of OpenOffice.org volunteers working on these ports. Other arguments against using Java focus on the possible consequences for OpenOffice.org itself. Marco Fioretti, journalist and OpenOffice.org volunteer, worries that the increased dependency on Java may destroy the project's credibility, thereby slowing its adaptation. When asked to explain misgivings hinted at on the OOo Discuss list, Fioretti says the abrupt move toward Java undermines claims that OpenOffice.org is a mature platform. Fioretti also points out that, in jurisdictions where requirements for government use require openness, OpenOffice.org may no longer qualify. Corporate managers or lawmakers, Fioretti worries, may conclude that project members "are incompetents who produced OpenOffice.org by pure accident" and wonder, "Can I trust them?" Just as importantly, the dependence on Java threatens OpenOffice.org's credibility with the rest of the FOSS community. Several anonymous commentators on NewsForge's recent review of the version 2.0 expressed doubts about continuing to use OpenOffice.org. "Maybe I should stop promoting it," one anonymous poster wrote. Several others wished that alternatives such as KOffice, AbiWord, and Gnumeric would develop faster so that they could become full replacements for OpenOffice.org. Among FOSS contributors, the reaction was much the same. The responses on the debian-openoffice.org, the mailing list for those involved with integrating OpenOffice.org into the Debian distribution, are typical of ones in other pockets of the community. Anders Breindahl, for example, writes, "I find it increasingly worrying that Sun to some extent considers Java to be okay for a free office suite.... I think this makes OpenOffice.org less optimal for the Free Software community." Similarly, in the same discussion, Sam Hiser, the former marketing lead for OpenOffice.org, characterized the change as a "challenge" that the FOSS community must answer with other software that's more compatible with its philosophy. Such comments suggest that little if any dialog is ocurring between those who decided to use Java and those who object to the decision. Each camp has a focus that is different from the other's. To date, neither seems to have responded to the other side's concerns.
OpenOffice.org Issue Tracker - Feedback Request. The Issue you raised is currently assigned to 'Requirements' pending review, but has not been updated within the last 3 years. Please consider re-testing with one of the latest versions of OOo, as the problem(s) may have already been addressed. Either use the recent stable version: http://download.openoffice.org/index.html or consider trying the new OOo 3 BETA (still in testing): http://download.openoffice.org/3.0beta/ Please report back the outcome so this Issue may be Closed or Progressed as necessary - otherwise it may be Resolved as Invalid in the future. You may also wish to search for (and note) any duplicates of this Issue that may have advanced further by checking the Issue Tracker: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/query.cgi Many thanks, Andrew Cleaning-up and Closing old Issues as part of: ~ The Grand Bug Squash, pre v3 ~ http://marketing.openoffice.org/3.0/announcementbeta.html
*** Issue 74925 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***