Apache OpenOffice (AOO) Bugzilla – Issue 64581
Retain Tools->Options->Paths->Templates in future releases
Last modified: 2007-01-02 11:55:17 UTC
Releases 2.0.2 (and prior) work as desired. The URL above proposes to disable a large number of path settings in the UI in release 2.0.3. The template paths setting is something I rely on. It is especially useful for: 1) To keep all user templates in one constant (easy to remember and find) place which is OOo release independent (and a much shorter path) e.g. $HOME/OOo-Templates. 2) Since Open using template works with subdirectories (a great feature!), It is possible to have a subdirectory under the main one for templates for a prior release e.g. $HOME/OOo-Templates/OOo_1. This keeps templates organized and aids greatly in migrating to a new release (e.g. gradually replacing all stw's with ott's). The old release template path can be pointed to this subdirectory. Then, the new release can see both old and new and the old release can see only the old. If the proposed change is implemented, this will be impossible to do using the UI. 3) There are other instances such as templates stored on a network, etc. where easy access to this feature would be important. I am sure there are quite a few "advanced" users who are not programmers or who do not know java. It would be far more difficult for them to access this option if it was only available in a configuration file that most users aren't even aware of. If other issues are raised relative to keeping other path settings in the UI, this issue may be combined with them to maximize votes/priority.
I agree with you. I use a separate folder for user templates and a separate folder for user defined dictionaries. It would be very annoying to be forced to edit configuration files to set the paths. I need separate folders, because they must be easily accessable from different versions including StarOffice, which are installed parallel.
TM->MMP: Please have a look, thanks !
yes, the idea is to bring pack the necessary paths in a robust way. Target is OOo 2.4
It is useful to modify these occasionally, but even more important to see where the paths are when chasing problems. Please keep them visible in the UI in 2.0.3 even if we can't change them. For multi-user situations, it may be necessary to group templates and dictionaries for groups of users, and separate directories for these cases is the easy way to do it.
Wouldn't it just be simpler to leave it alone for a few months until 2.0.4 comes out and it's done "right"?
I think that leaving templates path user configurable is an important feature. One which I use to share templates to _ALL_ my users.
My situation now: When I save a template, its stored in my user's directory. When I try to open it for doing some changes, the writer offers the directory of the server-installation. That does not make sense for an ordinary user. And I can't explain all our user's how to work directly with configuration files. For me that seems a regresion to times where computers where only used by computer scientists that where used to dipp to the inside of the machines. I hope, that will be changed before the final version of 2.0.3. cheers, Claudia
I'm in favor of having paths visible, and having the posibility to adapt them (again ASAP) .... However, I came along a little problem with importing Basis Libraries. After closing and starting OOo again, the library was listed, however Empty, which results in error message on loading the library's-window. (And of course trouble to load the lib again.) It turned out to be caused by my personal settings for Basic-paths: I defined my own user-location for macro's (Tools|Options|Paths) and removed the pre-defined. Apparently OOo is not able to handle that. I wouldn't be surprised if many of the 'Missing script'-errors that pass the users-lists frequently, have to do with this problem. I've had some myself and helped others to solve them. And all problems had to do with new installations, taking over some settings/paths from older installations. So pls give back the path setting ;-) but pls in robust way :-) Thanks ! Cor
as example: http://www.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=users&msgNo=120395
There should at least be some little configuration tool for adapting the paths once after istallation or changes. I agree to some degree with not needing all paths after they are set, but it has to be done sometimes and there should be a convenient way to do so. So I propose making a configuration tool or integrating in one of the available. That way we'd have both: a method of editing paths and no GUI option page.
Just a comment about current ideas how path settings should be. IMHO we should only allow to add pathes, the default pathes (share/path and user/path) will neither be shown nor can they be removed. This will make the dialog much more clear. Additionally we are working to make most of the components that currently use extendable pathes ("multipath") extendable by UNO packages so that e.g. templates can be added to an installation by just providing a UNO package with one configuration file (xcu).
If I go to menu file-template-edit (German: Datei-Dokumentvorlage-Bearbeiten...) the share-templates are shown. IMO it would be better, that the user-templates are shown by default.
@jolatt: I think that is a different problem, see issue 64328.
I absolutely agree with all the folks who want the template path setting to be mantained in the UI. In my case, I need to keep the templates organized by directories and subdirectories other than the program default ones (also, because I often modify and update my templates and I need to make them available for the people who work in my law firm). So, the best solution would be to keep the UI template path setting as it is in OOo 2.0.2 and prior, until the bug (which never occurred to me, truly) is fixed for OOo 2.0.4. If it's not possibile by now, then bring the UI setting back for OOo 2.0.4 (and release this last one ASAP).
Removing the possibility to set the paths for templates in Tools > Options is one ot the worst change ever done in OOo. In a corporate environment this setting is a key feature, moreover choosing network folders as template source allow OOo to automatically recognize new templates when someone put them in these directories. I manage a LAN with over 30 users and network folders used for template are (were) a core feature. Now if i upgrade OOo 2.0.2 to 2.0.3 all my users lose this possibility and all their currently settings. What shoul i tell to them ? What do i answer to them when saying that "in Micro$oft Office this doesn't occur" ? And how should i set now shared templates for every users like i were used to do ?
cianoz: I absolutely agree, that this was not one of our best decisions. But, there should be no problem for upgrading, as long as your environment is correctly set up at the moment. The option is removed from UI, but the settings in your config files will be read. During an upgrade, the user settings will stay in place. Users will loose no settings at all.
@ andreschnabel: It's true that when upgrading from prior OOo 2.0.x to OOo 2.0.3 the template path settings are not lost; but what if someone had to install Ooo 2.0.3 for the first time (i.e., without having previously installed OOo 2.0.2 or prior) and, e.g., have to share common templates with others in the same LAN? I, for instance, had to uninstall OOo 2.0.3 from a newly bought PC (to add to my LAN), install OOo 2.0.2, set the proper tempolate path, then uninstall OOo 2.0.2 then install OOo 2.0.3 again to have my templates properly set up. I hope you'd agree this sounds a bit crazy (I think I heard M$O team laugh from my remote home in Italy...). So, the UI Template Path settings tool MUST be back ASAP (OOo 2.0.4?); otherwise, it has to be made well-known how to manually set the config files to include new paths or modify the existing ones. Anyway, I still appreciate your work and continue to use OOo...
As you can see from the target of this issue it is planned to have the dialog settings back in 2.0.4. Until then you can patch the settings in the configuration file manually. In case you have a shared installation you would do it that way anyway.
I searched a lot over the OOo website, in OOo documentation and with Google, but i didn't find any clear explanation about which exactly are the config files i have to modify and what i have to modify inside them. I suppose the config file is C:\Documents and Settings\<user>\Applications Data\OpenOffice.org2\user\registry\data\org\openoffice\Office\Common.xcu but why don't you put a *FAQ* to explain it ? I think a lot of people has the same problem now. And, please, we want back all other paths entries that OOo 2.0.2 has in the options window (in the GUI). It was so confortable for the user to able to set all the paths without getting crazy with config files ! OOo 1.x had too many entries in that windows, but ver 2.0.2 had the right number, IMHO. Please.
We will not have all paths back as at least one of them can't be changed by the user at all (basic) and one of them can make OOo crash if a user does something stupid (UIConfig). Some other paths are under investigation. We definitely will have back the settings for templates, autotexts and autocorrection.
@andreschnabel: Hello, I'm the responsible person in our company (financial sector, ~1000 employees) for setting up our standard office product, OpenOffice.org. And I really didn't want to believe it when I read that most of the customizable path entries would be removed from 2.03! But today, after downloading the new german version, I was made a believer: Most entries are gone! :-( We have a central template repository, we have a central macro repository and we have a central directory structure for files. You can't be serious that all this customization entries shall be hidden in some undocumented setup files (if ever)? Right now we might have luck because we're already using OOo 2.02 and according to your statement the upgrade won't touch the existing path entries. But what shall we do when we have to setup new or reinstall systems? Install 2.02 first, setup the paths, then upgrade to 2.0x? IMO: This behaviour MUST be changed asap! And create a well-documented FAQ-entry until it is fixed! P.S.: Not that this would belong specifically to this issue but: Setting up a customized automatic installation of OOo 2.x is a pain in the ... But this is a different story. P.P.S.: Beside all the critizsm: I love OpenOffice.org 2! It's truly a great product (Have been using it since StarWriter 2.0 for OS/2).
hi all, you may use http://www.prooo-box.org/%7Eschmidjo/download.php?datei=ooo_pfade.zip as workaround. This is a package that can be installed by using the OOo package manager. You will find a new menu item in the Help-Menue. The package is German but should be easy to handle. Please be aware that this package is not tested and not at it's final location. It should be used by admins only.
Hi andreschnabel, thanks for the link but... there's just a little problem (I think I share qith many people): I neither speak nor understand German! Actually, I'm italian and, even though I speak something more than a bit of English, I don't even dare to use OOo in English; so, although I believe that the tool you seggested is very good, I won't even try to unpack the .zip file (although I have downloaded it). Maybe, if there was just an english localization of the tool, I could try, but by now... I still think the Tools|Options|Paths settings should be restored in full in the UI (and I'm not the one, I see... also in http://www.oooforum.org/ there's plenty of people who believe like I do...). Regards.
If you're going to change the template paths feature, at least update the documentation to (a) be accurate, (b) explain how templates work now, and (c) support established users who may need to know what happened to their old configuration and how to work around things now. To say experienced users can use the configuration file, without instructions about this file, is terrible. Even worse, the help file (and countless tutorials, blogs, and how-tos on the web) still refers to changing template paths! (e.g., from Writer 2.0.3, try Help -> Find -> Paths). Users need to be alerted to the change, advised what to do instead, and be told exactly what information they might run into on the web is no longer valid. Second, if OOo is going to mess around with templates, why not do it right? As others have suggested, wait until the remodel in 2.0.4. Even better, distinguish between a "Template" and a "Style Library." A "template" should be a standard layout for such things as letters, books, and working papers. For example, a book template would tell the user what front matter to put where, back matter, etc. A style library, on the other hand, would change the look and feel of the book. By changing style libraries (or style sets), the book's look and feel could change from formal to contemporary, but a common template would still guide the user through the process of what goes where in a book! Both template and style libraries should have user-configurable search paths. If OOo crashes when the user does not do this correctly, how hard is it to test for a legal path and substitute a default path when the user-configured one is illegal? Even better, how hard is it to test for a legal path when the user enters a new path?
I have to agree with every word MarshFeldman wrote, I am astonished that the project can make such a fundamental mistake when trying to compete with e.g. the new Office 12. In particular: >Even better, how hard is it to test for a legal path >when the user enters a new path? Well, quite. Andre Schnabel said: >I absolutely agree, that this was not one of >our best decisions. No. And not updating the documentation to match should be /impossible/. I am surprised that a change as significant as this can be introduced as a dot- dot point change, without a proper Beta programme. This is a feature-set change, not a bugfix. And I am furious that with the Chart module outstanding and some issues as old as 5038, 7065, 4579, 1761, 1598, and (god help us) 972 & 366 going unadressed that rare programming resource is allocated to this sort of destructive tinkering. If the developers continute to take this high-handed attitude with the users and thier views then the bubble of enthusiasm for OOo will burst. The existence of Issuezilla and the ability to communicate so openly with the development team is a huge differentiator over the competition, and compensates for the lack of user-friendly features or true innovation over the majority product. If the development team continue to concentrate on thier own priorities then this advantage will be worthless. I suggest that someone needs to do a query of the most highly voted-for issues, and get them dealt with, making at least a 2.1 and 2.2 revision to include them and maintianing 2.0.x until a sensible beta is over for both of them. There are only 165 issues with more than 12 votes. I use the product intensively, having a political objection to monopolies, and try to persuade other people to use it. But frankly, it isn't as good as it thinks it is, and it is nowhere near as good as the opposition. Microsoft got good with usability labs and very large (closed) feedback programmes. With enthusiastic and politically motivated early adopters and an open feedback programme, someone should be asking why there are so many "how do I" threads on the user forums.
Template, AutoText, AutoCorrect paths are on their way back into the UI. The spec documents this change in progress.
At long last! Welcome back to the UI Path settings tools! But... can we truly expect this to be for OOo 2.0.4? I think it'd be better so: maybe bobharvey is a bit too rude, but most of what he says is true. I am very happy that OpenOffice.org/StarOffice exists, but it's nonsense if it has to be that much worst than M$O; maybe home users may find it enough for their needs, but OOo must target to big users, such as companies, public administrations etc. if the M$ monopoly has to be broken. Regards to everybody.
I suppose so - 2.0.4 is still realistic.
I vote for this issue — but with a different (complementary) wish: bring back the setting for spellcheck dictionaries! If you concurrently have two (or more) versions of OOo, it's not wise to have several copies of your dictionaries.
This behavior must have appeared somewhere in the development betas. So I guess the lesson is: more of us should try some of these betas sometimes. For if we let geeks have their way we'd lose much more control. So I promise myself to try here and there more interim versions before they are released... but then one has to know where to look. Who knows what surprises awaits us, what strange decisions will have been made upon the release of a new version? Sarcasm aside: we get what we pay for, right?
Template path is back in m177.
This should be fixed along with i67100 Closing this task.
This issue was closed on July 31, and as of 2.0.4rc3 the templates path has been restored (thanks!), but the 'User-defined dictionaries' and 'Writing aids' paths are still missing (and others, but those are the ones I care about right now). Do we need to open a new issue to get them back, or are they in the works?
Can we have an answer to this, please? Not only can I not set my 'User-defined dictionaries' path, but also the settings in Common.xcu seem to be being ignored by 2.0.4rc3.
pb: with 2.0.4 there is a new xcu-file: paths.xcu. Here you can change the paths which are not shown on the UI. At the moment it is not planned to restore more paths.
>with 2.0.4 there is a new xcu-file: paths.xcu. Here you can change the paths which are not shown on the UI. OK, I have worked out how to do this. It needs a corresponding entry in Common.xcu >At the moment it is not planned to restore more paths. So then a new issue does need raising if we want other paths restoring?
See issue 70333 for User-defined dictionaries
closing - template path is back