WebDAV support as an extension

Hi Robert,

Robert Vojta wrote:
> On 11/23/06, Kai Sommerfeld <Kai.Sommerfeldsun.com> wrote:
> 
> Hallo Kai,
> 
>>  Glad you're asking. Why? Because the developer
team I'm responsible for
>> is, among other things like UNO and the API,
responsible for all the
>> extension infrastructure enhancements SUN is
currently implementing. 
>>
>>  Our vision: OOo = UNO Runtime Environment (URE) +
extensions
> 
> great ... So, let's start ... I decided to fix some
issues in current
 I've already ssen your bug reviewing activities. Good work.

> WebDAV content provider, but I'll be working on
external WebDAV
> support (= extension) too. I can take attention from
more developers
> and after that, we can remove neon from source code
tree.
 I must confessed that I'm a little bit confused now.

 Why do you plan to remove neon from the source tree? My
unterstanding
is to have everything in the OOo CVS and just to change the
way the
WebDAV content provider gets packaged and installed, not
that in future
WebDAV support must be installed from 'somewhere'. IMO, it
is important
that each standard OOo installation set will contain WebDAV
support out
of the 'box' and that the deafult (like today) is that this
WebDAV
support gets installed by default.

 Well, it makes sense to have a configure switch (like we
have already)
to enable usage of system neon (and ssl), but it also must
be possible
to build a self-contained OOo where neon and ssl libs are
part of the
OOo installation set (or later, the WebDAV extension)
itself.

 Today the ucpdav shared library contains everything needed
for WebDAV
and gets installed as part of the 'huge' OOo main package.
Later, the
WebDAV extension could contain the content provider code,
the neon code
and the openssl code as shared libaries. Additioanlly an xcu
file would
be part of the extension package. The packge would be
installed together
with OO.o.

> 
> - < 2.2 - WebDAV - internally supported
> - >= 2.2 - WebDAV - supported by module
> 
> I just hope, that the whole infrastructure (for
modules) will be
> prepared in 2.2 time.

 I think it is the best way to first enhance the _existing_
WebDAV
implementation. If this is done (means, HTTPS is fully
implemented,
including cerificate management), we can go ahead and
repackage the
binaries (yes, making it an extension is basically just
repackaging) in
a second step. Step 1 is really very important, because
missing HTTPS
support is an issue that has been reported by many OOo users
already.
Repackaging is just 'sugar'.

- Kai.

------------------------------------------------------------
---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribeucb.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-helpucb.openoffice.org

On 11/27/06, Kai Sommerfeld <Kai.Sommerfeldsun.com> wrote:

Hallo Kai,

>  I must confessed that I'm a little bit confused now.

I do not want to remove neon now ... For now, I would like
to add
openssl, https support, ssl certificates management and
enable master
password feature again. After that, I would like to 'remove'
these
things and make them available as an OXT package. Step 2 is
future -
>= 2.2 or later.

Sorry to confuse you 

Regards,
Robert

-- 
Robert Vojta

------------------------------------------------------------
---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribeucb.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-helpucb.openoffice.org