Drafting Tender "Text layout"

[floeff]

Hello,

one of the approved [1] tenders is the

  Tender "Text layout"

The board would like to work together in public with all of you on this tender before it gets officially published. The current draft is therefore shared at

  https://nextcloud.documentfoundation.org/s/43563WKN7pyNoMB

The board is happy to get your feedback and proposals. We'd like to discuss this ideally in the board call after next, i.e. on Friday, November 19, at 1300 Berlin time. Please send your feedback to the public board-discuss@documentfoundation.org mailing list.

Thanks a lot to all community members involved for working on the tender draft!

Looking forward to your feedback,
Florian

[1] https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/2021/msg00091.html

[vmiklos]

Hi Florian, all,

one of the approved [1] tenders is the

  Tender "Text layout"

The board would like to work together in public with all of you on this
tender before it gets officially published. The current draft is therefore
shared at

  https://nextcloud.documentfoundation.org/s/43563WKN7pyNoMB

The board is happy to get your feedback and proposals. We'd like to discuss
this ideally in the board call after next, i.e. on Friday, November 19, at
1300 Berlin time. Please send your feedback to the public
board-discuss@documentfoundation.org mailing list.

Lubos did some work in this area in the recent past, and based on that
experience the expectation is that the referenced tdf#133685 is a
Windows-only problem (most of the time is spent in Windows API calls),
and thus unrelated to the "Text layout" topic.

Is it intentional to include that bug in the tender, even if it seems to
be an unrelated performance problem?

If not, then perhaps you could consider removing that from the scope.

Regards,

Miklos

[floeff]

Hello Miklos,

Lubos did some work in this area in the recent past, and based on that
experience the expectation is that the referenced tdf#133685 is a
Windows-only problem (most of the time is spent in Windows API calls),
and thus unrelated to the "Text layout" topic.

Is it intentional to include that bug in the tender, even if it seems to
be an unrelated performance problem?

If not, then perhaps you could consider removing that from the scope.

thanks a lot for the feedback, and apologies for the belated reply! I was on vacation, and then quite a few things took place in parallel, so I only now got a chance to have a look at this.

I checked the wiki page, and this bug is indeed not mentioned in the original draft. I think it was added to the tender during one of the iterations, but I've just removed it.

Anything else that needs changing from your POV? Otherwise I'd move to publication of this soon.

Thanks!
Florian

[llunak]

No, it seems fine now.