Discussion:
Remove ActiveX from LibreOffice
Bryan Quigley
2015-12-30 20:02:53 UTC
Permalink
Hi there,

Recently it was decided to remove the rest of NPAPI support [1] which
got me thinking about the other Windows specific plugin tech -
ActiveX.

It seems ActiveX is very much no longer recommended by Microsoft and
it seems to not work by default for IE10/11 on Windows 7 and up. Any
objections to removing?

AFAICT this would just be removing embedding LO into IE.

Kind regards,
Bryan

[1] https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/20658/ and ESC discussion
here: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2015-December/071504.html
[2] https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2015/05/06/a-break-from-the-past-part-2-saying-goodbye-to-activex-vbscript-attachevent/
Mark Hung
2015-12-30 23:58:17 UTC
Permalink
Hi,

I've reported tdf#90386 last year, which was about IE8 didn't render
embedded LibreOffice properly.
A valid use case is to read the uploaded documents on SharePoint server in
intranet.
Eventually it obsoletes, but I prefer to consider this when facing some
directly related event.
( i.e EOL of Windows7, new toolchain ceasing ActiveX support, or security
issue which lacks of engineer resource ) .
Post by Bryan Quigley
Hi there,
Recently it was decided to remove the rest of NPAPI support [1] which
got me thinking about the other Windows specific plugin tech -
ActiveX.
It seems ActiveX is very much no longer recommended by Microsoft and
it seems to not work by default for IE10/11 on Windows 7 and up. Any
objections to removing?
AFAICT this would just be removing embedding LO into IE.
Kind regards,
Bryan
[1] https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/20658/ and ESC discussion
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2015-December/071504.html
[2]
https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2015/05/06/a-break-from-the-past-part-2-saying-goodbye-to-activex-vbscript-attachevent/
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
--
Mark Hung
Thorsten Behrens
2015-12-31 16:13:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Hung
A valid use case is to read the uploaded documents on SharePoint server in
intranet.
Eventually it obsoletes, but I prefer to consider this when facing some
directly related event.
( i.e EOL of Windows7, new toolchain ceasing ActiveX support, or security
issue which lacks of engineer resource ) .
Yeah. Unless this is not working anywhere anymore, let's keep it for
the while - seems it's useful at least in some cases. And the cost of
maintaining it is currently near zero, no?

Cheers,

-- Thorsten
Chris Sherlock
2016-01-01 04:17:33 UTC
Permalink
Unless I'm much mistaken, the ActiveX control does almost exactly the same
thing that the browser plugin did for Netscape.

Given that in Edge Microsoft will not be supporting ActiveX plugins any
more, isn't the justification for removing the ActiveX control the same as
for remove the NSAPI plugin?

Incidentally, in the bug references, if I had to hazard a guess, the ocx
needs to be registered manually.

Chris
Post by Mark Hung
Post by Mark Hung
A valid use case is to read the uploaded documents on SharePoint server
in
Post by Mark Hung
intranet.
Eventually it obsoletes, but I prefer to consider this when facing some
directly related event.
( i.e EOL of Windows7, new toolchain ceasing ActiveX support, or
security
Post by Mark Hung
issue which lacks of engineer resource ) .
Yeah. Unless this is not working anywhere anymore, let's keep it for
the while - seems it's useful at least in some cases. And the cost of
maintaining it is currently near zero, no?
Cheers,
-- Thorsten
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Chris Sherlock
2016-01-01 04:31:38 UTC
Permalink
P.S. given that LO is crashing due to the ActiveX control borking, that bug
still needs troubleshooting.

Mark, can you provide us with a backtrace when soffice dies, then add it to
the TDF bug report?

Chris
Post by Chris Sherlock
Unless I'm much mistaken, the ActiveX control does almost exactly the same
thing that the browser plugin did for Netscape.
Given that in Edge Microsoft will not be supporting ActiveX plugins any
more, isn't the justification for removing the ActiveX control the same as
for remove the NSAPI plugin?
Incidentally, in the bug references, if I had to hazard a guess, the ocx
needs to be registered manually.
Chris
On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 3:13 AM, Thorsten Behrens <
Post by Mark Hung
Post by Mark Hung
A valid use case is to read the uploaded documents on SharePoint server
in
Post by Mark Hung
intranet.
Eventually it obsoletes, but I prefer to consider this when facing some
directly related event.
( i.e EOL of Windows7, new toolchain ceasing ActiveX support, or
security
Post by Mark Hung
issue which lacks of engineer resource ) .
Yeah. Unless this is not working anywhere anymore, let's keep it for
the while - seems it's useful at least in some cases. And the cost of
maintaining it is currently near zero, no?
Cheers,
-- Thorsten
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Chris Sherlock
2016-01-01 09:19:18 UTC
Permalink
Does this mean it’s no longer crashing?

Chris
P.S. given that LO is crashing due to the ActiveX control borking, that bug still needs troubleshooting.
Mark, can you provide us with a backtrace when soffice dies, then add it to the TDF bug report?
Chris
Unless I'm much mistaken, the ActiveX control does almost exactly the same thing that the browser plugin did for Netscape.
Given that in Edge Microsoft will not be supporting ActiveX plugins any more, isn't the justification for removing the ActiveX control the same as for remove the NSAPI plugin?
Incidentally, in the bug references, if I had to hazard a guess, the ocx needs to be registered manually.
Chris
Post by Mark Hung
A valid use case is to read the uploaded documents on SharePoint server in
intranet.
Eventually it obsoletes, but I prefer to consider this when facing some
directly related event.
( i.e EOL of Windows7, new toolchain ceasing ActiveX support, or security
issue which lacks of engineer resource ) .
Yeah. Unless this is not working anywhere anymore, let's keep it for
the while - seems it's useful at least in some cases. And the cost of
maintaining it is currently near zero, no?
Cheers,
-- Thorsten
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice>
Mark Hung
2016-01-01 06:53:09 UTC
Permalink
Hi all,

I lost my memory and messed tdf#90386 with another thing.
It didn't seem to work properly since IE8 / LO4.2.2, though I did try to
fix it.
Post by Chris Sherlock
Unless I'm much mistaken, the ActiveX control does almost exactly the same
thing that the browser plugin did for Netscape.
Given that in Edge Microsoft will not be supporting ActiveX plugins any
more, isn't the justification for removing the ActiveX control the same as
for remove the NSAPI plugin?
Incidentally, in the bug references, if I had to hazard a guess, the ocx
needs to be registered manually.
Chris
On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 3:13 AM, Thorsten Behrens <
Post by Mark Hung
Post by Mark Hung
A valid use case is to read the uploaded documents on SharePoint server
in
Post by Mark Hung
intranet.
Eventually it obsoletes, but I prefer to consider this when facing some
directly related event.
( i.e EOL of Windows7, new toolchain ceasing ActiveX support, or
security
Post by Mark Hung
issue which lacks of engineer resource ) .
Yeah. Unless this is not working anywhere anymore, let's keep it for
the while - seems it's useful at least in some cases. And the cost of
maintaining it is currently near zero, no?
Cheers,
-- Thorsten
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
--
Mark Hung
Mark Hung
2016-01-01 07:11:00 UTC
Permalink
;-( .. Oh, I provide the wrong information again.

I mean the file didn't open if LibreOffice is installed with both Explorer
Extension and Active X disabled.
Post by Mark Hung
Hi all,
I lost my memory and messed tdf#90386 with another thing.
It didn't seem to work properly since IE8 / LO4.2.2, though I did try to
fix it.
Post by Chris Sherlock
Unless I'm much mistaken, the ActiveX control does almost exactly the
same thing that the browser plugin did for Netscape.
Given that in Edge Microsoft will not be supporting ActiveX plugins any
more, isn't the justification for removing the ActiveX control the same as
for remove the NSAPI plugin?
Incidentally, in the bug references, if I had to hazard a guess, the ocx
needs to be registered manually.
Chris
On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 3:13 AM, Thorsten Behrens <
Post by Mark Hung
Post by Mark Hung
A valid use case is to read the uploaded documents on SharePoint
server in
Post by Mark Hung
intranet.
Eventually it obsoletes, but I prefer to consider this when facing some
directly related event.
( i.e EOL of Windows7, new toolchain ceasing ActiveX support, or
security
Post by Mark Hung
issue which lacks of engineer resource ) .
Yeah. Unless this is not working anywhere anymore, let's keep it for
the while - seems it's useful at least in some cases. And the cost of
maintaining it is currently near zero, no?
Cheers,
-- Thorsten
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
--
Mark Hung
--
Mark Hung
Chris Sherlock
2015-12-31 01:33:58 UTC
Permalink
I’m all for this.

Chris
Post by Bryan Quigley
Hi there,
Recently it was decided to remove the rest of NPAPI support [1] which
got me thinking about the other Windows specific plugin tech -
ActiveX.
It seems ActiveX is very much no longer recommended by Microsoft and
it seems to not work by default for IE10/11 on Windows 7 and up. Any
objections to removing?
AFAICT this would just be removing embedding LO into IE.
Kind regards,
Bryan
[1] https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/20658/ and ESC discussion
here: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2015-December/071504.html
[2] https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2015/05/06/a-break-from-the-past-part-2-saying-goodbye-to-activex-vbscript-attachevent/
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Bryan Quigley
2015-12-31 02:19:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Hung
I've reported tdf#90386 last year, which was about IE8 didn't render
embedded LibreOffice properly.
From that bug, does that mean it doesn't really work properly anyway
since LO 4.4/IE8?
Post by Mark Hung
Eventually it obsoletes, but I prefer to consider this when facing some
directly related event.
( i.e EOL of Windows7, new toolchain ceasing ActiveX support, or security
issue which lacks of engineer resource ) .

Microsoft recently changed their policy (going into effect Jan 2016),
to obsolete all but the latest IE on said platform. Which means for
the great majority of (supported) users IE11 is the only supported
version.

[1] https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/gp/microsoft-internet-explorer/en-us
Post by Mark Hung
Post by Bryan Quigley
Hi there,
Recently it was decided to remove the rest of NPAPI support [1] which
got me thinking about the other Windows specific plugin tech -
ActiveX.
It seems ActiveX is very much no longer recommended by Microsoft and
it seems to not work by default for IE10/11 on Windows 7 and up. Any
objections to removing?
AFAICT this would just be removing embedding LO into IE.
Kind regards,
Bryan
[1] https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/20658/ and ESC discussion
here: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2015-December/071504.html
[2] https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2015/05/06/a-break-from-the-past-part-2-saying-goodbye-to-activex-vbscript-attachevent/
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Mark Hung
2015-12-31 05:23:19 UTC
Permalink
tdf#90386 is about IE8 only, IE9 and above do not have the issue. In the
case I reported, IE8 is still used in order to compatible with legacy
systems. It is my point that, why bother to remove it if not harmful or
infeasible?
Post by Bryan Quigley
Post by Mark Hung
I've reported tdf#90386 last year, which was about IE8 didn't render
embedded LibreOffice properly.
From that bug, does that mean it doesn't really work properly anyway
since LO 4.4/IE8?
Post by Mark Hung
Eventually it obsoletes, but I prefer to consider this when facing some
directly related event.
( i.e EOL of Windows7, new toolchain ceasing ActiveX support, or security
issue which lacks of engineer resource ) .
Microsoft recently changed their policy (going into effect Jan 2016),
to obsolete all but the latest IE on said platform. Which means for
the great majority of (supported) users IE11 is the only supported
version.
[1]
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/gp/microsoft-internet-explorer/en-us
Post by Mark Hung
Post by Bryan Quigley
Hi there,
Recently it was decided to remove the rest of NPAPI support [1] which
got me thinking about the other Windows specific plugin tech -
ActiveX.
It seems ActiveX is very much no longer recommended by Microsoft and
it seems to not work by default for IE10/11 on Windows 7 and up. Any
objections to removing?
AFAICT this would just be removing embedding LO into IE.
Kind regards,
Bryan
[1] https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/20658/ and ESC discussion
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2015-December/071504.html
Post by Mark Hung
Post by Bryan Quigley
[2]
https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2015/05/06/a-break-from-the-past-part-2-saying-goodbye-to-activex-vbscript-attachevent/
Post by Mark Hung
Post by Bryan Quigley
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
--
Mark Hung
Chris Sherlock
2015-12-31 05:57:51 UTC
Permalink
In a word: mantainence.

ActiveX is a failed idea by Microsoft, and in fact there is always a burden
in maintaining things that aren't seen as at all useful or even desirable.

We removed plugins for a similar reason.

Chris
Post by Mark Hung
tdf#90386 is about IE8 only, IE9 and above do not have the issue. In the
case I reported, IE8 is still used in order to compatible with legacy
systems. It is my point that, why bother to remove it if not harmful or
infeasible?
Post by Bryan Quigley
Post by Mark Hung
I've reported tdf#90386 last year, which was about IE8 didn't render
embedded LibreOffice properly.
From that bug, does that mean it doesn't really work properly anyway
since LO 4.4/IE8?
Post by Mark Hung
Eventually it obsoletes, but I prefer to consider this when facing some
directly related event.
( i.e EOL of Windows7, new toolchain ceasing ActiveX support, or
security
issue which lacks of engineer resource ) .
Microsoft recently changed their policy (going into effect Jan 2016),
to obsolete all but the latest IE on said platform. Which means for
the great majority of (supported) users IE11 is the only supported
version.
[1]
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/gp/microsoft-internet-explorer/en-us
Post by Mark Hung
Post by Bryan Quigley
Hi there,
Recently it was decided to remove the rest of NPAPI support [1] which
got me thinking about the other Windows specific plugin tech -
ActiveX.
It seems ActiveX is very much no longer recommended by Microsoft and
it seems to not work by default for IE10/11 on Windows 7 and up. Any
objections to removing?
AFAICT this would just be removing embedding LO into IE.
Kind regards,
Bryan
[1] https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/20658/ and ESC discussion
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2015-December/071504.html
Post by Mark Hung
Post by Bryan Quigley
[2]
https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2015/05/06/a-break-from-the-past-part-2-saying-goodbye-to-activex-vbscript-attachevent/
Post by Mark Hung
Post by Bryan Quigley
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
--
Mark Hung
Tor Lillqvist
2015-12-31 08:12:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Sherlock
In a word: mantainence.
ActiveX is a failed idea by Microsoft, and in fact there is always a
burden in maintaining things that aren't seen as at all useful or even
desirable.
We removed plugins for a similar reason.
I'm all for removing it. The less weird features, the better.

--tml
Michael Stahl
2016-01-04 20:00:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bryan Quigley
Hi there,
Recently it was decided to remove the rest of NPAPI support [1] which
got me thinking about the other Windows specific plugin tech -
ActiveX.
It seems ActiveX is very much no longer recommended by Microsoft and
it seems to not work by default for IE10/11 on Windows 7 and up. Any
objections to removing?
i don't think that a LO browser plugin is a terribly good idea, so no
objection to removing that.
Post by Bryan Quigley
AFAICT this would just be removing embedding LO into IE.
however, isn't it the case that ActiveX components may not be used just
from IE, but from any Win32 application?

that sounds like a potentially more useful embedding use-case, similar
to "officebean" and "LibreOfficeKit", but for developers that are
familiar with Win32 APIs.

(or would that be something else that also happens to be called
"ActiveX" but is not actually implemented by LO's so_activex library?)
Chris Sherlock
2016-01-10 13:44:26 UTC
Permalink
So I believe that we haven’t come to any firm conclusion on this issue.

There is a patch in gerrit currently, I’m a bit concerned it might be pushed before this is concretely decided.

What is our position on ActiveX?

Michael raises a pretty good point, and there are others who have said they don’t want this removed. I had thought that this wasn’t going to happen now…

Chris
Post by Michael Stahl
Post by Bryan Quigley
Hi there,
Recently it was decided to remove the rest of NPAPI support [1] which
got me thinking about the other Windows specific plugin tech -
ActiveX.
It seems ActiveX is very much no longer recommended by Microsoft and
it seems to not work by default for IE10/11 on Windows 7 and up. Any
objections to removing?
i don't think that a LO browser plugin is a terribly good idea, so no
objection to removing that.
Post by Bryan Quigley
AFAICT this would just be removing embedding LO into IE.
however, isn't it the case that ActiveX components may not be used just
from IE, but from any Win32 application?
that sounds like a potentially more useful embedding use-case, similar
to "officebean" and "LibreOfficeKit", but for developers that are
familiar with Win32 APIs.
(or would that be something else that also happens to be called
"ActiveX" but is not actually implemented by LO's so_activex library?)
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Ashod Nakashian
2016-01-10 16:05:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Sherlock
What is our position on ActiveX?
As Michael accurately noted, ActiveX is for more than browser embedding.
It's a generic framework for cross-language modules, which IE simply
capitalized on. It is used quite heavily even in .Net applications in
certain areas, but far better hidden and isolated that it seems like the
forgotten technology that it is from the 90s. However, it's mostly used by
and for legacy applications and is likely to diminish in adoption.

So even though it's likely that we do have consumers of LO ActiveX (outside
of IE,) I think the far more interesting and comment-worthy point is that
we don't seem to be actively supporting our ActiveX layer (could it be
broken or crippled?).

My position on ActiveX is to leave it (lest we break applications in the
wild,) and to *announce its deprecation* with two goals: first, solicit the
feedback of LO ActiveX consumers and, if so inclined to continue using it,
help in its support. And second, to flag a date in the future when ActiveX
will be completely removed from LO codebase, pending sufficient reason and
support by its consumers.

We could tentatively mark 6.0 as the first major release to remove ActiveX.
Bryan Quigley
2016-01-10 23:41:14 UTC
Permalink
I missed a couple of posts being off list, and some from Gerrit comments.
(1)And the cost of maintaining it is currently near zero, no?
I don't think so, it's likely more of a maintenance cost than NPAPI
was. I'm not an expert but it makes our Windows builds more complex.
(2)As Michael accurately noted, ActiveX is for more than browser embedding.
It's a generic framework for cross-language modules, which IE simply
capitalized on.
From my admittedly limited understanding (I'm much more a Linux dev)
users can still use the more modern Active Template Library [3] to
accomplish the same goal. I purposely didn't try to remove any of
this support.

To look at this issue from another POV.. If someone showed up today
with an issue with a LO ActiveX control embedded in their application
that didn't work - what would our response be? It's an outdated
technology that we're not investing in.
My position on ActiveX is to leave it (lest we break applications in the
wild,) and to *announce its deprecation* with two goals: first, solicit the
feedback of LO ActiveX consumers and, if so inclined to continue using it,
help in its support. And second, to flag a date in the future when ActiveX
will be completely removed from LO codebase, pending sufficient reason and
support by its consumers.
I'm happy with this. I'd say a quicker timeframe is fine though.
From the announce, if no one has found an application that uses
LO-embedded ActiveX remove it in a month or something. I expect that
if there are some users they might not hear until the install the
version without it regardless of what we do.

Kind regards,
Bryan

[1] https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/21024/
[2] http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2016-January/071789.html
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Template_Library
Hi there,
Recently it was decided to remove the rest of NPAPI support [1] which
got me thinking about the other Windows specific plugin tech -
ActiveX.
It seems ActiveX is very much no longer recommended by Microsoft and
it seems to not work by default for IE10/11 on Windows 7 and up. Any
objections to removing?
AFAICT this would just be removing embedding LO into IE.
Kind regards,
Bryan
[1] https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/20658/ and ESC discussion
here: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2015-December/071504.html
[2] https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2015/05/06/a-break-from-the-past-part-2-saying-goodbye-to-activex-vbscript-attachevent/
Chris Sherlock
2016-01-11 04:54:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bryan Quigley
To look at this issue from another POV.. If someone showed up today
with an issue with a LO ActiveX control embedded in their application
that didn't work - what would our response be? It's an outdated
technology that we're not investing in.
It probably shows a lack of adoption, but it doesn’t look like anyone actually has reported issues with it...
Post by Bryan Quigley
Post by Ashod Nakashian
My position on ActiveX is to leave it (lest we break applications in the
wild,) and to *announce its deprecation* with two goals: first, solicit the
feedback of LO ActiveX consumers and, if so inclined to continue using it,
help in its support. And second, to flag a date in the future when ActiveX
will be completely removed from LO codebase, pending sufficient reason and
support by its consumers.
I'm happy with this. I'd say a quicker timeframe is fine though.
From the announce, if no one has found an application that uses
LO-embedded ActiveX remove it in a month or something. I expect that
if there are some users they might not hear until the install the
version without it regardless of what we do.
Perhaps it should be announced in the release notes, with an actual version where it will be removed.

Chris
Bryan Quigley
2016-01-11 19:32:56 UTC
Permalink
I propose we add it to the 5.1 release notes (and 5.2 notes too) as:
Intent to Remove ActiveX support in the 5.2 release. If this change
negatively affects your Windows application please email the
LibreOffice development list with your use case and plan for moving
off of ActiveX. We specifically only want feedback if use ActiveX to
embed LibreOffice components into your application.

If no response, one week after 5.1.2 (Apr 10) is released let's make
the call to remove it (and update the release notes). If we do get
responses we can obviously decide to change the plan as needed.

Anywhere else we should post this?

Thoughts?
Bryan

[1] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/5.1#Feature_removal_.2F_deprecation
[2] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/5.2

On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 11:54 PM, Chris Sherlock
Post by Chris Sherlock
Post by Bryan Quigley
To look at this issue from another POV.. If someone showed up today
with an issue with a LO ActiveX control embedded in their application
that didn't work - what would our response be? It's an outdated
technology that we're not investing in.
It probably shows a lack of adoption, but it doesn’t look like anyone actually has reported issues with it...
Post by Bryan Quigley
Post by Ashod Nakashian
My position on ActiveX is to leave it (lest we break applications in the
wild,) and to *announce its deprecation* with two goals: first, solicit the
feedback of LO ActiveX consumers and, if so inclined to continue using it,
help in its support. And second, to flag a date in the future when ActiveX
will be completely removed from LO codebase, pending sufficient reason and
support by its consumers.
I'm happy with this. I'd say a quicker timeframe is fine though.
From the announce, if no one has found an application that uses
LO-embedded ActiveX remove it in a month or something. I expect that
if there are some users they might not hear until the install the
version without it regardless of what we do.
Perhaps it should be announced in the release notes, with an actual version where it will be removed.
Chris
Ashod Nakashian
2016-01-11 22:37:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bryan Quigley
Anywhere else we should post this?
Ideally the note would show up unintrusively upon loading/using the ActiveX
itself. Unfortunately we can't show a message box or some such UI, in case
the ActiveX is used non-interactively (in which case it'd block forever,
becoming unusable).

So the next best thing to do is *include the note in the installation*,
which should be hard to miss if made prominent (unless automated in silent
mode).

This would get the attention of possibly the users, if not the developers
(who might not even test out new versions as they come out, and expect
things to work as before). Users can contact developers, I expect, or at
least plan accordingly. Regardless, all we want is to give advance warning
before the day someone installs a newer version and be met with the
surprise of missing ActiveX altogether.

The installation and release notes seem to be the most reasonable places,
if not upon using the ActiveX itself. Unless others have better ideas.
Chris Sherlock
2016-01-12 01:21:35 UTC
Permalink
That sounds pretty reasonable to me.

Out of interest, just how “integrated” is this with the code? If someone wanted to create an external project on GitHub or some place like this, would it be feasible?

I guess I’m trying to understand how much of core it touches
 to reimplement an ActiveX control outside of the main tree, would a developer need to fork LibreOffice entirely, or could they maintain their codebranch entirely seperately and update the control if necessary after we do our changes to the main codebase?

I’m definitely for removing all vestiges of ActiveX from LO, but the more I think about it the more I can see that some corporation somewhere might be affected, far more so than the remove of NPAPI
 giving them the option of a control that can be maintained outside of the main project would be nice :-)

Chris
Post by Bryan Quigley
Anywhere else we should post this?
Ideally the note would show up unintrusively upon loading/using the ActiveX itself. Unfortunately we can't show a message box or some such UI, in case the ActiveX is used non-interactively (in which case it'd block forever, becoming unusable).
So the next best thing to do is include the note in the installation, which should be hard to miss if made prominent (unless automated in silent mode).
This would get the attention of possibly the users, if not the developers (who might not even test out new versions as they come out, and expect things to work as before). Users can contact developers, I expect, or at least plan accordingly. Regardless, all we want is to give advance warning before the day someone installs a newer version and be met with the surprise of missing ActiveX altogether.
The installation and release notes seem to be the most reasonable places, if not upon using the ActiveX itself. Unless others have better ideas.
SOS
2016-01-12 08:25:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bryan Quigley
Intent to Remove ActiveX support in the 5.2 release. If this change
negatively affects your Windows application please email the
LibreOffice development list with your use case and plan for moving
off of ActiveX. We specifically only want feedback if use ActiveX to
embed LibreOffice components into your application.
I aam wondering if the ActiveX stuff is used to build COM objects from
external DLL's ?
I uses (as example) a Windows videoplayer using basic and our API

Basic code:
if oSimpleFileAcces.Exists(filelocation) then
MPlayer = CreateObject("WMPlayer.OCX.7")
MPlayer.OpenPlayer(Filelocation)
endif

Greetz

Fernand
Post by Bryan Quigley
If no response, one week after 5.1.2 (Apr 10) is released let's make
the call to remove it (and update the release notes). If we do get
responses we can obviously decide to change the plan as needed.
Anywhere else we should post this?
Thoughts?
Bryan
[1] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/5.1#Feature_removal_.2F_deprecation
[2] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/5.2
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 11:54 PM, Chris Sherlock
Post by Chris Sherlock
Post by Bryan Quigley
To look at this issue from another POV.. If someone showed up today
with an issue with a LO ActiveX control embedded in their application
that didn't work - what would our response be? It's an outdated
technology that we're not investing in.
It probably shows a lack of adoption, but it doesn’t look like anyone actually has reported issues with it...
Post by Bryan Quigley
Post by Ashod Nakashian
My position on ActiveX is to leave it (lest we break applications in the
wild,) and to *announce its deprecation* with two goals: first, solicit the
feedback of LO ActiveX consumers and, if so inclined to continue using it,
help in its support. And second, to flag a date in the future when ActiveX
will be completely removed from LO codebase, pending sufficient reason and
support by its consumers.
I'm happy with this. I'd say a quicker timeframe is fine though.
From the announce, if no one has found an application that uses
LO-embedded ActiveX remove it in a month or something. I expect that
if there are some users they might not hear until the install the
version without it regardless of what we do.
Perhaps it should be announced in the release notes, with an actual version where it will be removed.
Chris
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
SOS
2016-01-13 07:52:33 UTC
Permalink
Bryan,

OK but someone must confirm that removing activeX has no influence on
this API functions and the LO codebase can use the ATL stuff without
activeX and the "CreateObject" will still been functioning.
greetez
Fernand
My understanding is that ATL can do the same thing with or without ActiveX.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Template_Library
Although as I mentioned previously I'm not much of a Windows developer.
Thanks,
bryan
Post by SOS
Post by Bryan Quigley
Intent to Remove ActiveX support in the 5.2 release. If this change
negatively affects your Windows application please email the
LibreOffice development list with your use case and plan for moving
off of ActiveX. We specifically only want feedback if use ActiveX to
embed LibreOffice components into your application.
I aam wondering if the ActiveX stuff is used to build COM objects from
external DLL's ?
I uses (as example) a Windows videoplayer using basic and our API
if oSimpleFileAcces.Exists(filelocation) then
MPlayer = CreateObject("WMPlayer.OCX.7")
MPlayer.OpenPlayer(Filelocation)
endif
Greetz
Fernand
Post by Bryan Quigley
If no response, one week after 5.1.2 (Apr 10) is released let's make
the call to remove it (and update the release notes). If we do get
responses we can obviously decide to change the plan as needed.
Anywhere else we should post this?
Thoughts?
Bryan
[1]
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/5.1#Feature_removal_.2F_deprecation
[2] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/5.2
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 11:54 PM, Chris Sherlock
Post by Chris Sherlock
Post by Bryan Quigley
To look at this issue from another POV.. If someone showed up today
with an issue with a LO ActiveX control embedded in their application
that didn't work - what would our response be? It's an outdated
technology that we're not investing in.
It probably shows a lack of adoption, but it doesn’t look like anyone
actually has reported issues with it...
Post by Bryan Quigley
Post by Ashod Nakashian
My position on ActiveX is to leave it (lest we break applications in the
wild,) and to *announce its deprecation* with two goals: first, solicit the
feedback of LO ActiveX consumers and, if so inclined to continue using it,
help in its support. And second, to flag a date in the future when ActiveX
will be completely removed from LO codebase, pending sufficient reason and
support by its consumers.
I'm happy with this. I'd say a quicker timeframe is fine though.
From the announce, if no one has found an application that uses
LO-embedded ActiveX remove it in a month or something. I expect that
if there are some users they might not hear until the install the
version without it regardless of what we do.
Perhaps it should be announced in the release notes, with an actual
version where it will be removed.
Chris
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
James E Lang
2016-01-11 14:52:45 UTC
Permalink
-----Original Message-----
From: Bryan Quigley <***@gmail.com>
To: libreoffice <***@lists.freedesktop.org>
Sent: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 15:41
Subject: Re: Remove ActiveX from LibreOffice

---------->8=====
My position on ActiveX is to leave it (lest we break applications in the wild,) and to *announce its deprecation* with two goals: first, solicit the feedback of LO ActiveX consumers and, if so inclined to continue using it, help in its support. And second, to flag a date in the future when ActiveX will be completely removed from LO codebase, pending sufficient reason and support by its consumers.
[Just to toss in a comment from a NOT NECESSARILY typical USER, I would probably fail to see any depreciation notice unless it were thrown in my face each time I used the feature until I say (in effect), "all right, Enough Already, SHUT UP!" aka, "Don't show this notice again." The same should apply to revising any existing menu accelerators. --jl]

---------->8=====
--
Jim
Rick C. Hodgin
2016-01-12 13:03:34 UTC
Permalink
If you search for "Microsoft Excel Automation" you'll find many references
online of how ActiveX is used in other applications to allow the Excel
engine to compute things in a spreadsheet form. Were the same ability
well-documented in LibreOffice, many people would switch as LibreOffice is
free, and Excel costs hundreds of dollars.

I urge you not to remove it, but to improve it for simpler integration. It
should work like this:

lo = CreateObject("libreoffice.application")
lo.open("c:\path\to\my\document\file.ext")
lo.visible = .t.

And in that way, an application can directly integrate operations into
their app which loads LibreOffice. Note that these examples are in Visual
Basic, but the same general form works from any application, including C++
(see below):

Here are some automation examples for Excel, Word, Outlook, and PowerPoint:
Excel: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/219151
Word: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/316383
Outlook: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/220595

A more example-by-example based tutorial:
PowerPoint:
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb871574%28v=vs.80%29.aspx

Here's a code snippet on how to access ActiveX from another application
using C++ from MSDN:
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/196776

ActiveX allows applications to integrate each other, and to have windowed
portions within an application which are actually a "portal" through to the
other application, though it appears to be fully integrated. It is a
powerful tool. And as I say, I have not used LibreOffice for integration
because I could not find good documentation on how to do it, whereas there
are many online resources on how to use Microsoft Office integration. If
the documentation were better, Windows people would use it as it is highly
desirable.

Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
Post by James E Lang
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 15:41
Subject: Re: Remove ActiveX from LibreOffice
---------->8=====
Post by Ashod Nakashian
My position on ActiveX is to leave it (lest we break applications in the
wild,) and to *announce its deprecation* with two goals: first, solicit the
feedback of LO ActiveX consumers and, if so inclined to continue using it,
help in its support. And second, to flag a date in the future when ActiveX
will be completely removed from LO codebase, pending sufficient reason and
support by its consumers.
[Just to toss in a comment from a NOT NECESSARILY typical USER, I would
probably fail to see any depreciation notice unless it were thrown in my
face each time I used the feature until I say (in effect), "all right,
Enough Already, SHUT UP!" aka, "Don't show this notice again." The same
should apply to revising any existing menu accelerators. --jl]
---------->8=====
--
Jim
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
timofonic timofonic
2016-01-12 15:36:39 UTC
Permalink
Hello.

I'm an humble and unskilled user, but here's my opinion:

- I personally think technologies like ActiveX are a double sword, they
help others to get attached to the Microsoft ecosystem. This technology
isn't an open standard and has potential security risks.
- I see this issue is taken serious with ActiveX, but there's another
dangerous technology: Java.
* Do you remember what happened with Oracle vs Java? They are switching to
OpenJDK, but personally I think that environment is poisoned by a
corporation as greedy and corrupt like microsoft.
* I think Java is a security risk, not so multiplatform in reality and not
so efficient. It should be avoided and eliminated from LO codebase.


What about making Python and Lua more important in LibreOffice?

- Lua:
* It's extremely lightweight and it did born for configure files.
* It can be used to replace certain native code that is difficult to
maintain or prone to lots of changes.
* You can use a JIT or compile it as native code, there are different
approachs.
* It could make LibreOffice more customizable: Do you think LibreOffice UI
is awful? Are you a keyboard junkie that is used to console text editors?
Do you have some disability that requires a specific interface (visual,
tactile, eye movement, voice...) No problem if the UI could be easy to
adapt to make it work in different ways.

- Python
* There's UNO: Who uses it?
* What about using the more faster Python implementations?



I think LibreOffice needs to have a more disruptive and innovative approach:

- I always considered emacs something very interesting, but not practical.
* elisp and lack of multithreading make it very unusable.
* It's unusable until you master it. It's good you can do some magic with
programming skills and get used to keyboard use, but there should be a
friendly start and the default mode should be easy for unskilled computer
users.
* Despite of that, the Emacs community is impressive: There's constant
loads of new extensions for it, very enthusiast users t the level some of
them are unfortunately zealots.

- I'm jealous of Atom, despite being "just" a text editor:
* It has loads of extensions.
* It could be used as an IDE for programing, web development and design.
* But I consider the "web native" apps really resource eaters.

What's the future of LibreOffice? Does it want to be just a Microsoft
Office clone?
- Why not make it a more flexible but lightweight at same time?
- What about niches? Engineering, sciences, education, programming.
- What about making it not freeze while saving and all these annoying stuff?

I would love:

- Writer: The best of a "text processor". Become a powerful ide. Able to
edit using markup languages. Able to use DVCS like Git.
- Calc: Make it more advanced
* Stadistic features of the old SMPS one or even better.
* Integrate CAS (Computer Algebra System) in some reliable and flexible
approach: Maxima, SageMath integration, resurrect CmathOOoCAS (it uses
Xcas/Giac), CoCoA.
- Make Math a real scientific tool.
* What about merging it with some CAS tool?
* What about provide RPN?
* What about making it able to be used as an advanced scientific calculator
and even interoperability with commercial ones?
* It needs some love in the boolean logic features, too.

- All: What about RTCE? Interoperability with e-learning systems like
Moodle? Able to be used to embed scientific/technical information like CAD,
EDA, 3D?

I know my ideas are insane, but that's what my insane mind think about the
ideal LO :)

Kind regards.

LibreOffice only goes to get the low hanging fruit. It may seem a good
approach, but makes it a curse.
Post by Rick C. Hodgin
If you search for "Microsoft Excel Automation" you'll find many references
online of how ActiveX is used in other applications to allow the Excel
engine to compute things in a spreadsheet form. Were the same ability
well-documented in LibreOffice, many people would switch as LibreOffice is
free, and Excel costs hundreds of dollars.
I urge you not to remove it, but to improve it for simpler integration. It
lo = CreateObject("libreoffice.application")
lo.open("c:\path\to\my\document\file.ext")
lo.visible = .t.
And in that way, an application can directly integrate operations into
their app which loads LibreOffice. Note that these examples are in Visual
Basic, but the same general form works from any application, including C++
Excel: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/219151
Word: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/316383
Outlook: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/220595
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb871574%28v=vs.80%29.aspx
Here's a code snippet on how to access ActiveX from another application
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/196776
ActiveX allows applications to integrate each other, and to have windowed
portions within an application which are actually a "portal" through to the
other application, though it appears to be fully integrated. It is a
powerful tool. And as I say, I have not used LibreOffice for integration
because I could not find good documentation on how to do it, whereas there
are many online resources on how to use Microsoft Office integration. If
the documentation were better, Windows people would use it as it is highly
desirable.
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
Post by James E Lang
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 15:41
Subject: Re: Remove ActiveX from LibreOffice
---------->8=====
Post by Ashod Nakashian
My position on ActiveX is to leave it (lest we break applications in the
wild,) and to *announce its deprecation* with two goals: first, solicit
the
Post by James E Lang
feedback of LO ActiveX consumers and, if so inclined to continue using
it,
Post by James E Lang
help in its support. And second, to flag a date in the future when
ActiveX
Post by James E Lang
will be completely removed from LO codebase, pending sufficient reason
and
Post by James E Lang
support by its consumers.
[Just to toss in a comment from a NOT NECESSARILY typical USER, I would
probably fail to see any depreciation notice unless it were thrown in my
face each time I used the feature until I say (in effect), "all right,
Enough Already, SHUT UP!" aka, "Don't show this notice again." The same
should apply to revising any existing menu accelerators. --jl]
---------->8=====
--
Jim
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
--
Problems?
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
deleted
Rick C. Hodgin
2016-01-12 15:51:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by timofonic timofonic
Hello.
- I personally think technologies like ActiveX are a double sword, they
help others to get attached to the Microsoft ecosystem. This technology
isn't an open standard and has potential security risks.
- I see this issue is taken serious with ActiveX, but there's another
dangerous technology: Java.
* Do you remember what happened with Oracle vs Java? They are switching to
OpenJDK, but personally I think that environment is poisoned by a
corporation as greedy and corrupt like microsoft.
* I think Java is a security risk, not so multiplatform in reality and not
so efficient. It should be avoided and eliminated from LO codebase.
What about making Python and Lua more important in LibreOffice?
My first thoughts: Python and Lua are languages. Windows is an OS,
meaning ActiveX works on Windows with any language that supports it,
allowing the code which runs under ActiveX to be ported to any other
application natively on Windows.

Windows is no small OS. In 2015, it still maintains over 80% marketshare
of all desktop OSes:
http://netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0

Plus, Python directly supports ActiveX and can import into itself, and I
believe with ActivePython can also export:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12039174/python-activex-automation
Post by timofonic timofonic
* It's extremely lightweight and it did born for configure files.
* It can be used to replace certain native code that is difficult to
maintain or prone to lots of changes.
* You can use a JIT or compile it as native code, there are different
approachs.
* It could make LibreOffice more customizable: Do you think LibreOffice UI
is awful? Are you a keyboard junkie that is used to console text editors?
Do you have some disability that requires a specific interface (visual,
tactile, eye movement, voice...) No problem if the UI could be easy to
adapt to make it work in different ways.
I have no experience with Lua.
Post by timofonic timofonic
- Python
* There's UNO: Who uses it?
* What about using the more faster Python implementations?
Blender uses a background python interface. It allows for some really nice
features, though most everything is done through the GUI for most users.
Post by timofonic timofonic
- I always considered emacs something very interesting, but not practical.
* elisp and lack of multithreading make it very unusable.
* It's unusable until you master it. It's good you can do some magic with
programming skills and get used to keyboard use, but there should be a
friendly start and the default mode should be easy for unskilled computer
users.
* Despite of that, the Emacs community is impressive: There's constant
loads of new extensions for it, very enthusiast users t the level some of
them are unfortunately zealots.
* It has loads of extensions.
* It could be used as an IDE for programing, web development and design.
* But I consider the "web native" apps really resource eaters.
What's the future of LibreOffice? Does it want to be just a Microsoft
Office clone?
- Why not make it a more flexible but lightweight at same time?
- What about niches? Engineering, sciences, education, programming.
- What about making it not freeze while saving and all these annoying stuff?
- Writer: The best of a "text processor". Become a powerful ide. Able to
edit using markup languages. Able to use DVCS like Git.
- Calc: Make it more advanced
* Stadistic features of the old SMPS one or even better.
* Integrate CAS (Computer Algebra System) in some reliable and flexible
approach: Maxima, SageMath integration, resurrect CmathOOoCAS (it uses
Xcas/Giac), CoCoA.
- Make Math a real scientific tool.
* What about merging it with some CAS tool?
* What about provide RPN?
* What about making it able to be used as an advanced scientific
calculator and even interoperability with commercial ones?
* It needs some love in the boolean logic features, too.
- All: What about RTCE? Interoperability with e-learning systems like
Moodle? Able to be used to embed scientific/technical information like CAD,
EDA, 3D?
I know my ideas are insane, but that's what my insane mind think about the
ideal LO :)
Kind regards.
LibreOffice only goes to get the low hanging fruit. It may seem a good
approach, but makes it a curse.
Post by Rick C. Hodgin
If you search for "Microsoft Excel Automation" you'll find many references
online of how ActiveX is used in other applications to allow the Excel
engine to compute things in a spreadsheet form. Were the same ability
well-documented in LibreOffice, many people would switch as LibreOffice is
free, and Excel costs hundreds of dollars.
I urge you not to remove it, but to improve it for simpler integration.
It
lo = CreateObject("libreoffice.application")
lo.open("c:\path\to\my\document\file.ext")
lo.visible = .t.
And in that way, an application can directly integrate operations into
their app which loads LibreOffice. Note that these examples are in Visual
Basic, but the same general form works from any application, including C++
Excel: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/219151
Word: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/316383
Outlook: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/220595
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb871574%28v=vs.80%29.aspx
Here's a code snippet on how to access ActiveX from another application
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/196776
ActiveX allows applications to integrate each other, and to have windowed
portions within an application which are actually a "portal" through to the
other application, though it appears to be fully integrated. It is a
powerful tool. And as I say, I have not used LibreOffice for integration
because I could not find good documentation on how to do it, whereas there
are many online resources on how to use Microsoft Office integration. If
the documentation were better, Windows people would use it as it is highly
desirable.
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
Post by James E Lang
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 15:41
Subject: Re: Remove ActiveX from LibreOffice
---------->8=====
Post by Ashod Nakashian
My position on ActiveX is to leave it (lest we break applications in
the
Post by James E Lang
wild,) and to *announce its deprecation* with two goals: first, solicit
the
Post by James E Lang
feedback of LO ActiveX consumers and, if so inclined to continue using
it,
Post by James E Lang
help in its support. And second, to flag a date in the future when
ActiveX
Post by James E Lang
will be completely removed from LO codebase, pending sufficient reason
and
Post by James E Lang
support by its consumers.
[Just to toss in a comment from a NOT NECESSARILY typical USER, I would
probably fail to see any depreciation notice unless it were thrown in my
face each time I used the feature until I say (in effect), "all right,
Enough Already, SHUT UP!" aka, "Don't show this notice again." The same
should apply to revising any existing menu accelerators. --jl]
---------->8=====
--
Jim
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
--
Problems?
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
deleted
Anthonys Lists
2016-01-12 17:24:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by timofonic timofonic
- Writer: The best of a "text processor". Become a powerful ide. Able
to edit using markup languages. Able to use DVCS like Git.
You've got me on my hobbyhorse :-) Both emacs and (el)vi(m)(s), iirc,
allow multiple edit windows on the same document. Okay, Michael has said
with Writer's then current - I don't know how much it's been cleaned up
since then - internals that is pretty much impossible. But if we can get
multiple windows on the one document, then implementing WordPerfect's
"reveal codes" mode should be incredibly simple - just have one window
in wysiwyg mode, and the other in markup mode.

Pull that off, and you'll have all the old greybeard WP power users
crying in delight ...

Cheers,
Wol
Tor Lillqvist
2016-01-12 17:27:18 UTC
Permalink
OK, now that "reveal codes" was brought up, this thread definitely has
jumped the shark.

--tml
Rick C. Hodgin
2016-01-12 03:08:11 UTC
Permalink
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
***@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Bryan Quigley
2016-01-13 04:27:03 UTC
Permalink
Hi Rick,

ActiveX is deprecated by Microsoft and will be less useful (or not at
all) on newer MS browsers. I'm unsure if it ever worked (or was
supposed to) let you embed ActiveX controls into LibreOffice itself.

Kind regards,
Bryan

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:08 PM, Rick C. Hodgin
Why are you removing ActiveX from LibreOffice? Excel supports it, and it is
desirable for integration with Windows apps like C#, Visual Basic, Visual
FoxPro. It allows those other apps to integrate the app directly into their
app.
I have tried to use it previously, but could not find documentation for it.
If it's an unused feature, I'd suggest that's why than for other reasons.
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
-------- Original Message --------
From: Chris Sherlock
Sent: Mon, 11/01/2016 08:21 PM
To: Ashod Nakashian
CC: libreoffice ; Bryan Quigley
Subject: Re: Remove ActiveX from LibreOffice
That sounds pretty reasonable to me.
Out of interest, just how “integrated” is this with the code? If someone
wanted to create an external project on GitHub or some place like this,
would it be feasible?
I guess I’m trying to understand how much of core it touches… to reimplement
an ActiveX control outside of the main tree, would a developer need to fork
LibreOffice entirely, or could they maintain their codebranch entirely
seperately and update the control if necessary after we do our changes to
the main codebase?
I’m definitely for removing all vestiges of ActiveX from LO, but the more I
think about it the more I can see that some corporation somewhere might be
affected, far more so than the remove of NPAPI… giving them the option of a
control that can be maintained outside of the main project would be nice :-)
Chris
Post by Bryan Quigley
Anywhere else we should post this?
Ideally the note would show up unintrusively upon loading/using the ActiveX
itself. Unfortunately we can't show a message box or some such UI, in case
the ActiveX is used non-interactively (in which case it'd block forever,
becoming unusable).
So the next best thing to do is include the note in the installation, which
should be hard to miss if made prominent (unless automated in silent mode).
This would get the attention of possibly the users, if not the developers
(who might not even test out new versions as they come out, and expect
things to work as before). Users can contact developers, I expect, or at
least plan accordingly. Regardless, all we want is to give advance warning
before the day someone installs a newer version and be met with the surprise
of missing ActiveX altogether.
The installation and release notes seem to be the most reasonable places, if
not upon using the ActiveX itself. Unless others have better ideas.
James E Lang
2016-01-13 06:36:41 UTC
Permalink
But Bryan, Rick is pointing out that ActiveX usage is not limited to browsers only. If its usage is deprecated then I assume there is a functionally equivalent alternative but the *effective* life cycle of applications that use ActiveX is almost certain to stretch past the start of LO 6.

I would define effective life cycle of an application as being AT LEAST two half lives of the application beyond the first release of the application that replaces the final LEGITIMATE release with an 18 month minimum (36 months if there is no subsequent application update release).

All support for Windows XP has been discontinued by Microsoft yet many computers still use it. Requiring a Windows XP upgrade to support EXISTING functionality in LO is quite possibly premature even now.

Depreciation means to me that products should cease requiring use of something in ongoing development cycles but that for its effective life cycle its use WRT previously developed programs will not be abridged.

I'm told that ActiveX has been a security nightmare since it was first released. That's probably a better reason to not support it than citing its depreciation status.

I realize that on volunteer projects such as LO such standards are a bit of a burden but they warrant at least a nodding recognition.
--
Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: Bryan Quigley <***@gmail.com>
To: "Rick C. Hodgin" <***@gmail.com>
Cc: Chris Sherlock <***@gmail.com>, Ashod Nakashian <***@gmail.com>, libreoffice <***@lists.freedesktop.org>
Sent: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:27
Subject: Re: Remove ActiveX from LibreOffice

Hi Rick,

ActiveX is deprecated by Microsoft and will be less useful (or not at
all) on newer MS browsers. I'm unsure if it ever worked (or was
supposed to) let you embed ActiveX controls into LibreOffice itself.

Kind regards,
Bryan

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:08 PM, Rick C. Hodgin
Why are you removing ActiveX from LibreOffice? Excel supports it, and it is
desirable for integration with Windows apps like C#, Visual Basic, Visual
FoxPro. It allows those other apps to integrate the app directly into their
app.
I have tried to use it previously, but could not find documentation for it.
If it's an unused feature, I'd suggest that's why than for other reasons.
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
-------- Original Message --------
From: Chris Sherlock
Sent: Mon, 11/01/2016 08:21 PM
To: Ashod Nakashian
CC: libreoffice ; Bryan Quigley
Subject: Re: Remove ActiveX from LibreOffice
That sounds pretty reasonable to me.
Out of interest, just how “integrated” is this with the code? If someone
wanted to create an external project on GitHub or some place like this,
would it be feasible?
I guess I’m trying to understand how much of core it touches
 to reimplement
an ActiveX control outside of the main tree, would a developer need to fork
LibreOffice entirely, or could they maintain their codebranch entirely
seperately and update the control if necessary after we do our changes to
the main codebase?
I’m definitely for removing all vestiges of ActiveX from LO, but the more I
think about it the more I can see that some corporation somewhere might be
affected, far more so than the remove of NPAPI
 giving them the option of a
control that can be maintained outside of the main project would be nice :-)
Chris
Post by Bryan Quigley
Anywhere else we should post this?
Ideally the note would show up unintrusively upon loading/using the ActiveX
itself. Unfortunately we can't show a message box or some such UI, in case
the ActiveX is used non-interactively (in which case it'd block forever,
becoming unusable).
So the next best thing to do is include the note in the installation, which
should be hard to miss if made prominent (unless automated in silent mode).
This would get the attention of possibly the users, if not the developers
(who might not even test out new versions as they come out, and expect
things to work as before). Users can contact developers, I expect, or at
least plan accordingly. Regardless, all we want is to give advance warning
before the day someone installs a newer version and be met with the surprise
of missing ActiveX altogether.
The installation and release notes seem to be the most reasonable places, if
not upon using the ActiveX itself. Unless others have better ideas.
Rick C. Hodgin
2016-01-13 12:48:58 UTC
Permalink
In addition, everything thru Windows 10 currently supports ActiveX, and of
all the various versions of Windows still seen in the wild, Windows 8, 8.1,
and 10 account for only 23% of all OSes, and 26% of Windows OSes. Windows
7 accounts for 56%, and Windows XP comes in at #2 accounting for 11%.

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

Windows OSes that support these features are not going away anytime soon.
Microsoft may even remove them from future releases, but there will be
users who will not so easily let go of their former feature sets. There
are too many powerful features in 32-bit Windows and 64-bit Windows to let
them all go. Microsoft and the rest of the business world may want to move
us all to browser-based operating systems, but there is no real computing
power there. It changes the user base from owners to renters, and there
are many who will not stand for that, and it will be those people who
continue to use LibreOffice, for example, as they are looking for real
ownership of their machine, and not just being a renter.

Allodial Title -- it makes all the difference. :-)

Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
Post by James E Lang
But Bryan, Rick is pointing out that ActiveX usage is not limited to
browsers only. If its usage is deprecated then I assume there is a
functionally equivalent alternative but the *effective* life cycle of
applications that use ActiveX is almost certain to stretch past the start
of LO 6.
I would define effective life cycle of an application as being AT LEAST
two half lives of the application beyond the first release of the
application that replaces the final LEGITIMATE release with an 18 month
minimum (36 months if there is no subsequent application update release).
All support for Windows XP has been discontinued by Microsoft yet many
computers still use it. Requiring a Windows XP upgrade to support EXISTING
functionality in LO is quite possibly premature even now.
Depreciation means to me that products should cease requiring use of
something in ongoing development cycles but that for its effective life
cycle its use WRT previously developed programs will not be abridged.
I'm told that ActiveX has been a security nightmare since it was first
released. That's probably a better reason to not support it than citing its
depreciation status.
I realize that on volunteer projects such as LO such standards are a bit
of a burden but they warrant at least a nodding recognition.
--
Jim
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:27
Subject: Re: Remove ActiveX from LibreOffice
Hi Rick,
ActiveX is deprecated by Microsoft and will be less useful (or not at
all) on newer MS browsers. I'm unsure if it ever worked (or was
supposed to) let you embed ActiveX controls into LibreOffice itself.
Kind regards,
Bryan
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:08 PM, Rick C. Hodgin
Why are you removing ActiveX from LibreOffice? Excel supports it, and it
is
desirable for integration with Windows apps like C#, Visual Basic, Visual
FoxPro. It allows those other apps to integrate the app directly into
their
app.
I have tried to use it previously, but could not find documentation for
it.
If it's an unused feature, I'd suggest that's why than for other reasons.
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
-------- Original Message --------
From: Chris Sherlock
Sent: Mon, 11/01/2016 08:21 PM
To: Ashod Nakashian
CC: libreoffice ; Bryan Quigley
Subject: Re: Remove ActiveX from LibreOffice
That sounds pretty reasonable to me.
Out of interest, just how “integrated” is this with the code? If someone
wanted to create an external project on GitHub or some place like this,
would it be feasible?
I guess I’m trying to understand how much of core it touches
 to
reimplement
an ActiveX control outside of the main tree, would a developer need to
fork
LibreOffice entirely, or could they maintain their codebranch entirely
seperately and update the control if necessary after we do our changes to
the main codebase?
I’m definitely for removing all vestiges of ActiveX from LO, but the
more I
think about it the more I can see that some corporation somewhere might
be
affected, far more so than the remove of NPAPI
 giving them the option
of a
control that can be maintained outside of the main project would be nice
:-)
Chris
Post by Bryan Quigley
Anywhere else we should post this?
Ideally the note would show up unintrusively upon loading/using the
ActiveX
itself. Unfortunately we can't show a message box or some such UI, in
case
the ActiveX is used non-interactively (in which case it'd block forever,
becoming unusable).
So the next best thing to do is include the note in the installation,
which
should be hard to miss if made prominent (unless automated in silent
mode).
This would get the attention of possibly the users, if not the developers
(who might not even test out new versions as they come out, and expect
things to work as before). Users can contact developers, I expect, or at
least plan accordingly. Regardless, all we want is to give advance
warning
before the day someone installs a newer version and be met with the
surprise
of missing ActiveX altogether.
The installation and release notes seem to be the most reasonable
places, if
not upon using the ActiveX itself. Unless others have better ideas.
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Bryan Quigley
2016-01-18 04:59:30 UTC
Permalink
Hi Jim,

I'm not convinced that anyone is actually using the ActiveX
functionality to embed other applications into LibreOffice, AFAICT no
one has mentioned it actually currently working. Nor has anyone said
they want to work on it.

Having said that I will go ahead with marking it deprecated but *not*
specifying a time to remove it. This way we give people possibly more
notice but also enable some future developer to remove the support.
In a way, we table the decision on timing until we have more data.

I'm also going to see about modifying the Windows installer to warn in
some way about ActiveX support.

Kind regards,
Bryan
Post by James E Lang
But Bryan, Rick is pointing out that ActiveX usage is not limited to
browsers only. If its usage is deprecated then I assume there is a
functionally equivalent alternative but the *effective* life cycle of
applications that use ActiveX is almost certain to stretch past the start of
LO 6.
I would define effective life cycle of an application as being AT LEAST two
half lives of the application beyond the first release of the application
that replaces the final LEGITIMATE release with an 18 month minimum (36
months if there is no subsequent application update release).
All support for Windows XP has been discontinued by Microsoft yet many
computers still use it. Requiring a Windows XP upgrade to support EXISTING
functionality in LO is quite possibly premature even now.
Depreciation means to me that products should cease requiring use of
something in ongoing development cycles but that for its effective life
cycle its use WRT previously developed programs will not be abridged.
I'm told that ActiveX has been a security nightmare since it was first
released. That's probably a better reason to not support it than citing its
depreciation status.
I realize that on volunteer projects such as LO such standards are a bit of
a burden but they warrant at least a nodding recognition.
--
Jim
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:27
Subject: Re: Remove ActiveX from LibreOffice
Hi Rick,
ActiveX is deprecated by Microsoft and will be less useful (or not at
all) on newer MS browsers. I'm unsure if it ever worked (or was
supposed to) let you embed ActiveX controls into LibreOffice itself.
Kind regards,
Bryan
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:08 PM, Rick C. Hodgin
Why are you removing ActiveX from LibreOffice? Excel supports it, and it is
desirable for integration with Windows apps like C#, Visual Basic, Visual
FoxPro. It allows those other apps to integrate the app directly into their
app.
I have tried to use it previously, but could not find documentation for it.
If it's an unused feature, I'd suggest that's why than for other reasons.
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
-------- Original Message --------
From: Chris Sherlock
Sent: Mon, 11/01/2016 08:21 PM
To: Ashod Nakashian
CC: libreoffice ; Bryan Quigley
Subject: Re: Remove ActiveX from LibreOffice
That sounds pretty reasonable to me.
Out of interest, just how “integrated” is this with the code? If someone
wanted to create an external project on GitHub or some place like this,
would it be feasible?
I guess I’m trying to understand how much of core it touches… to reimplement
an ActiveX control outside of the main tree, would a developer need to fork
LibreOffice entirely, or could they maintain their codebranch entirely
seperately and update the control if necessary after we do our changes to
the main codebase?
I’m definitely for removing all vestiges of ActiveX from LO, but the more I
think about it the more I can see that some corporation somewhere might be
affected, far more so than the remove of NPAPI… giving them the option of a
control that can be maintained outside of the main project would be nice :-)
Chris
Post by Bryan Quigley
Anywhere else we should post this?
Ideally the note would show up unintrusively upon loading/using the ActiveX
itself. Unfortunately we can't show a message box or some such UI, in case
the ActiveX is used non-interactively (in which case it'd block forever,
becoming unusable).
So the next best thing to do is include the note in the installation, which
should be hard to miss if made prominent (unless automated in silent mode).
This would get the attention of possibly the users, if not the developers
(who might not even test out new versions as they come out, and expect
things to work as before). Users can contact developers, I expect, or at
least plan accordingly. Regardless, all we want is to give advance warning
before the day someone installs a newer version and be met with the surprise
of missing ActiveX altogether.
The installation and release notes seem to be the most reasonable places, if
not upon using the ActiveX itself. Unless others have better ideas.
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
SOS
2016-01-13 07:57:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bryan Quigley
Hi Rick,
ActiveX is deprecated by Microsoft and will be less useful (or not at
all) on newer MS browsers. I'm unsure if it ever worked (or was
supposed to) let you embed ActiveX controls into LibreOffice itself.
Basic code running a Windows Mediaplayer:

if oSimpleFileAcces.Exists(filelocation) then
MPlayer = CreateObject("WMPlayer.OCX.7")
MPlayer.OpenPlayer(Filelocation)
endif

works still fine under 5.1.0
Post by Bryan Quigley
Kind regards,
Bryan
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:08 PM, Rick C. Hodgin
Why are you removing ActiveX from LibreOffice? Excel supports it, and it is
desirable for integration with Windows apps like C#, Visual Basic, Visual
FoxPro. It allows those other apps to integrate the app directly into their
app.
I have tried to use it previously, but could not find documentation for it.
If it's an unused feature, I'd suggest that's why than for other reasons.
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
-------- Original Message --------
From: Chris Sherlock
Sent: Mon, 11/01/2016 08:21 PM
To: Ashod Nakashian
CC: libreoffice ; Bryan Quigley
Subject: Re: Remove ActiveX from LibreOffice
That sounds pretty reasonable to me.
Out of interest, just how “integrated” is this with the code? If someone
wanted to create an external project on GitHub or some place like this,
would it be feasible?
I guess I’m trying to understand how much of core it touches… to reimplement
an ActiveX control outside of the main tree, would a developer need to fork
LibreOffice entirely, or could they maintain their codebranch entirely
seperately and update the control if necessary after we do our changes to
the main codebase?
I’m definitely for removing all vestiges of ActiveX from LO, but the more I
think about it the more I can see that some corporation somewhere might be
affected, far more so than the remove of NPAPI… giving them the option of a
control that can be maintained outside of the main project would be nice :-)
Chris
Post by Bryan Quigley
Anywhere else we should post this?
Ideally the note would show up unintrusively upon loading/using the ActiveX
itself. Unfortunately we can't show a message box or some such UI, in case
the ActiveX is used non-interactively (in which case it'd block forever,
becoming unusable).
So the next best thing to do is include the note in the installation, which
should be hard to miss if made prominent (unless automated in silent mode).
This would get the attention of possibly the users, if not the developers
(who might not even test out new versions as they come out, and expect
things to work as before). Users can contact developers, I expect, or at
least plan accordingly. Regardless, all we want is to give advance warning
before the day someone installs a newer version and be met with the surprise
of missing ActiveX altogether.
The installation and release notes seem to be the most reasonable places, if
not upon using the ActiveX itself. Unless others have better ideas.
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Loading...