| Summary: | Collaboration feature missing in Libreoffice: offline enhancement suggestion with user registration and peer to peer document updates | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | LibreOffice | Reporter: | Daniele <grassode> |
| Component: | LibreOffice | Assignee: | Not Assigned <libreoffice-bugs> |
| Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | ||
| Severity: | enhancement | CC: | stephane.guillou |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | 7.5.7.1 release | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Crash report or crash signature: | Regression By: | ||
|
Description
Daniele
2023-10-25 14:17:38 UTC
See the following relevant reports: - Bug 88127 - [RFE] Ability to collaborate on documents over GIT . Bug 85660 - FILESAVE: Improve source control compatibility of flat ODF files - Bug 97282 - Enhanced Change Tracking/collaboration proposal - immutable XML - Bug 133984 - Enhancement: Support for real-time and offline collaborative editing in LibreOffice (desktop) Maybe your request is already covered by some / all of them? Please see the discussions there. Hi Stephane, thank you for the research. Out of the 4 reports you provided, the last one (Bug 133984) is indeed a thorough exchange on this topic. The other either focus on git with not so user-friendly solutions for common users (Bug 88127 and Bug 85660) or propose a specific solution (Bug 97282) which may or may not be part of the final one. However, some elements are missing from Bug 133984 too, that is a practical solution which could build on already successful offline collaboration opensource projects such as anytype.io. Since the gist of what I am proposing is practically the same as Bug 133984, is there a way to link that report to this or, is it best to make a comment to that report? Thank you for the reply, Daniele. I would suggest commenting in bug 133984 with your ideas, to centralise the conversation. As you agree the request is essentially the same, I am marking this bug as a duplicate of bug 133984 (which gives weight to the feature request). *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 133984 *** Great, just done what you suggested. |