Am 07.07.2011 19:29, schrieb Mathias Bauer:
On 07.07.2011 18:06, Ian Lynch wrote:
-stuff removed that can be read one news back -
Just to prevent that a false impression comes up (and the 2 meg you
named gets a meaning that it doesn't have in fact): the code cleanup
in LO we are
On 08.07.2011 13:17, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
On Jul 8, 2011, at 12:58 PM, Mathias Bauer wrote:
On 08.07.2011 12:50, Armin Le Grand wrote:
I just want to mention that with the variable cleanup in OOo I
had 1010 conflicting files on aw080 on the next resync, in
average with 4-5 conflicts due
On 6 July 2011 23:51, Andrew Rist andrew.r...@oracle.com wrote:
To date the LibreOffice crew has taken the effort to merge in changes from
the OOo code line, for each release.
The most obvious and best way to collaborate in the future is to write good
code, and make it worth their while to
On 7 July 2011 12:09, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 6 July 2011 23:51, Andrew Rist andrew.r...@oracle.com wrote:
To date the LibreOffice crew has taken the effort to merge in changes
from
the OOo code line, for each release.
The most obvious and best way to
On 07.07.2011 13:25, Ian Lynch wrote:
On 7 July 2011 12:09, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 6 July 2011 23:51, Andrew Rist andrew.r...@oracle.com wrote:
To date the LibreOffice crew has taken the effort to merge in changes
from
the OOo code line, for each release.
On 7 July 2011 13:10, Mathias Bauer mathias_ba...@gmx.net wrote:
On 07.07.2011 13:09, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 6 July 2011 23:51, Andrew Rist andrew.r...@oracle.com wrote:
To date the LibreOffice crew has taken the effort to merge in changes from
the OOo code line, for each release.
The most
On 7 July 2011 13:17, Mathias Bauer mathias_ba...@gmx.net wrote:
...
One thing would be to collaborate to remove any redundant code. I have heard
that the LibO people have already worked on this so removing code should be
something that is not too controversial license-wise and could filter
On 7 Jul 2011, at 13:17, Mathias Bauer wrote:
This would at least require that someone having done that at LO would
contribute a patch for OOo. Having a patch could help to do the removal
in the same way as in LO. That could make sure that afterwards the code
bases became more similar and
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Rob Weir apa...@robweir.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On 7 Jul 2011, at 13:17, Mathias Bauer wrote:
This would at least require that someone having done that at LO would
contribute a patch for OOo.
--- On Thu, 7/7/11, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
...
Hence the desire to see the work that has already been done
on LO contributed here, rather than a related-but-different
cleanup.
All these contributions are hypothetical ... at least
until we have a repository of our own. And
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:45, Pedro F. Giffuni giffu...@tutopia.com wrote:
...
One of the things LibreOffice pretends to do, for
example, is to remove Java as a dependency, a move
that is not very attractive to Apache developers, I think.
Bah. I'd *love* to get rid of a JVM dependency :-)
On Jul 7, 2011, at 2:47 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:45, Pedro F. Giffuni giffu...@tutopia.com wrote:
...
One of the things LibreOffice pretends to do, for
example, is to remove Java as a dependency, a move
that is not very attractive to Apache developers, I think.
To date the LibreOffice crew has taken the effort to merge in changes
from the OOo code line, for each release.
The most obvious and best way to collaborate in the future is to write
good code, and make it worth their while to integrate it into LO.
The more compelling the development effort at
On 2011/6/6 19:52 Andrew Rist andrew.r...@oracle.com wrote:
To date the LibreOffice crew has taken the effort to merge in changes
from the OOo code line, for each release.
The most obvious and best way to collaborate in the future is to write
good code, and make it worth their while to
As I read this thread, it makes me a bit sad to see that the community of the
OpenSourceOffice is actually splitting in two, and I don't understand why.
I am not a developer, just a user, so I don't understand the technicalities. I
can understand the differences between the licenses and their
Hello ...
--- On Tue, 7/5/11, Drini Nosi drini.in...@gmail.com wrote:
...
As I read this thread, it makes me a
bit sad to see that the community of the OpenSourceOffice is
actually splitting in two, and I don't understand why.
Corporate interests. Some linux distributions and developers
were
Ross Gardler wrote:
At present the only way I can see to start doing this is to a) drop
the ego on both sides, this is a different world from the one in
which the fork was seen as necessary. There are still fundamental
licence differences, but I am sure that, for many, the licence is less
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 10:28 PM, Andy Brown a...@the-martin-byrd.netwrote:
As each developer retains ownership of their code it maybe better to ask
on the developers list [1]. The SC has no control over the devs.
[1] libreoff...@lists.freedesktop.org
Since Rob is asking the Steering
In general I avoid commenting threads like this, as in my
POV the licensing differences are not surmountable..
--- On Mon, 7/4/11, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
...
As each developer retains ownership of their code it
maybe better to ask
on the developers list [1]. The SC has no
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Pedro F. Giffuni giffu...@tutopia.com wrote:
In general I avoid commenting threads like this, as in my
POV the licensing differences are not surmountable..
It is hard to tell whether 100% of TDF developers insist on copyleft.
Certainly there is a vocal
@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: OOO and LibreOffice.
On 3 July 2011 23:29, Ted Rolle Jr. ster...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been a programmer for many years. I've seen projects succeed and
projects fail.
[ ... ]
The Apache Way is all about what some might call ego-less code.
However, this project does face
On 3 Jul 2011, at 19:43, Ross Gardler wrote:
But before we can
get to that point we need to address the technical differences between
the two code bases. LO is already 8 months or so adrift of OOo (or at
least that is what I am led to believe).
It's worth observing that the code that new
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On 3 Jul 2011, at 19:43, Ross Gardler wrote:
But before we can
get to that point we need to address the technical differences between
the two code bases. LO is already 8 months or so adrift of OOo (or at
least that is
Simon Phipps wrote:
It's certainly worth asking, although I believe their current LGPLv3+MPL
policy is more a suggestion than a requirement so it would ultimately be up
to each contributor. Perhaps you could ask on the steering-discuss list[1]?
S.
[1]
On 30/06/2011 Ian Lynch wrote:
If I save an odf file from OOo it will open exactly the same in LibO.
If that isn't true than I would be interested to know where things
break.
Talking about 100% compatibility is probably exaggerated, since there
are portions of the ODF standard (e.g. table
I think it is foolish to assign a metric to compatibility between OOO and
LibreOffice, and particularly between either and ODF. If the 1% matters to me,
it can be a show-stopper for my interoperability needs. The larger the take-up
of *Office.org, the greater the number of folks impacted
Perhaps I'm jaded, but when you have data in two places, you can be sure
of one thing: they're both wrong.
I fear that the *Office camps will be in some sort of competition.
Competition means that there is a winner, and a loser.
The good thing is that one will survive and become the de-facto
On 30 June 2011 18:04, Shane Curcuru a...@shanecurcuru.org wrote:
Isn't this related to certification programs? Speaking of which, does
anyone have a brief explanation and some links to any existing official OOo
certification or training or similar programs?
Just to be clear on terms
On 30 June 2011 17:18, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
From this, is it more precise to say that OpenOffice.org and
LibreOffice.org provide 100% fidelity in interchange of documents with each
other when employing their common native format, ODF?
I'm happy with that, I
On 30 June 2011 07:10, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
Umm, 100% fidelity to/of what? I would love to understand the
qualifications that attach to that statement, and how whatever that is can
be demonstrated/verified.
[T]hey both operate on odf files with 100% fidelity.
-dev@incubator.apache.org; giffu...@tutopia.com
Subject: Re: Differences between OOO and LibreOffice.
On 30 June 2011 07:10, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
Umm, 100% fidelity to/of what? I would love to understand the
qualifications that attach to that statement, and how
Isn't this related to certification programs? Speaking of which, does
anyone have a brief explanation and some links to any existing official
OOo certification or training or similar programs?
This is a major area for end users (and trainers, consultants, and the
like) that we need to figure
FWIW;
One interesting difference that I see happening in the future
wrt LibreOffice is that Apache OpenOffice will be a big
consumer of Java stuff.
Apache PDFBox looks like a good candidate for inclusion.
cheers,
Pedro.
Maybe better to emphasise the similarities, the most important being that
they both operate on odf files with 100% fidelity. From a user point of view
that is very important and not mentioned in this thread which was started by
what seems to be a user not a dev.
--
Ian
Ofqual Accredited IT
I've seen both.
Is LibreOffice a fork of the OOO code?
I don't know which one to choose.
Ted
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
--- On Tue, 6/28/11, Ted Rolle, Jr. ster...@gmail.com wrote:
I've seen both.
Good, that's what software freedom is about :-).
Is LibreOffice a fork of the OOO code?
Yes.
I don't know which one to choose.
This list is not really for comparisons among the
many OOo forks.
I am personally
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 13:37, Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Christian Grobmeier
grobme...@gmail.com wrote:
OOO uses (or will use in future) the ASL 2.0 license,
OOO is LGPLv3, the AOO fork will be ASL2
To my knowledge the OOo trademark will be
Also, please note it is the Apache License, v2.0. There is no S in
the acronym.
haha my mistake - i always do it wrong :-)
38 matches
Mail list logo
