On 2010-12-23 17:30, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:
On 22.12.2010 19:13, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
On 12/22/10 6:03 PM, Martin Dobiasch wrote:
... cut ...
Its installed as I've tested some other code on that Mac using the
Midi API
of Sun-Java. For example the same extension works for NeoOffice.
Do you know where in the code I can find the java implementation? Maybe I
can dig into it and compare Libre/Open-Office with NeoOffice
The UI of NeoOffice is completely Java based i assume they run native 64
bit. Anyway you can't simply compare NeoOffice with OpenOffice.org here.
Don't expect a fix form LibO they work more in the direction to remove
Java completely ;-)
Why would they want to cripple OOo that badly ?
Do you happen to know the rationale by any chance?
Maybe the question rephrased to make it more on-track: would there be a
problem with Java in OOo, such that removing Java would solve a problem?
And if so, what would it be?
Most of OOo is written in C++ so it won't be badly crippled if Java is
removed from the product. I have used OOo without Java on a machine and
almost all of OOo works just fine without Java.
As far as I can understand LibreOffice is just trying to minimize the
_dependency_ on Java. Developers will still be able to write extensions
in Java but the core (of LibreOffice) won't ideally require a Java
runtime anymore. As for the reasons: It would potentially minimize
memory usage and some are probably concerned about the Oracle <> Google
debacle:
http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@documentfoundation.org/msg02492.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@documentfoundation.org/msg02612.html
Cheers
-- Jan Holst Jensen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@api.openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@api.openoffice.org
