On 09/02/06, J David Eisenberg wrote: > Having a fork seems a bit excessive.
There are a number of other reasons to fork OOo now, rather than later. The only real question is when will OOo fork. Not if it forks. [Indeed, a case can be made that it has already forked twice. And this is without counting the companies that have "customized" it for their own rebranding.] > which are 99.44% identical -- a very expensive proposition indeed. For the first major release of the fork, as much as 95% of the code identical. Two or three major releases later, and the only reason that more than 75% of the code is identical, is because it has been added into OOo. ##### Easter eggs are only one of half a dozen things in OOo that add bloat, but not functionality, that would be gutted. I'll skip the enhancements that would be added, since the OOo developers have steadfastly maintained that OOo will _never_ incorporate them, since they are features that "nobody" would ever use. xan jonathon -- Ethical conduct is a vice. Corrupt conduct is a virtue. Motto of Nacarima.
