Hi,
Le 3 mars 08 à 17:57, Malte Timmermann a écrit :
Seems we have to distinguish here a little bit:
It is NOT acceptable for me if I (silently) loose the meta data when
not
having Java. Data must be kept when loading/manipulating/storing the
doc, and the user should be able to see that/where extra data is.
It IS acceptable for me if Java is required for writing Plugins to
manipulate meta data or advanced features. Then I also have no
objection
to raise the requirement from Java 1.4 to 1.5.
Probably it needs some more discussion to define the requirements what
exactly must be possible w/o having Java, and how the user can see
existing meta data in some way then.
I think you have presented the question in a clear way. I don't think
Java should be *required* to write plugins though, but that's just my
opinion.
Best,
Charles.
Malte.
Malte Timmermann wrote, On 03/03/08 17:36:
Thorsten Behrens wrote, On 03/03/08 17:21:
On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 04:08:16PM +0100, Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
On Mon, 2008-03-03 at 15:37 +0100, Michael Stahl wrote:
what are your opinions on making java 1.5 a requirement for OOo
3.0?
Unfavorable.
(this is a personal opinion)
If -and only if- this question is framed in that way, I am also
unfavorable. AFAICT java is not required for OOo to run.
Yep. The party line up to now was to have Java used for
non-essential, non-core features.
Yes. That's the way it works nowadays, and we shouldn't change that.
Requiring Java for an OOo core feature like ODF 1.2 Meta Data
support is
a no-no, IMHO.
Malte.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
