From: James Mckenzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 10:30:40 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
Looks like I can't visually parse your message because it looks like if you wrote what I have written and your new words are already cited (and thus look like I wrote them). Hmm. I'll try to parse it using brain. > Hmmm. Ok, I'll 'byte'. I will look at Eric B's FTP site to see if he > has a set of build instructions for his last successful build and see > if he has a listing of the patches he used. You wrote that no one is publishing what he does. I disagreed with you because at least one of the other builders is publishing everything he builds (the negative of everyone doesn't is at least one does). I do not know about Eric B., but I publish *everything*. Have you ever seen the build script of my build system? > I work with on a daily basis. What I meant to say, 'Is I hope that > SUN merges back into the 1.1.x branches, improvements made in the > 2.0.x branch that bring further functionality, after 2.0 is released.' And again: this is principal misunderstanding of the OpenOffice.org development model. 1.1.x is stable. My prediction is that 1.1.5 is the last version in 1.1.x series and if there will be 1.1.6, it will fix only *minor* issues in ODT support because no developer (Sun or community developer) wants to spend time with it... Sun (I can't speak for them though) is surely not going to invest more time into old releases. Do you remember people investing time into 1.0.x when 1.1.x was out? > that cannot fully upgrade to the 2.0 version. Things like the ability > to read ODT formatted files would be very nice. You must fall from moon yesterday ;-) Version 1.1.5 that is now in RC2 phase *can* read ODT files. See http://www.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=releases&msgNo=8641 where it was announced. It was Tue, 19 Jul 2005 22:49:51 +0200. > 1.1.x is old stable branch. We are all now working on the development > branch to make it the new stable branch. This looks like I wrote it :-) Hmm yes, I really wrote it. > I agree that 1.1.x is old. However, that does not mean that we should > stop development in this branch and bring into it, features that will > be in the 'new' 2.0 series. Yes, you described exactly what OpenOffice.org project *will be doing* :-) > True, that is why I'm suggesting going BACK to 1.1.x AFTER 2.0 is out. No ;-) > Right now it appears that there is effort being used to put > funtionality back into the 1.1.x (SRX645 branch) that is not fully > tested on the SRC680 branch. Sorry? Can you point to some example? -- Pavel Janík So if you're having problems on Windows 2000 clients with roving profiles, sessions being disconnected, files being truncated, corrupted, change notify not working or other such things you might have assumed were due to Samba bugs I suggest you take a look here first :-). -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeremy Allison) about the list of bugs in Windows 2000 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
