That's a good solution, that will have to come in place whenever incompatibles arise.
BTW: I depend totally on others when there's something to code or port. Regards, bastik Sean White wrote: > One of the things i LOVE about open source software is the ability for me > to > ask someone else to code something or port something that i cant do > myself. > So my solution to your problem of incompatible extensions is to set up a > new mailing list for OO to LO extension porting. the public can send the > extension which the people on the mailing list can then port over. > I wrote previously: > > I'm willing to accept that extensions wont work in future if OO and LO > grow > > apart, but I think this shouldn't be done artificially by changing the > > version number. It could be bad for OO users that want to use LO, but > miss > > some extensions because they are no longer compatible because the > version > > number of LO differs. > > > > Whenever there is a release with a changes for version 4.x.x I accept > > incompatibilities. > > > > not to you James: > > Most people don't take version numbers serious anymore. Look at Chrome > for > > example. The rapid change of major versions is ridiculous. > > > > LO is not build from scratch, so for me it can stick to 3.x.x and move > > onward. > > > > Regards, > > bastik -- GRATIS! Movie-FLAT mit über 300 Videos. Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
