On 09/01/2011 Jean-Baptiste Faure wrote: > I think that we should have a webpage where Linux distributions who are > packaging LibO, could list what changes they made compared to the > "official" build by TDF. ... > So, is it a good idea to ask the Linux distributions to publish the > changes they made to the official build ?
It is a good idea to track changes, but it is probably a questionable practice to make changes. I expected LibreOffice to be consistent across distributions (something that of course at the moment is not true of OpenOffice.org since most distributions apply significant patches to it). Are there compelling reasons why distributions should ship versions of LibreOffice that have significant changes with respect to the "official" version? The OpenOffice.org experience, and the first distribution-specific LibreOffice bugs like http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@documentfoundation.org/msg04508.html make me think that fragmentation, while of course allowed by the license, should be discouraged when it comes to functionality; I'm not questioning desktop integration or branding, but I'd like to know why distributions feel they have to make changes to functionality... Regards, Andrea. _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
