Nadav Har'El wrote:

>Is there a special reason why the binary version distributed by 
openoffice.org
>cannot contain your patch, or even why the patch isn't integrated with 
the
>official source (like was done in Mozilla)? Does your patch have the same
>license as the regular openoffice.org code? Does it add much overhead to
>the handling of non-Hebrew text?

There is no real good reason.  The guys at OpenOffice were very polite, 
but never committed to accept our code.  They did not develop an 
alternative in timely fashion either.
I suppose that if the code is well received by the Linux-il community, 
efforts should be resumed to convince the OO people to integrate it in the 
regular source lib.

>I'm a bit surprised IBM doesn't want to "advertise" itself and get the
>credit it deserves by providing the complete binary on its site. But 
these
>lawyer guys always come up with weird decisions, don't they ;)

IBM is interested in receiving due recognition for its contributions to 
Linux.  But the legal people have the last word, and if they say that we 
should only distribute patches, this is what we do.  It took us enough 
time (4 months) to get this much.  The wise Linux crowd will know to give 
credit where it is deserved.


Shalom,   Mati


=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to