--- Mer 27/6/12, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> ha scritto: ... > Top posting as a comment on the > entire post, and what it is and what it isn't. > > In a recent article [1], later quoted in in LinuxToday [2], > a LibreOffice board member was interviewed and made some > erroneous statements regarding Apache OpenOffice and Symphony: > > "[W]e are looking forward the interesting switch at Apache > OpenOffice from the Openoffice.org codebase to the Symphony > codebase; there will > certainly be some code we might be able to reuse. Although, > when you come to think of it, it’s funny to enter the Apache > Incubation Process with one software you’re inheriting, and > to use a different software you’ve also inherited just after > the incubation process is completed" > > Charles states pretty much the same on the LibreOffice > marketing list [3]: > > "AOO 4.0 will have the Symphony interface, and what this > means is that it will bring a whole new different set > of bugs." > > This is asserted as a decision. It is not. It is > merely one option of several that this project has been > considering in this thread. In fact, what IBM employees > have been doing most recently, as anyone > following this list knows, is merging bug fixes from > Symphony into the trunk and the 3.4.1 branch. So we're > obviously not currently going > down the 2nd option decribed in this thread. >
For the record, I am probably the only supporter of the so-called option II and I am certainly not an IBM employee. If we do take option II, which I honestly see unlikely, the idea would be to reintegrate all the OpenOffice base on top of Symphony and it would be done simply for practical purposes: we know the OpenOffice code and the related changes better than Symphony and we still have the traditional version control systems in place to do an orderly re-merge. We would (and notice it's an hypothetical situation at this time) just be rebasing, something that LibreOffice should be used to already. It's really disappointing to see uninformed people give opinions about things they evidently don't understand. Pedro.
