Le 2010-11-22 07:05, Sean White a écrit :
because the underlining code inst changing overly-much, most of the
extensions should be easy to port and in th odd case where an extension is
truely broken by LO's remakes then we can rewrite the plugin from scratch.
As a side not we will probably
The UI improvements look good and might just make it easier for people who
liked the MSOffice Ribbon and/or dislike the current UI. I think the design
could go along way
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Ron Faile rmfa...@bellsouth.net wrote:
On 11/20/2010 2:30 AM, Ron Faile wrote:
NoOP is
I just uploaded a file (item 11) on the UI improvements page,
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Default_UI_Improvements
with some ideas that include a new menu structure. Would be interested
in your comments.
Ron
--
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to
Le 2010-11-19 19:35, NoOp a écrit :
On 11/19/2010 03:26 PM, Sean White wrote:
As a concerned user, if LibreOffice is meant a independent office project
derived from the OpenOffice code then why do we still use their version
numbering system. Wouldn't it be better to start from 1 to reinforce
On 11/19/2010 06:22 PM, Michel Gagnon wrote:
Le 2010-11-19 19:35, NoOp a écrit :
On 11/19/2010 03:26 PM, Sean White wrote:
As a concerned user, if LibreOffice is meant a independent office project
derived from the OpenOffice code then why do we still use their version
numbering system.
NoOP is right, I wrote the quoted text. Your explanation is well
noted and I can see the reasoning behind it. The sooner we can change
the interface and feel of LibreOffice then the better, as I for one
don't want such a Oracle aligning feature as version numbers staring
me in the face every
Michel Gagnon schrieb:
Not now.
I think so, too.
Rainer
--
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly
