Rene Engelhard wrote:
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 11:13:48AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
Besides that, distros will have to continue libreoffice-build, which does
still contain patches. (Removing those would be a big regression about
what we ship right now)
Thanks. So some distributions will
Hi,
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 07:13:56PM +0100, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
Rene Engelhard wrote:
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 11:13:48AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
Besides that, distros will have to continue libreoffice-build, which does
still contain patches. (Removing those would be a big
On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 11:13 +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 09:13:43PM +0100, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
..
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
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 02:20:45PM +, Michael Meeks wrote:
On the other hand, I think Andrea is right - my hope is that lots of
the distributions on every platform will converge more onto the
LibreOffice core over time, and require fewer patches, and (perhaps) a
few more
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 09:13:43PM +0100, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
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
Nonsense. This is OSS.
it). Are there compelling reasons why distributions should
[ fullquoting for discuss@dfs sake. forgot the CC. Not that it matters
much, but anyways. ]
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 11:13:48AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 09:13:43PM +0100, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
It is a good idea to track changes, but it is probably a
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
