On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Phil Thane <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wednesday 06 October 2010 15:19:05 Gerard Cunningham wrote: >> > It's strangely quiet for being a "users support list". > > I'm a freelance journo with two regular Linux features. Tomorrow (I think) > Micro Mart should carry a two page piece from me about LO. I tested LO beta on > a testbed PC running Ubuntu 10.04 and it was fine, but I've still got OO on my > work machine. > > Next week I have to test (K)Ubuntu 10.10 for PC Utilities and I'll put LO on > that if it doesn't come by default. Assuming there are no issues 10.10 will > then go on the work machine. >
Correct me if I am wrong; I think that Linux distributions have already been using the LibreOffice fork, in the form of 'go-oo', http://go-oo.org/download/ That is, www.openoffice.org has been slow to take patches for Linux so there was a parallel branch that produced a version that Linux distributions would take. Ubuntu, OpenSUSE, RedHat have been using the OpenOffice.org from http://go-oo.org/ all time long. It was not a fork but a convenience for Linux distros for things not getting better within www.openoffice.org. Since Oracle+OpenOffice.org have not shown a commitment to make things better, the go-oo parallel branch becomes a fork, hence the change of the name to LibreOffice (OpenOffice.org is (tm), etc) and the whole infrastructure to support LibreOffice. My idea is that for Linux users who use OOo from their distros, there should be little or none difference between OOo and LibreOffice, at least at this early point. Simos -- To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to [email protected] List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/users/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted.
