Adrian Levi: > On 16 February 2011 02:47, Jochen Schulz <m...@well-adjusted.de> wrote: > >> I would be surprised to find something like this. The fork has purely >> political reasons and as it is still quite young, it shouldn't have >> deviated from OOo by much until now. > > LibreOffice includes the patchset that was GO-OO that neither Sun or > Oracle would comit to the repo, so it was maintained as a separate > patchset. Debian previously shipped GO-OO not Sun OO or Oracle OO
Thanks for the correction. I had never heard about these patches. >>> I am interested in what LibreOffice offers that makes it easier to >>> use, fewer bugs, features or lack thereof. >> >> Don't expect any of this today. I guess that it is currently even less >> stable/mature. > > Pure Conjecture, True. It's just what I expect of a fresh fork. J. -- My medicine shelf is my altar. [Agree] [Disagree] <http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature