On 22 October 2011 12:09, Christian Lohmaier <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 8:28 PM, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >> Are you aware of the number of changes that have already been applied to > the > >> LibreOffice code base? It is very large. So, although it seems like a > >> realistic desire on the surface, it may be difficult in practice. How > long > >> ago was the fork? Many people have spent significant time making > changes, > >> and many of those changes depend on earlier changes. > > > > It really is not that hard. At IBM we have our own fork of OOo called > > Lotus Symphony. We've made millions of lines of our own changes, but > > we still have merged in many patches from OOo. It requires some care, > > but it is not rocket science. > > Yes, it is so easy and simple - and because it is such a piece of cake > the contribution of the IA2 stuff is still not integrated years after > its contribution has been promised and announced by IBM. > > But Martin Hollmichel's initial statement is already wrong on so many > levels that the technical stuff doesn't really matter. > Really, whether you think you can or you think you can't you are probably right. If enough people really want a single road map for OO it will happen. It just seems that there are too many individual interests outweighing such a goal at present. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ) www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.
