On 1/2/12 9:57 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: > On Mon, Jan 02, 2012 at 09:45:01PM +0100, Andrea Pescetti wrote: >> Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: >>>> On Mon, Jan 02, 2012 at 10:32:10AM +0100, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: >>>>> Normally the office would come via the distro and would have been build >>>>> for >>>>> the distro and the specific versions of the system libraries. This is much >>>>> easier and i hope we can achieve this state in the future... >>>> I doubt this is going to happen. linux distros have switched to LO, and >>>> I guess Canonical, RedHat, Suse, ..., have interest in building a brand, >>>> so you cannot expect their interest in supporting packaging and >>>> distributing >>>> AOO; in conclusion, AOO relies on a "universal" Linux package. >> >>> I expect that some Linux-based distributions will continue shipping >>> LibreOffice by default (or what they call LibreOffice; in most cases >>> this was simply a name change, since they were actually distributing >>> ooo-build, closer to LibreOffice than to OpenOffice.org but >>> different from both, under the name "OpenOffice.org" and later under >>> the name "LibreOffice"; I think they are progressively aligning with >>> LibreOffice now, which is good since users were often confused by >>> customizations). >> >>> But there is no reason to think that Apache OpenOffice will be kept >>> out of the official repositories; most distributions already offer a >>> dozen browsers and half a dozen office programs, so it is surely >>> possible to get Apache OpenOffice in the most common distributions. > >> packaging a browser cannot be compared to packaging AOO. What I meant is > >that you can not expect RedHat, Canonical, Suse, etc to pay resources to >> package AOO. I guess (= I never packaged OOo myself, thought I have >> packaged some trivial stuff for Fedora) packaging AOO will require >> a very experienced packager.
>>you are right and the only chance I see is that users ask for it. To >>make this happen we have to deliver a good product that users want and >>that they would prefer over a pre-installed LibreOffice. Especially when >>it comes to commercial usage in companies this can be a key factor to >convince the distros to provide AOO as well. >>Juergen New to gmail for lists, hope this is clear. I use Debian, it has switched to LO, previously it was Go-Office,( Novell)already forking from pure OO. I have strong differences with how the LO devs are 'enhancing' the product. They have created at least one new feature that breaks backwards compatibility with previous versions of OO. Table>border/line styles I have a 9 year archive of business reports that would need to be edited to be usable. https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38542, & 42750. I have downloaded ver 3.4 from http://people.apache.org/~arielch/packages/ These work with my archived reports, Not sure how the code flows from one project to the other, my hope is that OO does not duplicate what LO is doing. -- Peace Greg Madden
