Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Mac App Store
On Jan 7, 2011, at 5:00 PM, Jonathan Aquilina wrote: > I was told there is an issue with mac and the GPL and LGPL licensing. not > sure what exactly though. Some quick reading shows the issue is not at all clear. For example, the Wesnoth community has debated this in depth, but the ultimate result is that Wesnoth is currently available in the App Store (for iOS), and even charges a small fee. (Just as Fabian Rodriguez suggested earlier in this thread.) An article on their community discussion is here: http://lwn.net/Articles/396535/ If you have iTunes, you can see the app store page for Wesnoth here: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/battle-for-wesnoth/id340691963?mt=8 Thus, it does not appear that Apple would block LibO because of our LGPL license (Wesnoth is GPL v2). The FSF is very unhappy with the App Store, but this does not appear to be a dealbreaker if we wish to go ahead with it. -Ben Benjamin Horst bho...@mac.com 646-464-2314 (Eastern) www.solidoffice.com -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Mac App Store
I was told there is an issue with mac and the GPL and LGPL licensing. not sure what exactly though. On 1/7/11 8:26 AM, Larry Gusaas wrote: On 2011/01/07 12:57 AM Jonathan Aquilina wrote: Someone also mentioned there are issues with GPL licensing that Apple doesn't seem to like :-/ And the license has nothing to do with an application installing on a Mac computer. I have several GPL and LGPL licensed applications installed. Larry -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: RE : [tdf-discuss] Re: Mac App Store
Ok that's it last message I read on this thread My impression JAVA = NO APP STORE LIBREOFFICE = JAVA therefore (for the near future) LIBREOFFICE = NO APP STORE Thanks guys , I really hoped this would happen, but, alas life is tough ;) Rogerio 2011/1/7 Robert Holtzman > On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 07:22:21PM +0100, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > > Larry, > > > > Let me remind you that we expect courtesy on our lists. > > What was posted was in no way discourteous. You're interpreting > bluntness as discourtesy. > > -- > Bob Holtzman > Key ID: 8D549279 > "If you think you're getting free lunch, > check the price of the beer" > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to > discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org > Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ > *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** > > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Co-working with Moz, etc
2011/1/6 Jaime R. Garza > Nobody told me, that's the problem, i have been asking a lot about that, > and > nobody seems to be interested, nor knows anything. So that's why I'm > wondering why. I think that is the future, there will be less and less fat > client apps, and more and more browser based apps. The main reason is > interoperabilty and platform independence. With ann HTML5 Office suite, you > just need a browser, and you can even install it locally. Now LO develops > several versionsfor different platforms, which cost more resources. > > Nobody wants to start building a HUGE NEW PROJECT like it would mean to start a HTML5 before we get a consistent, fairly bug free client to work on ... Remember LiO is only in RC stage right now Now for installing the Writer / Calc / Draw / Impress separate, it is not how the Ooo works, the program starts, and THEN it goes on to see what files it is opening, so it actually is ONE BIG program that after start-up modularizes itself, that's one of the reasons it is faster than the competition. Rogerio -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: RE : [tdf-discuss] Re: Mac App Store
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 07:22:21PM +0100, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > Larry, > > Let me remind you that we expect courtesy on our lists. What was posted was in no way discourteous. You're interpreting bluntness as discourtesy. -- Bob Holtzman Key ID: 8D549279 "If you think you're getting free lunch, check the price of the beer" -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Mac App Store
I agree totally with you on the first part of your response Mirek. On 1/7/11 7:34 PM, Mirek M. wrote: Hi everyone, 2011/1/7 Fabián Rodríguez On 11-01-06 11:16 PM, Larry Gusaas wrote: On 2011/01/06 9:57 PM todd rme wrote: I do find it bizarre that people are so up in arms about OOXML but seem to have no complaints with Apple's blatant attempts to have total control over the software you are allowed to install on your own computer. Apple does not control what software I install on my computer. Quit spreading such BS. Larry You're right, at least for now. Apple controls its OS and its updates, which effectively can control which apps go on your computer (or not). IMO, it's only a matter of time before such restrictions happen, just like iPhone and iPad (which *for now* are bypassed with Cydia..). For all the effort this may take, at some point Apple may well decide to remove LibreOffice or break it as part of a "security upgrade". I am not going into that discussion as even passing the App Store requirements is almost guaranteed to fail. I disagree. If LibreOffice is in the App Store, then it means that many more people will see, download, and use LibreOffice (don't forget that LibreOffice is still unknown to a vast majority of the world). Even if LibreOffice is in the App Store for a little while, it will still make a difference. As for the ethics question, I'd say adding LibreOffice to the App Store is just as ethical as having a LibreOffice version for Windows. It's not that LibreOffice wants to support Microsoft's platform or devalue the Linux platform, but rather that having a Windows version of LibO puts the suite into the hands of more people. The App Store would do the same thing -- put LibO into the hands of more people. Back to the initial suggestion of adding LibreOffice to the AppStore, just look at NeoOffice's take on it: http://trinity.neooffice.org/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=8290&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight= "1. NeoOffice uses Java so it is very likely to be rejected since Apple has publicly stated that they will not approve Java applications for the App Store" This is the only major problem I see. On the other hand, I heard LibO wants to phase out Java (and I hope it does), so hopefully this is just a temporary problem. "2. There is no ability for patching that I can see so patches would still need to be done the existing way" What's wrong with the existing way? "3. There is no optional donation support that I can see and even if there is, Apple takes a 30% cut" The same goes for all the software centers in Linux, I believe (although I know Ubuntu Software Center has a donation button in plans). But hey, the more people learn about LibreOffice, the more people will visit its website and donate. More users means more donations. Not much point in wasting any more time on this (again, IMO). Cheers, Fabian -- LibreOffice questions ? Des questions sur LibreOffice ? Preguntas acerca de LibreOffice ? Ask LibreOffice: http://libreoffice.shapado.com/ ~ Fabián Rodríguez http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:MagicFab -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: RE : Re: Mac App Store
I'm sorry. I should have said " Would you please provide some documentation to back up your speculation. Otherwise it is pure FUD" Your recent blog "The tragedy of Soapboxing" attacked the raising of legitimate concerns about OOXML in the thread I started seemed to have several barbs aimed at me for starting that thread. Was that courteous? You did answer many questions raised in the thread, and I thank you for that, but the accusation of 'Soapboxing" definitely wasn't very courteous. On 2011/01/07 12:22 PM Charles-H. Schulz wrote: Larry, Let me remind you that we expect courtesy on our lists. Thank you, Charles. Le 7 janv. 2011, 6:55 PM, "Larry Gusaas" a écrit : On 2011/01/07 9:38 AM Fabián Rodríguez wrote:> > You're right, at least for now. Apple controls i... Your unsubstantiated idle speculation is pure FUD. Larry -- _ Larry I. Gusaas Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada Website... Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgArchive: http://listarchives... Larry -- _ Larry I. Gusaas Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada Website: http://larry-gusaas.com "An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Mac App Store
Hi everyone, 2011/1/7 Fabián Rodríguez > On 11-01-06 11:16 PM, Larry Gusaas wrote: > > > > On 2011/01/06 9:57 PM todd rme wrote: > >> I do find it bizarre that people are so up in arms about OOXML but > >> seem to have no complaints with Apple's blatant attempts to have total > >> control over the software you are allowed to install on your own > >> computer. > > > > Apple does not control what software I install on my computer. Quit > > spreading such BS. > > > > > > Larry > > You're right, at least for now. Apple controls its OS and its updates, > which effectively can control which apps go on your computer (or not). > IMO, it's only a matter of time before such restrictions happen, just > like iPhone and iPad (which *for now* are bypassed with Cydia..). For > all the effort this may take, at some point Apple may well decide to > remove LibreOffice or break it as part of a "security upgrade". I am not > going into that discussion as even passing the App Store requirements is > almost guaranteed to fail. > I disagree. If LibreOffice is in the App Store, then it means that many more people will see, download, and use LibreOffice (don't forget that LibreOffice is still unknown to a vast majority of the world). Even if LibreOffice is in the App Store for a little while, it will still make a difference. As for the ethics question, I'd say adding LibreOffice to the App Store is just as ethical as having a LibreOffice version for Windows. It's not that LibreOffice wants to support Microsoft's platform or devalue the Linux platform, but rather that having a Windows version of LibO puts the suite into the hands of more people. The App Store would do the same thing -- put LibO into the hands of more people. > Back to the initial suggestion of adding LibreOffice to the AppStore, > just look at NeoOffice's take on it: > > http://trinity.neooffice.org/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=8290&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight= > > "1. NeoOffice uses Java so it is very likely to be rejected since Apple has publicly stated that they will not approve Java applications for the App Store" This is the only major problem I see. On the other hand, I heard LibO wants to phase out Java (and I hope it does), so hopefully this is just a temporary problem. "2. There is no ability for patching that I can see so patches would still need to be done the existing way" What's wrong with the existing way? "3. There is no optional donation support that I can see and even if there is, Apple takes a 30% cut" The same goes for all the software centers in Linux, I believe (although I know Ubuntu Software Center has a donation button in plans). But hey, the more people learn about LibreOffice, the more people will visit its website and donate. More users means more donations. Not much point in wasting any more time on this (again, IMO). > Cheers, > > Fabian > > -- > LibreOffice questions ? Des questions sur LibreOffice ? Preguntas acerca > de LibreOffice ? Ask LibreOffice: http://libreoffice.shapado.com/ > ~ > Fabián Rodríguez > http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:MagicFab > > > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to > discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org > Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ > *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Mac App Store
2011/1/7 Fabián Rodríguez > On 11-01-06 11:16 PM, Larry Gusaas wrote: > > > > On 2011/01/06 9:57 PM todd rme wrote: > >> I do find it bizarre that people are so up in arms about OOXML but > >> seem to have no complaints with Apple's blatant attempts to have total > >> control over the software you are allowed to install on your own > >> computer. > > > > Apple does not control what software I install on my computer. Quit > > spreading such BS. > > > > > > Larry > > You're right, at least for now. Apple controls its OS and its updates, > which effectively can control which apps go on your computer (or not). > IMO, it's only a matter of time before such restrictions happen, just > like iPhone and iPad (which *for now* are bypassed with Cydia..). For > all the effort this may take, at some point Apple may well decide to > remove LibreOffice or break it as part of a "security upgrade". I am not > going into that discussion as even passing the App Store requirements is > almost guaranteed to fail. > > Back to the initial suggestion of adding LibreOffice to the AppStore, > just look at NeoOffice's take on it: > > http://trinity.neooffice.org/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=8290&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight= > > Not much point in wasting any more time on this (again, IMO). > > Cheers, > > Fabian > To be honest I too have found it really strange that so many FOSS advocates are Apple advocates. Let's face it if Apple had established the monopoly that Wintel had it would have been worse. Systems more closed and even all the hardware would have been locked into Apple. Ok, all big commercial interests are going to be self-serving but at least let's be consistent with the attitudes :-) -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications The Schools ITQ www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
RE : [tdf-discuss] Re: Mac App Store
Larry, Let me remind you that we expect courtesy on our lists. Thank you, Charles. Le 7 janv. 2011, 6:55 PM, "Larry Gusaas" a écrit : On 2011/01/07 9:38 AM Fabián Rodríguez wrote: > > You're right, at least for now. Apple controls i... Your unsubstantiated idle speculation is pure FUD. Larry -- _ Larry I. Gusaas Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada Website... Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgArchive: http://listarchives... -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: Mac App Store
On 2011/01/07 9:38 AM Fabián Rodríguez wrote: You're right, at least for now. Apple controls its OS and its updates, which effectively can control which apps go on your computer (or not). IMO, it's only a matter of time before such restrictions happen, just like iPhone and iPad (which*for now* are bypassed with Cydia..). Your unsubstantiated idle speculation is pure FUD. Larry -- _ Larry I. Gusaas Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada Website: http://larry-gusaas.com "An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs." - Edgard Varese -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: Decisions about libreoffice.org English main site management
Hello David, See my comments inline. Le Fri, 7 Jan 2011 23:12:29 +0800, David Nelson a écrit : > Hi guys, :-) > > I would like to make a proposal. I consider that the libreoffice.org > website is a resource that can be of strategic importance to TDF and > the community. I have a bunch of ideas for further developing it and > using it to further the project's aims and interests. > > To do that job, I would ask - for a period of 4 months, subsequently > renewable on condition of the SC's approval - for complete authority > and final veto on all content on the libreoffice.org website. I want > to be considered *the boss* of the libreoffice.org website, and my > decisions would only be overridden by a majority vote of SC members. > Anything short of that, my decision wins. I would not go for that, but as I and others say, we would like to have the leadership on the website. > > This would give me the necessary authority to try some imaginative and > ambitious plans that I will put to Marketing. > > I would ask for the title of "Executive editor of the libreoffice.org > website". The only reason I have for asking for this title is that it > gives me a handle to use in relations with outside parties, such as > the press. > > If you feel able to grant me this trust, you can be sure that I will > act responsibly and wisely, and that my sole aim will be to advance > and protect the interests of the LibreOffice project and community. > > I believe in teamwork and community-building. I would be keen to > listen to and to learn from others, and to take the smartest decisions > possible. I would seek to leave behind a positive contribution. > > Your decision would be sealed by an official vote at the next SC > meeting. > > What do you say, guys? ;-) Can we try this experiment and see what it > produces? I'm not really comfortable with this extraordinary powers over that period and I would rather favour you driving a team (-an official team that is-) . However, this is the Steering Discuss list, which means that you have written an official and public request to the SC and we are bound to discuss it at the next SC call, which we will do. Best, Charles. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Mac App Store
On 11-01-06 11:16 PM, Larry Gusaas wrote: > > On 2011/01/06 9:57 PM todd rme wrote: >> I do find it bizarre that people are so up in arms about OOXML but >> seem to have no complaints with Apple's blatant attempts to have total >> control over the software you are allowed to install on your own >> computer. > > Apple does not control what software I install on my computer. Quit > spreading such BS. > > > Larry You're right, at least for now. Apple controls its OS and its updates, which effectively can control which apps go on your computer (or not). IMO, it's only a matter of time before such restrictions happen, just like iPhone and iPad (which *for now* are bypassed with Cydia..). For all the effort this may take, at some point Apple may well decide to remove LibreOffice or break it as part of a "security upgrade". I am not going into that discussion as even passing the App Store requirements is almost guaranteed to fail. Back to the initial suggestion of adding LibreOffice to the AppStore, just look at NeoOffice's take on it: http://trinity.neooffice.org/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=8290&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight= Not much point in wasting any more time on this (again, IMO). Cheers, Fabian -- LibreOffice questions ? Des questions sur LibreOffice ? Preguntas acerca de LibreOffice ? Ask LibreOffice: http://libreoffice.shapado.com/ ~ Fabián Rodríguez http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:MagicFab -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] A better idea for a download package.
Il 06/01/2011 17:01, Christophe Strobbe ha scritto: > > At 21:03 30/11/2010, Charles Marcus wrote: >> (...) >> >> The current size problem as compared to OOo is because all of the >> language packs are included... and this situation is only temporary >> until storage is no longer an issue... > > After all the negative comments on the download size in this old thread, > I would like to say something positive: as a developer of > LibreOffice/OpenOffice.org extensions, I find the availability of > language packs in the download excellent: it enables me to switch > between interface languages in LibreOffice without the need to install > several language versions of the same office suite. This is great if you > want to check localised versions of extensions. However, I realise this > is only a minority use case. > > Best regards, > > Christophe > > +1, I think the size isn't a problem at all, is better toi have every language in the same package of libo and the ability to switch between languages is great :-) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Mac App Store
Anecdotal evidence of the impact of being listed in the app store--yesterday, Evernote tweeted their installation rate increased 1,800% from the day before the Mac App Store launched. Ben Sent from my iPhone On Jan 7, 2011, at 6:01 AM, "Charles-H. Schulz" wrote: > Jonathan, > > I believe there are some specific legal issues that are related to FOSS > licences, but we do need to investigate some more (help is welcome). > > Best, > Charles. > > Le Fri, 07 Jan 2011 10:41:52 +0100, > Jonathan Aquilina a écrit : > >> Would we do something with LO, or would there be GPL licensing issues? >> >> On 01/07/2011 10:04 AM, Uwe Altmann wrote: >>> Am 07.01.11 04:57, schrieb todd rme: >>> - It is not packaged and submitted using Apple’s packaging technologies included in Xcode – No third party installers are allowed (I thought this was a major goal of LibO) >>> It /is/ "packaged and submitted using Apple’s packaging >>> technologies" as far as the Mac Version of OOo is concerned - it's >>> a *.dmg file containing an *.app folder, which his a common way of >>> installing programs on a Mac. >>> >>> NeoOffice is listed since years in the download area of apple.com so >>> this can not be that problematic. >> >> > > > > -- > Charles-H. Schulz > Membre du Comité exécutif > The Document Foundation. > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org > Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ > *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Mac App Store
On 11-01-06 10:57 PM, todd rme wrote: > On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Nguyen Vu Hung > wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 7:02 AM, Benjamin Horst wrote: >>> Does anyone know the technical requirements needed to get into the Mac App >>> Store? >>> Are there any developers here who'd like to get involved in this process? >> Here is the guidelines for submission to App Store >> http://www.everythingicafe.com/apple-releases-mac-app-store-guidelines-and-devs-respond/2010/10/21/ >> >> And for iOS (iPhone and the like, FYI) >> http://developer.apple.com/news/ios/appstoretips/ >> >> Technically, I would say LibO meets all (most?) the requirements needed. > I don't think it meets these: > > - It duplicates apps already in the App Store, particularly if there > are many of them (iWork) > - It creates a store inside itself for selling or distributing other > software (extensions) > - It is not packaged and submitted using Apple’s packaging > technologies included in Xcode – No third party installers are allowed > (I thought this was a major goal of LibO) > > And I don't know whether it meets this one: > - It has metadata that mentions the name of any other computer platform > > > I do find it bizarre that people are so up in arms about OOXML but > seem to have no complaints with Apple's blatant attempts to have total > control over the software you are allowed to install on your own > computer. > > -Todd > Define "People" ? :) The FSF has several ongoing campaigns educating about the problems such restrictions bring. Some posts on their blog provide an example for free software subsmissions to their App Store: http://www.fsf.org/search?SearchableText=app%20store Before technical requirements, there are legal requirements. I know the App Store terms have changed a few times in the past months, add that to the check list. In the event that LibreOffice would pass all technical & legal requirements I'd suggest charging (more than $1) for the convenience. Anyone else will know where to find it outside of the store. I presented on exactly this topic (business models for free software distribution on an "app store") for the Android Marketplace yesterday, I'll gladly provide some pointers when/if it's deemed appropriate. I hardly an expert but I have an idea or two. Cheers, Fabian -- LibreOffice questions ? Des questions sur LibreOffice ? Preguntas acerca de LibreOffice ? Ask LibreOffice: http://libreoffice.shapado.com/ ~ Fabián Rodríguez http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:MagicFab -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Mac App Store
Jonathan, I believe there are some specific legal issues that are related to FOSS licences, but we do need to investigate some more (help is welcome). Best, Charles. Le Fri, 07 Jan 2011 10:41:52 +0100, Jonathan Aquilina a écrit : > Would we do something with LO, or would there be GPL licensing issues? > > On 01/07/2011 10:04 AM, Uwe Altmann wrote: > > Am 07.01.11 04:57, schrieb todd rme: > > > >> - It is not packaged and submitted using Apple’s packaging > >> technologies included in Xcode – No third party installers are > >> allowed (I thought this was a major goal of LibO) > > It /is/ "packaged and submitted using Apple’s packaging > > technologies" as far as the Mac Version of OOo is concerned - it's > > a *.dmg file containing an *.app folder, which his a common way of > > installing programs on a Mac. > > > > NeoOffice is listed since years in the download area of apple.com so > > this can not be that problematic. > > -- Charles-H. Schulz Membre du Comité exécutif The Document Foundation. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Mac App Store
Would we do something with LO, or would there be GPL licensing issues? On 01/07/2011 10:04 AM, Uwe Altmann wrote: Am 07.01.11 04:57, schrieb todd rme: - It is not packaged and submitted using Apple’s packaging technologies included in Xcode – No third party installers are allowed (I thought this was a major goal of LibO) It /is/ "packaged and submitted using Apple’s packaging technologies" as far as the Mac Version of OOo is concerned - it's a *.dmg file containing an *.app folder, which his a common way of installing programs on a Mac. NeoOffice is listed since years in the download area of apple.com so this can not be that problematic. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Mac App Store
Am 07.01.11 04:57, schrieb todd rme: > - It is not packaged and submitted using Apple’s packaging > technologies included in Xcode – No third party installers are allowed > (I thought this was a major goal of LibO) It /is/ "packaged and submitted using Apple’s packaging technologies" as far as the Mac Version of OOo is concerned - it's a *.dmg file containing an *.app folder, which his a common way of installing programs on a Mac. NeoOffice is listed since years in the download area of apple.com so this can not be that problematic. -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen Uwe Altmann OpenOffice.org - auch auf dem Mac! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
