On Thu Oct 14 2010 22:30:26 GMT-0700 (PDT) Marius Popa wrote:
Will OpenOffice.org be developed to future final version or will the future
final versions replace the future versions of OpenOffice.org?
Your question does not make sense.
If your asking if LibreOffice will replace
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 11:48:10 AM +1300, Paul (paul.m...@gmail.com) wrote:
I think this commentary is more accurate as to why the video exists:
http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2010/10/microsoft-gives-its-blessing-to-openofficeorg/index.htm?cmpid=sbslashdotschapman
The funny,
Am 15.10.2010 00:30, schrieb NoOp:
On 10/14/2010 05:57 AM, Malte Timmermann wrote:
...
It's not clear to me how contributions to LO will make their way to
OpenOffice.org.
For me, it looks very much one-way: LO grabbing a lot of stuff from OOo,
but LO not contributing anything to OOo.
...
In
Hi all,
On 15.10.2010 13:13, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
Christian Lippka wrote:
Because the Novell go-oo people decided not to contribute theier
gstreamer implementation to OOo and OOo respected that. Later Kai
Ahrens was so brave and did another implementation of gstreamer for
OOo. Due to
Thorsten,
you can call it any way you like. Oracle asked Novell if it would
contribute the gstreamer adaptor and Novell said No. This is not an
LGPLv2 issue. The company Novell owns everything an employee of Novell
implements. And if you say No we respect that.
Christian.
Am 15.10.2010 14:03,
Hi Thorsten,
On 10/15/2010 01:13 PM, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
And regarding that release meeting decision:
it was a positive sign actually, that for once, Oracle stuck to
their own rules (that everybody else had to follow unconditionally).
Cheers,
-- Thorsten
that's not true at all. We
Hi,
that's not true at all. We established the release meeting some years
ago with good participation from non Oracle people to speak about
possible exceptions from the rules within the release process.
I agree on that.
But that said, it is also not correct to say, that the Oracle gstreamer
Hi Martin,
you wrote:
We established the release meeting some years ago with good
participation from non Oracle people to speak about possible
exceptions from the rules within the release process. That's why
we tried have people from QA, l10n, marketing, dev, documentation,
etc on board to
Thorsten,
Am 15.10.2010 14:57, schrieb Thorsten Behrens:
Christian Lippka wrote:
you can call it any way you like.
Thank you Christian, I appreciate that. What I don't appreciate is
that you not even consider my points, effectively saying this is
our truth, we make the rules, get lost.
Hi André,
Am 15.10.2010 15:09, schrieb Andre Schnabel:
Hi,
that's not true at all. We established the release meeting some years
ago with good participation from non Oracle people to speak about
possible exceptions from the rules within the release process.
I agree on that.
But that said,
Dear All
There seems to be a lot of infighting coming through.
To me it is bad Public Relations.
Is there any other way this could be handled ?
Kind regards
David
Hi André,
Am 15.10.2010 15:09, schrieb Andre Schnabel:
Hi,
that's not true at all. We established the release meeting some
Hi,
Von: Christian Lippka christian.lip...@oracle.com
I did not refer to your comment, I refereed to Fridrich Strba from
Novell and Rene Engelhard who is now Founding Members. Both voted
strongly against taking Gstreamer as an exception.
Note, I don't say that they should not have done
On 10/15/2010 03:14 PM, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
The mail you quote is about what should be regarded a showstopper
fix, so it doesn't really apply to the case at hand.
I just wanted to use this example that work in the release meeting was
constructive most of the time, nothing special related
Hi,
On 10/15/2010 03:22 PM, Christian Lippka wrote:
Hi André,
Am 15.10.2010 15:09, schrieb Andre Schnabel:
Hi,
that's not true at all. We established the release meeting some years
ago with good participation from non Oracle people to speak about
possible exceptions from the rules within
Hi Thorsten,
Thorsten Behrens wrote, On 10/15/10 16:21:
Christian Lippka wrote:
I'm saying again, Oracle asked Novell, Novell said no, we respected
that.
Christian, you continue to ignore the facts I gave in a previous
mail. If you could please go back and re-read it, to learn what the
On 10/15/2010 03:14 PM, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
To the best of my knowledge, it
was a standing rule not to integrate features past feature freeze -
and everytime that happened, unilaterally by Sun, it broke the build
for the non-Sun platforms. I guess Rene can give the whole picture
here.
Hi Thorsten,
Thorsten Behrens wrote, On 10/15/10 17:02:
Malte Timmermann wrote:
So if Novell really was committed to OpenOffice.org - why didn't they
simply contribute this feature?
Hi Malte,
conversely - why did Sun explicitely exempted extensions from the
SCA, and why, do you think,
Martin Hollmichel wrote:
On 10/15/2010 03:14 PM, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
To the best of my knowledge, it
was a standing rule not to integrate features past feature freeze -
and everytime that happened, unilaterally by Sun, it broke the build
for the non-Sun platforms. I guess Rene can give the
Le 16/10/2010 00:25, Robert Derman a écrit :
[...]
I would much appreciate it if someone could, in as few words as
feasable, explain what gstreamer is, and what function it performs.
Please search and read (first paragraph only) :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gstreamer
In many case Wikipedia
On 10/14/2010 12:57 PM, Malte Timmermann wrote:
For me, it looks very much one-way: LO grabbing a lot of stuff from OOo,
but LO not contributing anything to OOo.
Historically, Sun has rejected the overwhelming majority of
contributions from others.
Can you explain? What are TDF's plans wrt
On 10/15/2010 05:14 AM, Marius Popa wrote:
Is OpenOffice.org a dead project?
All of Oracle's RD will be going into Oracle Cloud Office, and Oracle
OpenOffice. Some of the results of that RD will be migrated into OOo.
In time, OOo will be like SQL-Ledger --- ostensibly open source, but
source
On 10/15/2010 01:41 PM, David Evans wrote:
There seems to be a lot of infighting coming through.
To me it is bad Public Relations.
It is called transparency.
And unlike closed source projects, FLOSS projects thrive on being
transparent, and letting third parties _usually_ know what the
On 10/15/2010 11:52 PM, Larry Gusaas wrote:
References please, or is this just your speculation?
Go back to the speech Larry made about purchasing FLOSS companies, for
the sole purpose of owning, and monetizing FLOSS.
Given the licenses that Sun, and subsequently Oracle required everything
to
On 2010-10-15, RA Brown rabr...@the-martin-byrd.net wrote:
On Thu Oct 14 2010 22:14:38 GMT-0700 (PDT) Marius Popa wrote:
Is OpenOffice.org a dead project?
Not at this time. See http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/press/177158 .
As Frank Zappa quipped about jazz: it's not dead -- it just
On 10/15/10 19:11, jonathon wrote:
Historically, Sun has rejected the overwhelming majority of
contributions from others.
Why would Sun do that?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: discuss-unsubscr...@openoffice.org
For additional
On 2010/10/15 7:05 PM jonathon wrote:
On 10/15/2010 11:52 PM, Larry Gusaas wrote:
References please, or is this just your speculation?
Go back to the speech Larry made about purchasing FLOSS companies, for
the sole purpose of owning, and monetizing FLOSS.
Reference please.
Oracle
26 matches
Mail list logo
