On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 06:58:45PM -0400, Allen Pulsifer wrote:
> As a long time member of the OpenOffice.org community, I would like to offer
> my thoughts on the Oracle/IBM proposal.
>
Thanks for the very well-written and well-reasoned post.
--
"Allen Pulsifer" wrote on 06/02/2011 06:58:45
PM:
>
> As a long time member of the OpenOffice.org community, I would like to
offer
> my thoughts on the Oracle/IBM proposal.
>
Thanks. This is a great summary of the history.
.
.
.
>
> Despite the fact the IBM's vision for OpenOffice seems
Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Allen Pulsifer wrote:
> > As a long time member of the OpenOffice.org community, I would like to
offer
> > my thoughts on the Oracle/IBM proposal.
> Thanks for the very well-written and well-reasoned post.
+1
--- Noel
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 20:22, wrote:
>...
> The only concrete thing I've heard so far is the question of whether
> subversion can handle the project.
I would be extremely surprised if Subversion could not handle it. I'd
like to know more about the problems that the OO.o devs ran into.
> Are th
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 1:34 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>> Allen Pulsifer wrote:
>> > As a long time member of the OpenOffice.org community, I would like to
> offer
>> > my thoughts on the Oracle/IBM proposal.
>> Thanks for the very well-written and well-reasoned post.
>
>
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 1:22 AM, wrote:
> "Allen Pulsifer" wrote on 06/02/2011 06:58:45 PM:
>> Second, if Apache takes on OpenOffice, it will instantly become the
> Apache
>> project with the largest number of end-users (if you include the number
> of
>> users of both the Apache version and i
