Adrian Levi:
> On 16 February 2011 02:47, Jochen Schulz <ml@well-adjusted.de> wrote:
>
>> I would be surprised to find something like this. The fork has purely
>> political reasons and as it is still quite young, it shouldn't have
>> deviated from OOo by much until now.
>
> LibreOffice includes the patchset that was GO-OO that neither Sun or
> Oracle would comit to the repo, so it was maintained as a separate
> patchset. Debian previously shipped GO-OO not Sun OO or Oracle OO
Thanks for the correction. I had never heard about these patches.
>>> I am interested in what LibreOffice offers that makes it easier to
>>> use, fewer bugs, features or lack thereof.
>>
>> Don't expect any of this today. I guess that it is currently even less
>> stable/mature.
>
> Pure Conjecture,
True. It's just what I expect of a fresh fork.
J.
--
My medicine shelf is my altar.
[Agree] [Disagree]
<http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature