| 1 |
Hi, :-) |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
After I posted on the Gentoo devs list, there was this reply, which |
| 4 |
I'm posting here. I was wondering whether someone from the LibreOffice |
| 5 |
devs would like to jump in and respond? (I posted this follow-up to |
| 6 |
both lists.) |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
To sign up for the Gentoo devs list: gentoo-dev@l.g.o |
| 9 |
To sign-up for the LibO devs list: |
| 10 |
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice |
| 11 |
To view this message entirely: |
| 12 |
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_6d65d86d8ff498eedb95435c35fc4fad.xml |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 09:13, Stuart Longland wrote: |
| 15 |
> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 05:40:03PM +0800, David Nelson wrote: |
| 16 |
>> A number of Linux distributions have announced their intention to ship |
| 17 |
>> LibreOffice with their future releases. We know that they frequently |
| 18 |
>> do re-branding work to integrate their chosen office suite in lines |
| 19 |
>> with their project's thinking. |
| 20 |
>> |
| 21 |
>> So we are keen to involve you in our project branding and development, |
| 22 |
>> so that we ship releases that better fit your needs. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Do we even brand OpenOffice? I can't spot the difference between the |
| 25 |
> self-built OpenOffice.org binary I have, and the official Sun binary I |
| 26 |
> had previously. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> My concern with LibreOffice would be more to do with compiling it... |
| 29 |
> it'd be a nice package to have on the Yeeloong, but AFAIK it needs |
| 30 |
> Java..? Something I've been trying to bootstrap unsuccessfully for the |
| 31 |
> best part of two years now. (gcj-jdk is a long way from usable, and |
| 32 |
> there's a chicken-egg issue with icedtea6.) It also needs _lots_ of RAM |
| 33 |
> and disk space ... not a plentiful resource on MIPS. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
HTH. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
David Nelson |
Archives