| 1 |
BRM wrote: |
| 2 |
>> From: Paul Hartman<paul.hartman+gentoo@×××××.com> |
| 3 |
>> To: gentoo-user@l.g.o |
| 4 |
>> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 10:41 AM |
| 5 |
>> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Openoffice being replaced? |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Dale<rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>>> I noticed this today: |
| 10 |
>>> |
| 11 |
>>> The following mask changes are necessary to proceed: |
| 12 |
>>> #required by @selected, required by @world (argument) |
| 13 |
>>> # /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask: |
| 14 |
>>> # Tomáš Chvátal<scarabeus@g.o> (27 Jul 2011) |
| 15 |
>>> # Old replaced packages. Will be removed in 30 days. |
| 16 |
>>> # app-office/openoffice -> app-office/libreoffice |
| 17 |
>>> # app-office/openoffice-bin -> app-office/libreoffice-bin |
| 18 |
>>> # app-text/wpd2sxw -> app-text/wpd2odt |
| 19 |
>>> |
| 20 |
>>>> =app-office/openoffice-3.2.1-r1 |
| 21 |
>>>> |
| 22 |
>>> |
| 23 |
>>> Does this mean that libreoffice is going to replace OOo in the tree? |
| 24 |
>>> |
| 25 |
>> Looks like it. It has already replaced it on all my computers. |
| 26 |
>> |
| 27 |
>> Gentoo's OpenOffice has included the go-oo patches for a long time |
| 28 |
>> anyway, which were the big thing changed about LibreOffice (those |
| 29 |
>> patches included in mainline), and using the two I can honestly say |
| 30 |
>> there's really no difference as far as I can tell, aside from the |
| 31 |
>> splash screen. Somebody posted about some Sun templates a while |
| 32 |
>> back... maybe something proprietary like that is changed, but |
| 33 |
>> OpenTemplate.org is meant to replace those anyway. |
| 34 |
>> |
| 35 |
>> I would say switch to LibreOffice and don't look back. :) |
| 36 |
>> |
| 37 |
>> |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> I wouldn't. While LibreOffice may have some advances at the moment, I'm still interested in following main-line OOo - now being setting under Apache. |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> Please do not force us to convert from OO to LO. I have no problem with separate installs for each, but there will be those (like me) that want the official OO installs. |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
> That said, I have more confidence in Apache managing OO than I do TDF with LO, having observed TDF's mailing lists for several months (before finally dropping off in favor of Apache OO). I know others will have different opinions; but that (again) is why we should allow those using OO to remain using OO. |
| 44 |
> |
| 45 |
> |
| 46 |
> Ben |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> |
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
If you want it to stay in the tree, you will have to find someone to |
| 52 |
maintain it or maintain it yourself. Otherwise, it looks like OOo is |
| 53 |
going to be checking out pretty soon. I would rather stay with OOo |
| 54 |
myself but I'm not a dev and to be honest, have no interest in being one |
| 55 |
either. |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
Just saying. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
Dale |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
:-) :-) |
Archives