incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shenfeng Liu <>
Subject Re: Next steps for Symphony and AOO
Date Fri, 15 Jun 2012 19:32:29 GMT
And I'd like to repeat what Rob mentioned in his previous mail, behind option I & option
II is in fact an open question: how can we quickly integrate the most value in current AOO
and Symphony together to deliver the next generation of AOO 4.0? We made a lot of technical
study, and either option has some advantage and disadvantage for short term as well as long
term of AOO development, and will face different issues and risks on the way. But is there
any other innovative way that can be even better and even faster? That's the question for

发自我的 iPhone

在 2012-6-15,15:31,Pedro Giffuni <> 写道:

> --- Ven 15/6/12, Jürgen Schmidt <> ha scritto:
> ...
>> we should be careful with spreading numbers based on wild
>> guessing. It requires some deeper analysis.
> Yes, you are right. The estimates for bringing the
> accessibility stuff are rather discouraging for
> option I though.
>>> Personally, I think I will work on both options
>>> at the same time: I do want to have an early
>>> Symphony BSD port. No objections if I start
>>> merging patches into Symphony once uploaded? :).
>> you are free in the work you are doing but I think it would
>> be wrong. We should find an agreement on the direction we
>> want to move forward. Our goal is to take the best of both
>> and build the best free office suite ever. We shouldn't
>> split further resources by working on 2 code bases.
>> It will be the completely wrong signal.
> Well, I won't be doing any main development just merge
> some of what has already been done in AOO, mostly the
> BSD port.
>> I am of course against releasing 2 source releases based on
>> 2 different source trees.
> There are unofficial "demo" releases of Symphony already,
> I am not forking, I only want to do the BSD port.
>> I am surprised about such an idea
> Surprises can be good :).
> Pedro.

View raw message