Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Subject: Re: Next steps for Symphony and AOO
From: drew <drew@baseanswers.com>
To: pfg@apache.org
Cc: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <1339705174.28109.YahooMailClassic@web113511.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <1339705174.28109.YahooMailClassic@web113511.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 17:10:46 -0400
Message-ID: <1339708246.4355.9.camel@sybil-gnome>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 13:19 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> 
> --- Gio 14/6/12, Marcus (OOo) <marcus.mail@wtnet.de> ha scritto:
> 
> ...
> 
> > >
> > > And I think it's not just about emotions. If you take A
> > > as base and pick the enhancements of B you'll get an
> > > enhanced A. You won't probably
> > > remove features from A but take only some of B.
> > >
> > > So the decision between Method I and II is also the
> > > decision to work for an enhanced OOo/AOO or for an
> > > enhanced Symphony.
> > 
> 
> I might have missed something but the idea behind both
> options is to arrive to the same product, that means
> reusing as much available code as possible.
> 
> 
> > Also a clear +1 from me to go the way of option I.
> > 
> 
> 
> It would be interesting to could put the options
> in some time metric.
> 
> My guess (and it's only a guess, not an estimate)
> ...
> 
> Option I : 2 years.
> Option II: 8 months.
> 
> Personally, I think I will work on both options
> at the same time: 

*chuckling*... good choice.


> I do want to have an early
> Symphony BSD port. No objections if I start
> merging patches into Symphony once uploaded? :).

Oh no, a wild variant (mutant) version is born.. ;-) why not, you have
the skill and the clay in your hands.

//drew

> 
> Pedro.
> 
>