Re: Do you consider Go-oo project to be a fork of OpenOffice.org?

Tor,
thank you for reply

 > You must have missed the big news this week...

Nope, that was my next question ;)
What is the exact relation between Go-oo and LibreOffice?
Does LibreOffice sources/build contain Go-oo patches?
Judging from list foundation personalities it seems that Go-oo == 
LibreOffice.

 > We did not consider go-oo a fork.

I appreciate that.

 > But LibreOffice definitely is [the fork].

So no upstreaming anymore? No more merging with vanilla sources?

How big is currently involvement Sun/Oracle in OpenOffice development? I 
remember Michel Meek's commit analysis - 
http://people.gnome.org/~michael/images/2008-09-29-active-both.png - 
showing that ca 80% code originated by SUN followed by Novel and 
marginal bits from others. It is a bit outdated, 29.9.2008, 2 years ago, 
is there any new analysis? Missing such significant contributor would be 
a massive blow.

 > Wikipedia ..primary sources are not supposed to be used.

Primary sources should be referenced, preferably, if they exist. I am 
working exactly on that.

Regards
Espinosa


On 30/09/10 08:56, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
> You must have missed the big news this week...
>
> We did not consider go-oo a fork. But LibreOffice definitely is. See http://www.documentfoundation.org/ .
>
> Wikipedia is a wiki. It is written by random people on the Internet. Primary sources are not supposed to be used. (I.e., if you think the Wikipedia entry on go-oo should have been mainly writtten, or was mainly written, by the people who worked on go-oo or ooo-build, you are mistaken. I say "mainly" because I admit I fixed some things in the article a long time ago.) If you think there are errors in Wikipedia, fix it.
>
> --tml
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ooo-build mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/ooo-build
>
>
>