Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Java dependency

I think there is a difference between removing Java as a dependency needed
for out-of-the-box features, and blocking people from extending the
application with Java extensions. I think keeping the Java UNO bridge does
make sense, but users shouldn't need to fire up a JVM for basic/common
functionality out-of-the-box.

On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 6:14 PM, Cedric Bosdonnat <
cedric.bosdonnat.ooo@free.fr> wrote:

> <snip>
> Removing Java completely is a No-go for me as this would prevent
> developers to write extensions and automation in Java. There are
> currently no other quick and simple way to extend OOo / LO for people
> who don't really care about the internals. Removing all Java
> dependencies from LO (and then removing the Java UNO bridge) would mean
> that we will exclude:
>  * Java extensions developers & users
>  * Java external apps using LO
> <snip>
> --
> Cédric Bosdonnat
> LibreOffice hacker
> http://documentfoundation.org
> OOo Eclipse Integration developer
> http://cedric.bosdonnat.free.fr

--
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***