Re: [tdf-discuss] [Change executable names] Re: Digest of discuss -AT- documentfoundation.org issue 127 (3742-3762)

I agree here Robert. Doing such a thing would be detrimental on the 
whole to the user base, as well as future users. There will also be 
great loss of functionality in my honest opinion if that happens.

On 12/18/10 7:24 PM, RGB ES wrote:
> 2010/12/18 Robert Derman<robert.derman@pressenter.com>:
> > Instead of this I think that LO should have all its own extensions and
> > accessories and should completely divorce itself from OOo sooner rather than
> > later.
> Let's face the reality: For most people (and ALL companies), real life
> is too complicated to worry about ideological discussions about the
> freedom on a project. By "divorcing" from OOo as you say you will lost
> LOTS of potential users, specially those who depends on key extensions
> or self made macros... Can you imagine a sysadmin saying "well, by
> moving to LibO we need to rewrite almost all our macros, but that's
> fine"? Well, I can't...
> A complete divorce must be well planed, offering good migration tools
> and good *reasons* for the change.
> Breaking now will be a suicide. Full compatibility is a must for the
> whole 3.3 life cycle.
> Maybe for 4.0... but must be planned with great precision and the old
> version must be supported for some time too.
> Just my 2¢


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***