> From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@gmail.com]
> no it means the benefit of the patches is so minimal that a rewrite is > probably cheaper and easier. For the example for 1 use case we have > integrated we spend a lot of time to understand the patch and realize > that the implementation address only one facet and is incomplete form > our pov. We or better Oliver spend even more time on it to make it > complete. > > The other use case were addressed wrong from our pov and we took the > feature idea and implement it new and in a way to make it more general > and ready for the future. > > Both solution found their way in LO which is fine but it > shows ones more > that it is wasted time and resources. Better would be to > collaborate and > work together on such things. > > I believe that neither AOO nor LO has so many resources that it is > clever to do the work twice in the long term. In each case a solution is not to get. My client is willing to pay for it, but there is no company within: http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html that wants to do the work. The reality is concrete and now unfortunately my customer is working with one of the companies sponsoring LO. I would much have preferred a job would be created for one of the companies supporting the AOO. Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
