Not necessarily. If there is a dev whose willing to do a port of said
filters I would say have fun. I think porting the filters would be a
great asset to this project as well as many other office related open
source projects.
On 12/6/10 6:50 AM, David Tardon wrote:
On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 02:
On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 02:40:07PM +0100, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
> Hi Jonathan, *,
>
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Jonathan Aquilina
> wrote:
> > i was talking to kendy this morning on irc and i was told that java is
> > eventually going to be phased out its a matter of porting the code fr
Hi Jonathan, *,
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Jonathan Aquilina
wrote:
> i was talking to kendy this morning on irc and i was told that java is
> eventually going to be phased out its a matter of porting the code from java
> to c++. What i would be flustered with is where to begin in my honest
i was talking to kendy this morning on irc and i was told that java is
eventually going to be phased out its a matter of porting the code from
java to c++. What i would be flustered with is where to begin in my
honest opinion
On 12/3/10 2:00 PM, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
Hi Wols, *,
On Fri,
Hi Wols, *,
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Wols Lists wrote:
> On 03/12/10 02:26, Kevin Hunter wrote:
> [...]
> Seeing as Base is where I want to work, this seems an obvious thing to
> do. I'm guessing that building without Java, then running some tests
> (smoketest? what?) and seeing what brea
On 03/12/10 10:48, Caolán McNamara wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 10:28 +, Wols Lists wrote:
>> Where do I start :-)
>>
>> Seeing as Base is where I want to work, this seems an obvious thing to
>> do. I'm guessing that building without Java, then running some tests
>> (smoketest? what?) and see
On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 10:28 +, Wols Lists wrote:
> Where do I start :-)
>
> Seeing as Base is where I want to work, this seems an obvious thing to
> do. I'm guessing that building without Java, then running some tests
> (smoketest? what?) and seeing what breaks is a good idea.
I think the typ
On 03/12/10 02:26, Kevin Hunter wrote:
> I'm absolutely for this, especially in terms of getting any/all
> necessaries rewritten in C++ ... but not right now. As others have
> stated, like it not, the current product uses Java (e.g. Base) and I
> believe it would be foolhardy to default to a build
