Josh Triplett wrote:
> That page does *not* mean that the FSF will be forking OO.o. That page
> simply states that developers from both OO.o and the GCJ project are
> actively working to ensure that OO.o 2.0 will run with GCJ 4.0. What
> part of that article makes you believe that the FSF has an
Bruce Byfield wrote:
> http://www.fsf.org/news/open-office-java.html
>
> I'm planning to follow up on this news in an article for Newsforge. Does
> anybody have any comments they would like to make?
>
> I'll be checking this list tomorrow, but if people could cc me, I'd
> appreciate it -- I have
On (08/05/05 18:26), Bruce Byfield wrote:
> See:
>
> http://www.fsf.org/news/open-office-java.html
>
> I'm planning to follow up on this news in an article for Newsforge. Does
> anybody have any comments they would like to make?
>
> I'll be checking this list tomorrow, but if people could cc me,
See:
http://www.fsf.org/news/open-office-java.html
I'm planning to follow up on this news in an article for Newsforge. Does
anybody have any comments they would like to make?
I'll be checking this list tomorrow, but if people could cc me, I'd
appreciate it -- I have a lot of ground to cover on t
4 matches
Mail list logo