On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 16:45, Jon Dowland wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 01:36:58PM +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>>> Thanks, I will start enumerating the differences between OpenOffice and
>>> LibreOffice here:
>>> http://dotancohen.com/eng/d
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 16:45, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 01:36:58PM +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>> Thanks, I will start enumerating the differences between OpenOffice and
>> LibreOffice here:
>> http://dotancohen.com/eng/difference_openoffice_libreoffice.html
>
> That's going to b
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 01:36:58PM +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> Thanks, I will start enumerating the differences between OpenOffice and
> LibreOffice here:
> http://dotancohen.com/eng/difference_openoffice_libreoffice.html
That's going to be one hell of a moving target. What audience are you tryin
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 04:09, Greg Madden wrote:
> Look at the referenced bug reports, there are attachments to the reports
> showing
> what has happened to my templates & archived docs. others have noticed this
> also.
>
Thanks, I will start enumerating the differences between OpenOffice
and
Chris Davies wrote:
> I've found the converse to be true, particularly with templated
> documents. At one point I found that I could open templated documents
> with LO but in order to print them I had to save then in native OOo
> format and reload them in AOO. Fortunately that state of affairs las
On 11/03/12 22:09, Greg Madden wrote:
> I have been using dev builds, now rc's, of AOO for a while now. For
my work,
> archived documents& templates this is working out better, for my use
scenario,
> than LO ver 3.4.x and later.
>
> There are differences between AOO& LO, significant enough t
...Reposted to list...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Rene Engelhard
Date: Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: OT Apache Open Office
To: Brad Alexander
[ no idea whether you intented to send a PM, but.. ]
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 06:53:05PM -0400, Brad Alexander wrote
On Monday 12 March 2012 11:30:19 am Dotan Cohen wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 23:09, Greg Madden wrote:
> > There are differences between AOO & LO, significant enough to warrant
> > having a choice in Debian of which one to use.
>
> What are the significant differences that you have perceived?
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 10:00:26AM +, Chris Davies wrote:
> documents. At one point I found that I could open templated documents
> with LO but in order to print them I had to save then in native OOo
> format and reload them in AOO. Fortunately that state of affairs lasted
This is nonsense. Th
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 06:36:52PM -0800, Greg Madden wrote:
> > Someone will have to step up and put the work in to package AOO, for the
> > choice to exist "in Debian".
>
> The Apache OO folks do provide .deb files with desktop integration. In my
> tests
> these work well enough on a Debi
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 23:09, Greg Madden wrote:
> There are differences between AOO & LO, significant enough to warrant having a
> choice in Debian of which one to use.
>
What are the significant differences that you have perceived? I might
have to maintain a page outlining the differences if t
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 13:09:10 -0800, Greg Madden wrote:
> I have been using dev builds, now rc's, of AOO for a while now. For my
> work, archived documents & templates this is working out better, for my
> use scenario, than LO ver 3.4.x and later.
What are those improvements you're seeing?
> Ther
Greg Madden wrote:
> 1. About 'file open' : Someone mentioned LO has a stricter compliance
> with ? document format standards, anecdotal experience shows some
> MS docs do not open in LO that do open in AOO. Not really an area of
> concern here, I rarely get a MS document sent to me.
I've found
On Sunday 11 March 2012 3:27:51 pm Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 01:09:10PM -0800, Greg Madden wrote:
> > I have been using dev builds, now rc's, of AOO for a while now. For my
> > work, archived documents & templates this is working out better, for my
> > use scenario, than LO ver
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 01:09:10PM -0800, Greg Madden wrote:
> I have been using dev builds, now rc's, of AOO for a while now. For my work,
> archived documents & templates this is working out better, for my use
> scenario,
> than LO ver 3.4.x and later.
That's interesting. Do you mean there ar
I have been using dev builds, now rc's, of AOO for a while now. For my work,
archived documents & templates this is working out better, for my use scenario,
than LO ver 3.4.x and later.
There are differences between AOO & LO, significant enough to warrant having a
choice in Debian of which one
16 matches
Mail list logo
