On Wednesday 23 November 2011 11:07:14 am Werner Joss wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 November 2011 19:31:28 Calvin Morrison wrote:
> > I say we leave KOffice how it is, for people who need it, then focus on
> > Loffice (i think this is already the plan?)
>
> I'm ok with that, trying to bring koffice to par with office suites depeloped
> by huge teams is pointless.
> but _please_ leave it just as-is in TDE as long as there is not a viable,
> lightweight alternative.
> I remember a discussion awhile ago on trinity-users (?) where koffice2 was
> mentioned, which would eventually be based on qt4 only (_not_ kde4).
> maybe there's a chance to have something like that in awhile ?
Once it is up-to-par, we probably won't need to touch it for a long while, except to update ODF (and possibly MS Office) support. We don't need to add in every feature under the sun, being lightweight saves us from doing that. But perhaps at least add in a plugins feature for people who like KOffice but need more features?
> werner
> p.s.:
> the existence of koffice 1.6.3 was one important argument for me to use TDE :)
> I know support for M$ formats in koffice (1.6) is bad, but recent versions can
> read the odf files that koffice produces, as does OO/LO, and google docs.
> that is enough 'compatibility' for me.
I think for /most/ Linux users, ODF is the most important to support, though as has already been said, some people just need it. Again, I think it should be a secondary concern (not a main concern), but still needed.
--
Kristopher Gamrat
Ark Linux webmaster
http://www.arklinux.org/
Attachments: