I did a test of all documents available at my company earlier this year (when the OOo development version was ~1.9.m50) and submitted several bugs where the conversion had differences I noticed.
1) Most of the word documents had content outside of the margins, that calls for version specific conversion to printer margins. At first I thought it was a bad conversion in OOo, but after some careful inspection I saw the same problem in word also. (Drag the left margin left or right a couple pixels -- this gives you a vertical line aligned with the left margin -- the content was outside of this margin in word 2k that I was testing with -- most documents were created with word97 or word 2k on another machine)
2) Font Substitution. There were a couple cases where I submitted bug reports where it turned out to be font substitution problems. I didn't have the font that the original document wanted. This varies widely between most word processor versions, including word versions (sometimes even several times within a release cycle -- several versions of word2k have different font substitutions for instance). After looking up the wanted font, it turned out that OOo substituted the closer matching font when compared to word2k (with latest patches).
do you really want to be using Firefox 1.0.1 (the version available in 3.7) these days?
You do realize that most distributions are just applying all patches for the latest stable release and patching to keep the name down[1]. I know that Debian and Ubuntu do this, and wouldn't be surprised if OpenBSD did also.
FC4 just takes the latest release without any version patching at all.
1. This is because when they tried only taking the security patches, they found how all of the patches are interdependent and just kept the version number to keep from having to rebuild any extensions they may have packaged.
Yes, version 1.1 has its quirks, so you might want to give OOo 2 beta a try.
You already have it being shipped in Fedora and Suse, so it can't be all bad.
That being said, my mom is happy with OOo 1.1.4, and I am reluctant to change things at this stage, mostly because of other things that would make any changes in the computer bad timing...
Support should be both inline (to save to the same file)
OOo already has this, even version 1.1.x
& support some revision control backend (to work seamlessly with CVS/subversion/etc.).
Yes I was thinking about this also. In the end, it probably won't require any changes in OOo itself at all. Just have a mechanism that exports from cvs/svn/svk and then waits for the exported file to be saved, and wala you have a new revision in the repository.
Has MySQL modified the GPL in any way from standard?
If not, then I see a small market for the non-GPL version since GPLed software can be used in a comercial setting without any problems.
Now, if someone wanted to link MySQL into their product, then there would be a use for the non-GPL license. Also, there is a use for buying support from them from a disaster recovery point of view, but wouldn't a contract with RH or Novell/Suse do that also?
Uhh, how does removing the SISSL from the list of licenses (leaving one entry in that list) keep Sun from compeating with Microsoft in the Office software market?
It seems to me that it only takes a few people who the joke is either new to them and thus funny, or one of those old jokes where it still makes you chuckle whenever you see it.
If they have mod points, then you should be able to see why this happens.
You can always change the point value of a "funny" mod in your prefs...
establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare
Notice the two words "provide" and "promote"? There is good reason why "provide" isn't used twice.
In those days, the government didn't have the power to impose an income tax. Most government monies were raised through bonds that were paid back with interest (your modern day T-Bills).
The names for our modern day "welfare" systems were chosen very craftily by the politicians, and should be added to the weasel word list IMO.
[...]"in practice nobody should ever be doing prototyping on the production system - period."
Agreed.
But that is not what the gp post was talking about. Production was a poorly chosen word, but understandable to most people. Why should you not be able to run a full production workload in your prototyping environment?
RSS 0.90 was the original Netscape RSS version. This RSS was called RDF Site Summary, but was based on an early working draft of the RDF standard, and was not compatible with the final RDF Recommendation.
RSS 1.0 and 1.1 are an open format by the "RSS-DEV Working Group", again standing for RDF Site Summary. RSS 1.0 is an RDF format like RSS 0.90, but not fully compatible with it, since 1.0 is based on the final RDF 1.0 Recommendation.
The RSS 2.* branch (initially UserLand, now Harvard) includes the following versions:
RSS 0.91 is the simplified RSS version released by Netscape, and also the version number of the simplified version championed by Dave Winer from Userland Software. The Netscape version was now called Rich Site Summary, this was no longer an RDF format, but was relatively easy to use. It remains the most common RSS variant.
RSS 0.92 through 0.94 are expansions of the RSS 0.91 format, which are mostly compatible with each other and with Winer's version of RSS 0.91, but are not compatible with RSS 0.90. In all Userland RSS 0.9x specifications, RSS was no longer an acronym.
RSS 2.0.1 has the internal version number 2.0. RSS 2.0.1 was proclaimed to be "frozen", but still updated shortly after release without changing the version number. RSS now stood for Really Simple Syndication. The major change in this version is an explicit extension mechanism using XML Namespaces.
Once you sign a contract, each developer would have to go to court to get any relief which gets expensive quickly.
This looks like a viable strategy. Hire a bunch of promising "enemy" developers and show them all of your internal code under NDA and non-compete terms, and you have reduced possible compettition.
Slashdot Mirror
I did a test of all documents available at my company earlier this year (when the OOo development version was ~1.9.m50) and submitted several bugs where the conversion had differences I noticed.
1) Most of the word documents had content outside of the margins, that calls for version specific conversion to printer margins. At first I thought it was a bad conversion in OOo, but after some careful inspection I saw the same problem in word also. (Drag the left margin left or right a couple pixels -- this gives you a vertical line aligned with the left margin -- the content was outside of this margin in word 2k that I was testing with -- most documents were created with word97 or word 2k on another machine)
2) Font Substitution. There were a couple cases where I submitted bug reports where it turned out to be font substitution problems. I didn't have the font that the original document wanted. This varies widely between most word processor versions, including word versions (sometimes even several times within a release cycle -- several versions of word2k have different font substitutions for instance). After looking up the wanted font, it turned out that OOo substituted the closer matching font when compared to word2k (with latest patches).
Try AVG
do you really want to be using Firefox 1.0.1 (the version available in 3.7) these days?
You do realize that most distributions are just applying all patches for the latest stable release and patching to keep the name down[1]. I know that Debian and Ubuntu do this, and wouldn't be surprised if OpenBSD did also.
FC4 just takes the latest release without any version patching at all.
1. This is because when they tried only taking the security patches, they found how all of the patches are interdependent and just kept the version number to keep from having to rebuild any extensions they may have packaged.
Do you mean OpenSSL?
Or maybe even GNUTLS?
Yeah, got it. But you mangled it badly.
or the fed-ex guy- who transports vital medical supplies
Care to guess just how fucked we would be if they used UPS?
Yes, version 1.1 has its quirks, so you might want to give OOo 2 beta a try.
You already have it being shipped in Fedora and Suse, so it can't be all bad.
That being said, my mom is happy with OOo 1.1.4, and I am reluctant to change things at this stage, mostly because of other things that would make any changes in the computer bad timing...
Support should be both inline (to save to the same file)
OOo already has this, even version 1.1.x
& support some revision control backend (to work seamlessly with CVS/subversion/etc.).
Yes I was thinking about this also. In the end, it probably won't require any changes in OOo itself at all. Just have a mechanism that exports from cvs/svn/svk and then waits for the exported file to be saved, and wala you have a new revision in the repository.
Has MySQL modified the GPL in any way from standard?
If not, then I see a small market for the non-GPL version since GPLed software can be used in a comercial setting without any problems.
Now, if someone wanted to link MySQL into their product, then there would be a use for the non-GPL license. Also, there is a use for buying support from them from a disaster recovery point of view, but wouldn't a contract with RH or Novell/Suse do that also?
And here I thought it was ThereSQL...
Please check your eyes.
Lexmark was the one that was being sued by another company.
I'm sorry, but there is an entire market around the HP 3, 4 and 5 printers. They are tanks that just need new toner and a fuser once in a while...
Uhh, how does removing the SISSL from the list of licenses (leaving one entry in that list) keep Sun from compeating with Microsoft in the Office software market?
Not only that, but NeoOffice/J is a GPL fork of OOo 1.1, so GPL and OOo is already happening because of the forking.
20 kps!!! Holy crap, that's almost 45,000 mph!!!
Yeah, and our trains are still late...
It seems to me that it only takes a few people who the joke is either new to them and thus funny, or one of those old jokes where it still makes you chuckle whenever you see it.
If they have mod points, then you should be able to see why this happens.
You can always change the point value of a "funny" mod in your prefs...
establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare
Notice the two words "provide" and "promote"? There is good reason why "provide" isn't used twice.
In those days, the government didn't have the power to impose an income tax. Most government monies were raised through bonds that were paid back with interest (your modern day T-Bills).
The names for our modern day "welfare" systems were chosen very craftily by the politicians, and should be added to the weasel word list IMO.
Given that Windows XP was released with, what, 65,000 bugs[...]
But that doesn't count the number of times that 16bit counter wrapped.
Damn it!
That was so bad it's funny!
[...]"in practice nobody should ever be doing prototyping on the production system - period."
Agreed.
But that is not what the gp post was talking about. Production was a poorly chosen word, but understandable to most people. Why should you not be able to run a full production workload in your prototyping environment?
From Wikipedia:
The RSS 2.* branch (initially UserLand, now Harvard) includes the following versions:
And everyone still ran Win98SE that came out in May 1999.
So if Microsoft follows their historical record, Vista has a good chance of coming out in the 2007-2009 range.
No, it's two bites.
Oh, do you mean Noah's wife?
I disagree.
Once you sign a contract, each developer would have to go to court to get any relief which gets expensive quickly.
This looks like a viable strategy. Hire a bunch of promising "enemy" developers and show them all of your internal code under NDA and non-compete terms, and you have reduced possible compettition.