On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 08:42:26PM -0500, Havoc Pennington wrote:
>
> Sam TH <sam uchicago edu> writes:
> > However, about GNOME 2.0, the board members, etc seemed to punt in the
> > last discussion. However, this issue does need to be moved forward in
> > some way, if only to begin to develop criteria for determining the
> > contents of GNOME office in GNOME 2.0.
> >
> > Hopefully the discussion can generate more light and less heat this
> > time.
> >
>
> If you mean the GO vs. OpenOffice discussion, the board did make a
> final decision to just include both and not worry about trying to
> decide this issue for or against either suite in any way.
Perhaps I missed the minutes of that meeting, but I never heard about
that decision. It's good to know now, though.
sam th
sam uchicago edu
http://www.abisource.com/~sam/
GnuPG Key:
http://www.abisource.com/~sam/key
Attachment:
pgpIfL4InJhj2.pgp
Description: PGP signature