[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [discuss] GROUPWARE - Answered: Why "OOGS" ?
From: |
Dan Kuykendall |
Subject: |
Re: [discuss] GROUPWARE - Answered: Why "OOGS" ? |
Date: |
Thu, 08 Feb 2001 09:39:02 -0800 |
> > Like, GNU stands for Gnu's Not Unix.
> > Thus the "extra" O :-)
>
> Sorry, those went out of fashion in the 80s.
I have to agree.
> But this is totally immaterial as long as the 'OGS' part means Open
> Groupware Standards and the result that come out of it is :
> a) standard
Yes
> b) open
Yes
> c) agreed upon by all of us
Will probably never happen, but "agreed upon by most" will be enough.
> d) all libraries are licenced under LGPL or some other licence
> with even less strings attached.
Yep
> e) nice, multi-system (UNO, CORBA, XPCOM, plain C, etc.) APIs
Im going for XML-RPC at this point.
Seek3r
Re: [discuss] Re: [Evolution] OO - GROUPWARE - Call for concluison- was: OpenOffice: Say it isn't so., Sander Vesik, 2001/02/06
Re: [discuss] Re: [Evolution] OO - GROUPWARE - Call for concluison-was: OpenOffice: Say it isn't so., Dan Kuykendall, 2001/02/06
GROUPWARE - Answered: Why "OOGS" ?, Lloyd Llewellyn, 2001/02/08
- Re: [discuss] GROUPWARE - Answered: Why "OOGS" ?, Sander Vesik, 2001/02/08
- Re: [discuss] GROUPWARE - Answered: Why "OOGS" ?,
Dan Kuykendall <=
- Re: [discuss] GROUPWARE - Answered: Why "OOGS" ?, Sander Vesik, 2001/02/08
- Re: [discuss] GROUPWARE - Answered: Why "OOGS" ?, Dan Kuykendall, 2001/02/08
- OGS Project, Dan Kuykendall, 2001/02/08
- Re: [discuss] GROUPWARE - Answered: Why "OOGS" ?, Sander Vesik, 2001/02/08
Please remove me from the list, Will Wong, 2001/02/08
Re: [discuss] Re: [Evolution] Re: [discuss] OO - GROUPWARE - Call for concluison - was: OpenOffice: Say it isn't so., Jeffry Smith, 2001/02/06