Andreas Pour <pour@mieterra.com> wrote:
> Why is that not true?  Please explain so I can fix it.  As to

Is it freeware or free completely in the BSD sense?  Probably not.

> Hmm, I have heard different things about it.  Some of the packages
> (KPresenter) are ready, but I thought as a package it wasn't yet up to
> KDE stable release standards.  I think it would be a mistake to overhype
> it.  But as I don't use it (or any other office suite) every day or even
> frequently I can only go by what I have heard.  Let's let the core
> developers decide as a group what to say here.

I hope they are bold enough to call it for what it is after the 4-5
years of development.  Calling it KOffice 1.0 is not overhype IMHO.
Calling it a preview on the other hand is not credit enough to the
KOffice developers, most of whom have been thinking of and promoting
this as the first public release as far as I know.  

Let's not turn the GNOME 1.0 fiasco or the legendary stability of KDE
1.1.2 into a noose around our own necks.  Remember KDE 1.0 -- a first
release has to start somewhere.  We need a first release for KOffice,
and this is it.  That's the line that was drawn.  We need more
developers and users of KOffice too, IMHO.  Also, we may need to think
of companies that are basing and integrating products with KOffice
already... those guys need this first release.

Cc'ed to koffice@kde.org -> Guys, is this KOffice 1.0 or a KOffice
preview?

> > I think aRts actually does more than just sound...  so maybe call it a
> > "multimedia architecture" and not limit to sound.  MPEG1 and DiVX are
> > supported already, I believe.
> 
> If you find out for sure please let me know; my understanding is that
> video is planned but not yet supported (noatun is for that IIRC).  Also,
> please give me the command so I can try it!, that would be cool.

Well, I know for sure that Stefan W. has designed it as and promotes
it as a multimedia architecture...  even if it mainly supports sound
mainly at present.  (See Antonio's email for other media supported
already).

> > Okay, I will need to go over this over some more detail later.
> 
> Great, thanks for your comments!

Thanks for your own work on this, more comments forthcoming.

Cheers,
Navin.