incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simos Xenitellis <simos.li...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?
Date Mon, 06 Jun 2011 17:37:04 GMT
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Richard S. Hall <heavy@ungoverned.org> wrote:
> On 6/6/11 11:26, Simos Xenitellis wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Richard S. Hall<heavy@ungoverned.org>
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 6/6/11 10:41, Manfred A. Reiter wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Richard, *
>>>>
>>>> 2011/6/6 Richard S. Hall<heavy@ungoverned.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 6/6/11 2:48, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 6/5/11 11:26 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 6/6/2011 1:06 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Phil Steitz<phil.steitz@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> Disclaimer: I work for Oracle, but certainly don't speak for them and
I
>>>>> knew nothing about this other than what i've read on these mailing
>>>>> lists...
>>>>>
>>>>> However, it seems like we have lost sight of the fact that TDF split
>>>>> the
>>>>> community from OOo. Sure, Oracle is the perceived villain and TDF the
>>>>> perceived good guy, but it doesn't change the fact that OOo created the
>>>>> community in the first place.
>>>>>
>>>> Fact: Your employer provoked the split, by a absolute
>>>> "non-communication" on the existing mailinglist.
>>>> Now, to say that TDF has split the Communtiy is dishonest!
>>>
>>> Forking splits communities. Whether you feel you had a justified reason
>>> for
>>> doing so does not change this fact. I am not weighing in on whether it is
>>> right or wrong in this case, since I think that is immaterial to where we
>>> are now.
>>>
>> That's an example of denial. I do not see a conductive environment here
>> if such attitudes are tolerated.
>>
>>> I am only going by the "facts" as presented on the various Apache mailing
>>> lists. If it is true that TDF was engaged by Oracle/IBM before the Apache
>>> proposal, but failed to come to terms, then I cannot see how one can
>>> claim
>>> that the Apache proposal was merely an attempt to split the community.
>>>
>> You should read more about free and open-source software, from diverse
>> sources.
>> Get a lwn.net subscription.
>>
>> Similar example, there was XFree86 long time ago that behaved just
>> like the Oracle developers.
>> Then, it was forked into X.Org and everyone moved to X.Org.
>> XFree86 is a distant memory.
>>
>
> Ok, forget the first part of what I originally said, since it doesn't really
> matter and apparently it prevents any discussion of the second part...
>
> The second part was, was TDF actually engaged and failed to come to terms or
> not? That is what I've read, so I accepted this as true.
>

Double fault.

I suppose you rather wanted to say “TDF actually engaged [with Oracle]
[but the negotiations] failed to [to reach an agreement]”.

My personal interpretation:
1. Oracle wanted to give away OpenOffice.org, even transfer the copyrights.
2. The TDF is really happy to receive OpenOffice.org, as a copyleft
project (LGPLv3+MPLv2).
3. [lots of cheap speculation, 1p each] There might be an agreement
between IBM and Oracle/Sun
for access to the OOo source code for the proprietary Lotus Symphony,
so Oracle had to oblige to IBM
and go to the Apache Foundation. Or, less interestingly, ODF/OOo is a
huge investment inside IBM
that they would rather not relinquish control and ability to create
proprietary products.
4. A lot of people unhappy.

Simos

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message