incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <>
Subject Re: Team OpenOffice White Label Office (powered by Apache Open Office)
Date Thu, 22 Dec 2011 00:16:55 GMT

Thank you for your perspective. I think a properly released 3.3.1 is totally
possible.. I recall Martin came to the list with the idea. We took separate paths. There is
now a chance to bring these paths together.

But the discussion has to happen here on the Apache OpenOffice (incubating) project list in

Oracle assigned the trademarks to the Apache Software Foundation and now the ASF as a non-profit
must hold that asset in trust for the public. will be on Apache Infrastructure soon. It will remain. Versions like 3.3.1
could be supported. Every committer to AOO has authority to edit the website. Even that is
under CTR.

I've spent a lot of time migrating the NLC project websites. The ecosystem
does indeed have an historical branding standard that is at odds with Apache's. Team's
name is an example. For the OOo ecosystem we have a prefix - Team OOo, Greek OOo, Mongolian
OOo, Foo OOo. For Apache it is the other way - everything must be Apache Foo.

Who knows, it might even be possible to find a way to continue with 3.4 as
the next version. But to do that a very compelling argument would need to be developed here
in public.


On Dec 21, 2011, at 3:22 PM, Pavel Janík wrote:

> [ Long mail from non-English native speaker, not written on mobile device ;-) ]
> Ross,
> On Dec 21, 2011, at 11:10 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>> Today Team OpenOffice released a "White Label Office" based off the
>> 3.3 code.
> ...
> I think the core issue here is "responsibility to users", "credibility of the product"
and "bridging the gap between the last OOo and the first AOOo".
> It is very easy to feel like a member of the project that has just started, has no users
(because there is no release yet) and has no history. And I perfectly understand it - I was
in the same situation 9 or so years ago. I did not care at all about StarOffice users and
I was very unhappy to see some references to it in OOo source code and even reported issues
about such things (resulting in some ..._so modules etc.).
> It is not very easy when you have been living with some product, some project, and you
were at the heart of the project for a long time, it was your daily bread, you know a lot
of people who were using the product and want to use it in the future ("responsibility to
> I perfectly understand how Martin, Stefan and Matthias feel. I know them very well. I
understand their motivation. And I trust them!!!
> ...
> All committers here do what they can to fix IP issues so Apache (WE!) can release AOOo.
But Team OOo thinks it is not enough to bridge the gap.
> What has to be done now IMO?
> Team OOo:
> 1. work closely with Apache team to get trademarks cleaned up.
> 2. clean FAQ and fix other issues that arise on non-technical level.
> 3. join the work here (I can imagine how Matthias feels when he has to read all mails
here ;-), explain your goals more clearly. Some people here do not get your goals (and it
is not their fault! It is your fault - you are not expressing them well...).
> Apache:
> 1. help Team OOo bridge the release gap between OOo and AOOo (because it helps to bring
legacy users forward to AOOo, smooths the transition) OR start thinking what can be done without
Team OOo to bridge the gap.
> It is all about communication...
> Oracle did a lot of good to Apache but they did a lot of bad to users
and developers. You can't choose only the first or the second part of the sentence. Both are
true and you have to see them both. More and more I read (repeated) mails from "Apache only,
not OOo" (sorry to say it this way) people, I see that you only see the first part of the
sentence. That doesn't mean I'm saying the trademarks are here to be violated!
> Note: I have yet to see worst management decision than Oracle's decision to transfer
OOo to Apache *this way*. They simply cut the costs throwing their users to the air and damaging
their name in the community so badly that they will need another 10 years to get the same
"sound". And additionally Apache (WE!) can't find the right solution to this "bridging the
gap" problem (ideas? dual licensing, gradual IP cleanup?). Do WE (Apache) care at all? Do
we see both sides of the coin?
> -- 
> Pavel Janík

View raw message