Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6099276F3 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 00:01:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 20565 invoked by uid 500); 16 Dec 2011 00:01:13 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 20516 invoked by uid 500); 16 Dec 2011 00:01:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 20508 invoked by uid 99); 16 Dec 2011 00:01:13 -0000 Received: from minotaur.apache.org (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 00:01:13 +0000 Received: from localhost (HELO mail-vx0-f175.google.com) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username robweir, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 00:01:12 +0000 Received: by vcbf1 with SMTP id f1so1105487vcb.6 for ; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:01:11 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.214.73 with SMTP id gz9mr1831260vcb.5.1323993671860; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:01:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.220.157.75 with HTTP; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:01:11 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <00368217-AC58-4F03-B602-1628D91DFF40@gmail.com> <201112161144.21667.g.a.lauder@gmail.com>

Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 19:01:11 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Off topic From: Rob Weir To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Ian Lynch wrote: > On 15 December 2011 23:03, Rob Weir wrote: > >> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Graham Lauder >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > The evidence actually reveals the complete opposite. =C2=A0A vast vibr= ant >> community >> > with all the tension and =C2=A0foibles that brings with it, that produ= ced, >> marketed >> > and distributed a well featured and reliable Office suite to a communi= ty >> of >> > probably tens of millions of users. =C2=A0Could we have done some thin= gs >> better, of >> > course, nothing is ever perfect but it was never as bad as you and >> others have >> > been painting it. >> > >> >> OOo was a failure > > > No, overall I agree with Graham OOo has been a great success. Without OOo > there would be no odf and not even a debate about interoperability and th= e > appropriateness of proprietary formats in government. We can speculate > whether the corporate charity was a restriction or a benefit - there is n= o > control to test that against. > OOo was the name of a product, an open source project and a community. So we may just be talking past each other here. The product was fine. The community was vibrant. But both of these were sustained by an open source project based on a corporate dominated development model, a benevolent dictatorship that avoided power sharing and used the license to prevent competition from forks. Take away that corporate subsidy, but change nothing else about the project, and the product and community accomplishments cannot be sustained. They will fall to earth with a might crash. It is like pointing to Cuba in 1970 and saying what wonderful parks and hospitals they have, but ignoring the fact that this come only from a Soviet subsidy and at the expense of intolerance of political dissent. The goal, of course, is not to find another dictator, from SUSE or IBM or anyone else. The goal is to build an ecosystem of multiple stakeholders and co-investors in the technology. -Rob