Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice • Hacker News Board

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#251

Post by jimjag » Fri, Sep 02, 2016, 9:37 PM UTC

CopperWing wrote: post #220

okket wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My last remark was too snarky and out of context, I am sorry. You want both projects to merge again with OO being the 'core' and LO the 'user interface'? Sounds intriguing, but are both code bases still compatible enough for that? Would this not be more effort than gain? What is obvious is that the AOO project cannot support, at the present time, being an end-user focused effort. I would suggest we focus on not being…

OpenOffice and LibreOffice are already "merged". In fact in the past years, after the fork, LibreOffice developers regularly tracked OpenOffice source code repository and merged all the useful changes they could find, by either picking the original code or re-implementing it their own way. In addition to that they also completely overhauled and simplified the build system, removed tons of dead code and translated Ger…

"In fact in the past years, after the fork, LibreOffice developers regularly tracked OpenOffice source code repository and merged all the useful changes they could find, by either picking the original code or re-implementing it their own way."

And therein lies the problem... AOO was simply consumed. There was no quid-pro-quo where these were then donated back to AOO. Of course, the ALv2 does not require that, and so LO was perfectly within their right to not donate back. But it also seems somewhat "shady", and not the kind of behavior one would expect of a fellow FOSS project, but more like a corporate FOSS bottom feeder.

So development was basically all single stream... what was useful was used but nothing was given back.

I wish people would recall this when they mention how "arrogant" Apache is, or how Apache acted in bad faith and stuff like that or that Apache wanted to "control everything". Certainly if a single, unified OO eco-system was important to LO/TDF, they had opportunities to help make that happen. Let's at least be honest here.

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#252

Post by labster » Fri, Sep 02, 2016, 9:44 PM UTC

jasonkostempski wrote: post #247

elchief wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And maybe rewrite it in C# and call it OctothorpOffice...

Coctothorp is how I pronounce C# :) That or C++++ because # looks like 4 overlapping +'s which I've always assumed is what they were hinting at.

If you pronounce it like that, what will the next version be? We don't have a nonathorp. I've always assumed the next version will be C𝄪 (for those of you who are non-musicians, that's a double sharp symbol).

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#253

Post by billforsternz » Fri, Sep 02, 2016, 9:47 PM UTC

wjoe wrote: post #154

mindcrime wrote: post #143

Well, my prediction[1] came true even faster than I anticipated. I don't understand why so many people seem so desperate to see AOO fail and go away. Hey look, if you prefer LO, fine. Some of us prefer AOO for our own reasons. There's no reason to take glee in seeing a project struggle. Anyway, none of this means the project is actually going to be retired. It's just a discussion around something that might happen. […

What reasons are there to prefer OpenOffice? From my perspective, I hear about LibreOffice updates often, and OpenOffice doesn't sound like it's being maintained as much. I don't know if this is actually correct, but I never understood what the need was for keeping them separate after Oracle gave up OO to Apache. LibreOffice seems to have 'won' popular attention if nothing else, and is the one included in distros now…

I still need OO because in the documents I work with at least, LO will not let me select certain frames. I see an awful lot of LO good OO bad comments here and elsewhere, but my user experience doesn't really conform to that pattern.

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#254

Post by bashinator » Fri, Sep 02, 2016, 9:50 PM UTC

andrepd wrote: post #244

nitrogen wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, maybe shortcuts are discoverable, but actual actions no longer are. Not everyone finds the ribbon an improvement; I feel the need to point that out since so many comments appeared praising the awfully opaque ribbon.

How so? Why are actions hidden in nested menus easier to find than in the ribbon?

Because the menus are words, describing the function of their contents at a glance.

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#255

Post by rectang » Fri, Sep 02, 2016, 9:54 PM UTC

ISV_Damocles wrote: post #250

rectang wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the time of the donation, The Document Foundation had an (understandably) antagonistic relationship with Oracle and legal foundations which were firming up but not yet solid. The assets were not going to TDF from Oracle directly. In accepting the proposal for a new Apache OpenOffice project, the ASF accepted not only the assets from Oracle but also a community, distinct from the LibreOffice community, that wanted…

What community? The only community around OpenOffice.org were the Sun/Oracle devs + the Go-OO devs getting it to work on Linux. The Go-OO devs forked it into LibreOffice and then Oracle shuttered their own work and reassigned their devs to other projects. Only a tiny handful of devs not part of Go-OO remained, and they had not been instrumental in actually maintaining the codebase as these other two groups had. There…

There were enough people on the "Initial Committers" list here to persuade the Apache Incubator PMC to adopt the project: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenOfficeProposal

Subsequently, there were enough people to vet and prepare multiple releases over the next couple years after that.

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#256

Post by jimjag » Fri, Sep 02, 2016, 10:04 PM UTC

lamarkia wrote: post #223

gpvos wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was the problem before it became an Apache project. It should not be a problem anymore.

Some AOO developers appear to have a superiority complex. It is visible in the discussion.

There are people on both sides that suffer from that condition. It does nothing to improve or further the discussion.

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#257

Post by jimjag » Fri, Sep 02, 2016, 10:07 PM UTC

cesarb wrote: post #137

jimjag wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"One possible solution would be for the OpenOffice folks to copy the Linux kernel and become an "upstream project" that others use to create a range of office-suite distributions like LibreOffice." ... which were exactly the thoughts and reasons behind Apache accepting OO in the 1st place. For various reasons this obviously never happened. But it WAS the idea from the start.

Interestingly, that could have happened. Not only did LO make the effort of rebasing all their changes on top of a particular AOO release, they also were set up to incorporate all the new work from AOO into their branch. For instance, they quickly incorporated the sidebar code. Even today, one of the LO developers still goes over each AOO change, merging any worthwhile ones. What actually happened? For some reason, d…

I think you are proving my point... AOO was "plundered" by LO but LO never gave anything back. So any "co-opporation" was extremely one-sided and one-direction. It was hoped that LO, as good FOSS neighbors, would donate back, even though they didn't have to, just as we hope that our corporate neighbors also donate back. We trust in altruism rather than in forcing it. It just so happens in this case that our trust was somewhat misguided.

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#258

Post by mzs » Fri, Sep 02, 2016, 10:08 PM UTC

sveredov wrote: post #195

jimjag wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Apache had not accepted it, Oracle was NOT going to donate it to TDF. Instead, Oracle would simply have shuttered it, or sold it to IBM. There was no workable plan ever that would have resulted in the OO code going to TDF. Even if AOO had never done a single release, LO still benefited enormously from OO going to Apache, since once at Apache, there was known and public IP provenance, AND the code was relicensed to…

The Apache Foundation could simply have accepted the OpenOffice.org codebase+trademarks from Oracle, then donate to LibreOffice. But they did not do so. The Apache Foundation does not have experience with software that end-users use. They have experience with server software. That was their undoing.

As I recall Sun and IBM had a contract cause OOo was used for Lotus Notes. Then Oracle bought Sun. Oracle had obligations to IBM from that contract. Oracle could not figure-out how to make money on OOo so wanted to get rid of it. Oracle offered it to IBM but IBM did not want it. Instead IBM suggested ASF take it on. So Oracle relicensed under ASL and transferred everything hence Apache OpenOffice was born. IBM provided most of the devs to the project at that point, even hired some Star and Sun folks for it.

While this was all happening LibreOffice formed from... what was it... Goo go or something like that, the folks that were behind the build system and distro patches that most people outside of Solaris were actually running. I have a suspicion that there were terms agreed to between IBM, Oracle, and ASF that prevented ASF from donating anything to anyone.

Now IBM has scaled back support and at this point it's an LGPL v APL religious war.

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#259

Post by jimjag » Fri, Sep 02, 2016, 10:12 PM UTC

davidgerard wrote: post #181

mindcrime wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The two forks represent two different ideologies to a large extent - "permissive" licensing vs "copyleft". Some of us think it's important to have a full-featured, world-class office suite that's under a permissive license. Others think it's important to have a full-featured, world class office suite that's copyleft. Who's to say either is wrong? Feature wise, there may not be a lot of reasons to prefer AOO right now…

So what you're saying is, LO vs AOO is real-world testing that shows a conclusive defeat of "permissive" at the hands of "copyleft", in terms of appeal to the class of users who know the difference.

"users"?? Hardly.

Instead, it shows that should copyleft people desire, they can severely damage permissive projects by simply not doing what their own license requires. They kind of prove the point that you have to force people to give back, because given their own tendencies, they won't. LO could have easily been a bilateral partner, instead of a simple consumer.

Even so, LO benefited greatly by having AOO to consume, as I have mentioned elsewhere. You simply can't ignore that nor hand-wave away it's significance.

Re: Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

#260

Post by JohnTHaller » Fri, Sep 02, 2016, 10:13 PM UTC

EdSharkey wrote: post #177

PeterisP wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the point of that wasted effort? What you're asking is "if X has no contributors, why don't Y people become contributors and start contributing?" Currently there are differences between code bases. If the OpenOffice team wants to abandon OO codebase and distribute a version of LibreOffice with some splash screen and text resource changes, then they're free to do so, it's open source.

I was thinking more like a takeover of the Open Office codebase since its organization has collapsed. Take over the administration, steering committee, etc. I can see that the codebases have diverged, but will a lot be lost if Open Office's codebase was clobbered with the LibreOffice sources?

Apache wouldn't permit that due to their distaste for LibreOffice's licensing (read: copyleft).