incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Niall Pemberton <>
Subject Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?
Date Sun, 05 Jun 2011 22:51:50 GMT
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Phil Steitz <> wrote:
> On 6/5/11 11:21 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Christian Grobmeier <> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> I have tried to follow as much as emails as possible but it's
>>> overwhelming. Anyway I feel that several questions do not longer
>>> belong to the pre-incubation phase but should be clarified after we
>>> have accepted the podling. Many questions are around "Can/Should we
>>> have a second office community?", "is ASL better or GPL", "can we
>>> handle all the dependencies" or "what direction should it go". I mean
>>> "svn vs git" is really a topic for the openopffice-dev list.
>>> Most of them are all questions we can answer when have a podling - we
>>> need votes to decide and a podling population. At the moment its just
>>> noise. And to be honest, a separate ML for these issues would be also
>>> cool.
>>> My question: are we already able to vote for the podling or not?
>>> If no - what questions need to be answered before we vote?
>> This proposal raises lots of questions, but the requirements for
>> entering the incubator are not high and so IMO don't need to be
>> answered before a vote. The only reason I believe for rejecting this
>> proposal would be because it would be in the best interests of the
>> community to not split the FOSS development and compete with
>> LibreOffice.
>> I think we should seriously consider that before voting.
>> I agree with all the arguments that ASF members have been putting
>> forward about the good things for an OO project here at the ASF. I
>> much prefer the Apache License and the freedom it provides to that of
>> copyleft licenses. The ASF is a great home for projects and has a long
>> history with established processes and policies. However, I have great
>> respect for what LibreOffice have done and the community they have
>> established. The copyleft license isn't ideal IMO, but other than that
>> I have great respect for what they've managed to setup and the vibrant
>> community that they've established. If LibreOffice hadn't happened
>> then I think it would be better to have an OO project here at the ASF.
>> But it has and they are too far down the road and have expended too
>> much effort to make it appealing for them to join in here.
>> We should also remember that, with Oracle abandoning OO, we are being
>> used to facilitate their business relations with IBM. IBM could (and
>> still can) decide to put its efforts into LibreOffice and while we may
>> have philosophical differences over license, they surely don't as we
>> witnessed when they transferred their efforts from our Harmony project
>> to the GPL'd OpenJDK.
> Interesting point.  I wonder if there is an explanation for this
> inconsistency from the IBM perspective.
>> IMO the only negative thing then about LibreOffice is the copyleft
>> license - everything else about them is great. When deciding whether
>> to accept OO we should consider whether that and facilitating BigCos
>> interests is worth splitting the FOSS community.
>> I am considering voting -1 to this proposal for those reasons.
> I share your concerns; but the fact is we have no "content"
> requirements in the Incubator.  We have never imposed technical,
> political or business requirements on podlings.  As a result, we
> have been "used" to promote silly (IMO) middleware bloat and
> proprietary code dumps.  On the other hand, we have grown some
> decent communities around stuff that smelled at first.  Each time
> something smelly like this shows up, I ask myself whether it makes
> sense to push for "standards," but I have a hard time coming up with
> a set of principles that we would likely agree on.  Can you?

No I can't - but if enough people have concerns then theres probably a
good reason for it. If not then it deserves to pass.



> Phil
>> Niall
>>> I saw there is a lot of support for this proposal and the initial
>>> committers list has grown immense in just a few days. There is already
>>> a good amount of mentors and I will add myself too. Code grant seems
>>> to be OK and all the other entry criterias seem to be taken. If the
>>> would vote would be today, I would vote +1 clearly, because everything
>>> we want in the Incubator seem to be solved.
>>> Again are we able to vote on the podling? If no, please specifiy why?
>>> Cheers,
>>> Christian
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message