incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jochen Wiedmann <>
Subject Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?
Date Mon, 06 Jun 2011 15:04:31 GMT
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 3:52 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. <> wrote:

> To the extent that OOo presents the incubator with something the ASF has
> not faced, you are correct... these things we have no standards yet to
> measure whether a podling should be accepted.  To the extent that it is
> the same, or similar, as many other incubator podlings, it should be
> allowed to proceed without changing those standards.  The question is,
> in which ways is OOo unique to the ASF?  We've had some good discussions
> here on these points.

Let me summarize what I do see as unique points:

- Code duplication: We frequently had projects that duplicated another
projects scope, or whatever you name it. But we never before had a
case, where there is an existing open source project with almost
identical source code.
- Community overlap: Most likely as a consequence of the previous
point, we never before had a case, where there is an external, and, to
the best of my knowledge, working community that is so interested in
the proposed project while at the same time wishing not to join. That
in common with the code duplication means that all we can really do
better is the choice of license. That may be sufficient for most, but
not all of us.
- Audience: Apache audience has traditionally been system admins,
developers, and so on. As a consequence, Apache projects are typically
having a community of some hundred or thousand users. Those hundreds
or thousands are typically aware of what Apache can and cannot do.
This project aims to be used by millions. We must realistically expect
that a lot of additions and modifications must be made for this
project in terms of infrastructure, policies, and structures. Users
will be more helpless and unaware as they usually are. What worked for
all and every existing Apache project will most likely not work for
this one.
- Concentration on binaries: Apache projects are usually all about
source code. For example, Apache httpd is still distributing binaries
for Windows and Netware (!) only. For this project, a release will
possibly consist of a single tar ball plus several hundred or even
thousand binaries: A myriad of localized variants, several platforms
(at least Windows 32/64, Mac) are already for sure, but it is easy to
imagine additional variants. Such releases can no longer be controlled
in the traditional way. Which PMC member would really bother to
inspect some hundred files when asked for a positive vote?
- Efforts overlap: Again, as a consequence of the points, we never
before had a case, where there is an external organization that will
basically do just the same stuff: Build scripts for binaries, running
a build infrastructure, reapply our patches, and so on. That means a
real lot of duplicated efforts with no additional value.


Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men
will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of

John Maynard Keynes (

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

View raw message