incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ian Lynch <>
Subject Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?
Date Mon, 06 Jun 2011 15:46:21 GMT
On 6 June 2011 16:39, Richard S. Hall <> wrote:

> On 6/6/11 11:26, Simos Xenitellis wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Richard S. Hall<>
>>  wrote:
>>> On 6/6/11 10:41, Manfred A. Reiter wrote:
>>>> Hi Richard, *
>>>> 2011/6/6 Richard S. Hall<>
>>>>> On 6/6/11 2:48, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/5/11 11:26 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/6/2011 1:06 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Phil Steitz<>
>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>  [...]
>>>>  Disclaimer: I work for Oracle, but certainly don't speak for them and I
>>>>> knew nothing about this other than what i've read on these mailing
>>>>> lists...
>>>>> However, it seems like we have lost sight of the fact that TDF split
>>>>> the
>>>>> community from OOo. Sure, Oracle is the perceived villain and TDF the
>>>>> perceived good guy, but it doesn't change the fact that OOo created the
>>>>> community in the first place.
>>>>>  Fact: Your employer provoked the split, by a absolute
>>>> "non-communication" on the existing mailinglist.
>>>> Now, to say that TDF has split the Communtiy is dishonest!
>>> Forking splits communities. Whether you feel you had a justified reason
>>> for
>>> doing so does not change this fact. I am not weighing in on whether it is
>>> right or wrong in this case, since I think that is immaterial to where we
>>> are now.
>>>  That's an example of denial. I do not see a conductive environment here
>> if such attitudes are tolerated.
>>  I am only going by the "facts" as presented on the various Apache mailing
>>> lists. If it is true that TDF was engaged by Oracle/IBM before the Apache
>>> proposal, but failed to come to terms, then I cannot see how one can
>>> claim
>>> that the Apache proposal was merely an attempt to split the community.
>>>  You should read more about free and open-source software, from diverse
>> sources.
>> Get a subscription.
>> Similar example, there was XFree86 long time ago that behaved just
>> like the Oracle developers.
>> Then, it was forked into X.Org and everyone moved to X.Org.
>> XFree86 is a distant memory.
> Ok, forget the first part of what I originally said, since it doesn't
> really matter and apparently it prevents any discussion of the second
> part...
> The second part was, was TDF actually engaged and failed to come to terms
> or not? That is what I've read, so I accepted this as true.
> If so, do you actually believe the Apache proposal is just a stick in the
> eye of the TDF by Oracle/IBM because they were angry they couldn't come to
> terms? Or do you believe that because they couldn't come to terms they
> created this proposal to form their own community of like-minded people?
> I would have to assume the latter, not the former.

And the natural extension is that if there is no home for the OOo code with
Apache where will it end up? That scenario is not without risk either.

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message