An open letter to Apache OpenOffice
([Development] Oct 13, 2020 14:14 UTC (Tue) (corbet))
- Reference: 0000834121
- News link: https://lwn.net/Articles/834121/
- Source link:
On the 20th anniversary of the open-sourcing of the OpenOffice.org suite, the LibreOffice project has sent [1]an open letter to the Apache OpenOffice project suggesting that it is time for the latter to recognize that the game is over. " If Apache OpenOffice wants to still maintain its old 4.1 branch from 2014, sure, that’s important for legacy users. But the most responsible thing to do in 2020 is: help new users. Make them aware that there’s a much more modern, up-to-date, professionally supported suite, based on OpenOffice, with many extra features that people need. "
[1] https://blog.documentfoundation.org/blog/2020/10/12/open-letter-to-apache-openoffice/
[1] https://blog.documentfoundation.org/blog/2020/10/12/open-letter-to-apache-openoffice/
An open letter to Apache OpenOffice
To save anybody else from skimming back, here is what AOO's official contributions to Apache's board have written about the smallest incremental feature release, AOO 4.2.0, something I argued that a healthy dev team ought to be able to get out the door in a few weeks back in 2016.
Jan 2017: Apache OpenOffice 4.2.0 is planned for this year - but without to name a specific time frame
July 2017: Apache OpenOffice 4.2.0 is also planned for this year - but without to name a specific time frame
Jan 2018: The next major release will be 4.2.0 with a target to publish in 2018.
July 2018: 4.2.0 is the next minor release, planned to be released into a beta phase within this year.
Feb 2019: 4.2.0 is the next minor release, planned to be released into a beta phase.
July 2019: 4.2.0 is the next minor release, planned to be released into a beta phase.
Jan 2020: 4.2.0 is the next minor release, planned to be released into a beta phase.
July 2020: 4.2.0 is the next minor release, planned to be released into a beta phase.
An open letter to Apache OpenOffice
To save anybody else from skimming back, here is what AOO's official contributions to Apache's board have written about the smallest incremental feature release, AOO 4.2.0, something I argued that a healthy dev team ought to be able to get out the door in a few weeks back in 2016.
Jan 2017: Apache OpenOffice 4.2.0 is planned for this year - but without to name a specific time frame
July 2017: Apache OpenOffice 4.2.0 is also planned for this year - but without to name a specific time frame
Jan 2018: The next major release will be 4.2.0 with a target to publish in 2018.
July 2018: 4.2.0 is the next minor release, planned to be released into a beta phase within this year.
Feb 2019: 4.2.0 is the next minor release, planned to be released into a beta phase.
July 2019: 4.2.0 is the next minor release, planned to be released into a beta phase.
Jan 2020: 4.2.0 is the next minor release, planned to be released into a beta phase.
July 2020: 4.2.0 is the next minor release, planned to be released into a beta phase.
An open letter to Apache OpenOffice
Apache were only embarrassing themselves with it from the day they took it over.
They can act as custodian for the name, maybe, but actually pushing the software forward is far beyond anything they've demonstrated they can do with it thus far.
They need to call it a day. Or remerge LibreOffice back into the fold, rename it to OpenOffice again and at least START on a level footing again. There's nothing in the licensing that would prevent that, as far as I know.
And splitting development effort like that is damaging to everyone, and people are STILL using the old name to search for the software they want, and then are bitterly disappointed at the state of it when they get it. It actually hurts LibreOffice and The Document Foundation in that regard - people remember OpenOffice but it's not a patch on LibreOffice while techy people automatically convert "Open" to "Libre" in their head whenever it's mentioned.
Apache really need to do the decent thing, and either license the name somehow or pull in the stables of LibreOffice and push them as OpenOffice.
I'm pretty disappointed in the Apache Foundation, to be honest, with their handling of the whole thing. It's tearing a community in two, one half of which is far lesser, completely stagnated, was insecure for a long period of time because of lack of development, and yet receives the lion's-share of Google searches and brand-name recognition, while the other half are doing all the work, making an excellent product, and struggling for recognition and (thus) cash. If they were actually DOING anything with it, it wouldn't be so bad, even if it was a rival commercial product or similar.
But it appears nothing more than spite by this point, to cling onto the name but not want to put in any effort, recognise any outside effort, or pass the torch on.
An open letter to Apache OpenOffice
Apache were only embarrassing themselves with it from the day they took it over.
They can act as custodian for the name, maybe, but actually pushing the software forward is far beyond anything they've demonstrated they can do with it thus far.
They need to call it a day. Or remerge LibreOffice back into the fold, rename it to OpenOffice again and at least START on a level footing again. There's nothing in the licensing that would prevent that, as far as I know.
And splitting development effort like that is damaging to everyone, and people are STILL using the old name to search for the software they want, and then are bitterly disappointed at the state of it when they get it. It actually hurts LibreOffice and The Document Foundation in that regard - people remember OpenOffice but it's not a patch on LibreOffice while techy people automatically convert "Open" to "Libre" in their head whenever it's mentioned.
Apache really need to do the decent thing, and either license the name somehow or pull in the stables of LibreOffice and push them as OpenOffice.
I'm pretty disappointed in the Apache Foundation, to be honest, with their handling of the whole thing. It's tearing a community in two, one half of which is far lesser, completely stagnated, was insecure for a long period of time because of lack of development, and yet receives the lion's-share of Google searches and brand-name recognition, while the other half are doing all the work, making an excellent product, and struggling for recognition and (thus) cash. If they were actually DOING anything with it, it wouldn't be so bad, even if it was a rival commercial product or similar.
But it appears nothing more than spite by this point, to cling onto the name but not want to put in any effort, recognise any outside effort, or pass the torch on.
An open letter to Apache OpenOffice
> They need to call it a day. Or remerge LibreOffice back into the fold, rename it to OpenOffice again and at least START on a level footing again. There's nothing in the licensing that would prevent that, as far as I know.
There is nothing stopping LibreOffice merging code *from* Apache OpenOffice. However, if AOO tried to do the reverse, they would have to relicense to GPL, which I believe violates ASF's policies.
> Apache really need to do the decent thing, and either license the name somehow or pull in the stables of LibreOffice and push them as OpenOffice.
My (possibly wrong) understanding is:
- Projects are independent, and can decide whether they are active or inactive, provided they still have enough of a community to actually make that decision.
- The ASF theoretically owns the name, but it would be a severe violation of norms for them to hand it over to a direct competitor to the project that's using that name.
(from [1]http://community.apache.org/projectIndependence.html )
So nothing is going to change unless the AOO project agrees to it or dies of natural causes.
> But it appears nothing more than spite by this point, to cling onto the name but not want to put in any effort, recognise any outside effort, or pass the torch on.
Indeed, this is a travesty. I just don't see how the ASF is supposed to fix it without violating their own principles.
[1] http://community.apache.org/projectIndependence.html
An open letter to Apache OpenOffice
> They need to call it a day. Or remerge LibreOffice back into the fold, rename it to OpenOffice again and at least START on a level footing again. There's nothing in the licensing that would prevent that, as far as I know.
There is nothing stopping LibreOffice merging code *from* Apache OpenOffice. However, if AOO tried to do the reverse, they would have to relicense to GPL, which I believe violates ASF's policies.
> Apache really need to do the decent thing, and either license the name somehow or pull in the stables of LibreOffice and push them as OpenOffice.
My (possibly wrong) understanding is:
- Projects are independent, and can decide whether they are active or inactive, provided they still have enough of a community to actually make that decision.
- The ASF theoretically owns the name, but it would be a severe violation of norms for them to hand it over to a direct competitor to the project that's using that name.
(from [1]http://community.apache.org/projectIndependence.html )
So nothing is going to change unless the AOO project agrees to it or dies of natural causes.
> But it appears nothing more than spite by this point, to cling onto the name but not want to put in any effort, recognise any outside effort, or pass the torch on.
Indeed, this is a travesty. I just don't see how the ASF is supposed to fix it without violating their own principles.
[1] http://community.apache.org/projectIndependence.html
An open letter to Apache OpenOffice
Jim Jagielski's heels appear to be firmly dug in… [1]https://twitter.com/jimjag/status/1316000871109586949
> FTR: If @tdforg is serious about working together, then they could start by allowing @ApacheOO the same benefit which they constantly and consistently take advantage of: using contributions in one project that were originally destined to the other. Dual license commits!
> After all, it's not @ApacheOO who is constantly whining about working together, or to "do the right thing", while doing not one whit to actually make it happen. "The lady doth protest too much, methinks"
[1] https://twitter.com/jimjag/status/1316000871109586949