3 ms·

Here's an idea. If OpenOffice has no contributors. How about all the libreoffice folks start committing to both code bases or mirror them, whatever? Maybe th

Here's an idea. If OpenOffice has no contributors. How about all the libreoffice folks start committing to both code bases or mirror them, whatever? Maybe the only thing that differs between the code bases is some splash screen and text resource bundles, ultimately. Why not bury the hatchet, devs?

PeterisP 10y ago
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.
- EdSharkey 10y ago
  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?
  - JohnTHaller 10y ago
    Apache wouldn't permit that due to their distaste for LibreOffice's licensing (read: copyleft).
    - rectang 10y ago
      LibreOffice doesn't like Apache's licensing, but AOO is happy to share the code with them and they are happy to consume it. Both sides have strong beliefs, but the licensing situation benefits the copyleft faction.
sveredov 10y ago
Committing on both repositories is not practical, because the source code has diverged too much between the two. It's now too much effort and requires brain power to do. I have not seen blame from LibreOffice developers and I do not understand what is being said in the AOO discussion. Instead, the Apache OpenOpenOffice people took advantage of the openoffice.org domain. They should have put on openoffice.org that the old OOo has been forked into AOO, LibreOffice and NeoOffice. However, what they did is not mention at all that LibreOffice is one of the options out of the defunct OpenOffice.org.

PeterisP 10y ago

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.

EdSharkey 10y ago
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?
- JohnTHaller 10y ago
  Apache wouldn't permit that due to their distaste for LibreOffice's licensing (read: copyleft).
  - rectang 10y ago
    LibreOffice doesn't like Apache's licensing, but AOO is happy to share the code with them and they are happy to consume it. Both sides have strong beliefs, but the licensing situation benefits the copyleft faction.

sveredov 10y ago

Committing on both repositories is not practical, because the source code has diverged too much between the two. It's now too much effort and requires brain power to do. I have not seen blame from LibreOffice developers and I do not understand what is being said in the AOO discussion. Instead, the Apache OpenOpenOffice people took advantage of the openoffice.org domain. They should have put on openoffice.org that the old OOo has been forked into AOO, LibreOffice and NeoOffice. However, what they did is not mention at all that LibreOffice is one of the options out of the defunct OpenOffice.org.