6 ms·

OpenOffice.org is now officially part of the Apache family

156 points by Garbage 15y ago

burgerbrain 15y ago
"We congratulate the LibreOffice community on their success over their inaugural year and wish them luck in their future endeavors. We look forward to opening up the dialogue between Open Document Format-oriented communities to deepen understanding and cease the unwarranted spread of misinformation." Interesting. I wonder how exactly they see their relationship with libreoffice going forward. Regardless, this is great news. Apache cannot possibly mishandle the project more than Sun/Oracle were.
- joelhaasnoot 15y ago
  I would completely understand that the LibreOffice folks are bitter about the whole Sun/Oracle situation, but you'd think it would be in the best interest of everyone to reconcile and merge the two branches. Yes, Apache Foundation would probably add bureaucracy, but that's not always bad.
  - bkor 15y ago
    I don't see the point really. LibreOffice already has working infrastructure, did loads of cleanup and has a working community. I don't see the point of the Apache Foundation, nor rewriting stuff just so it can have a different license.
    - melling 15y ago
      Which community is bigger? Which app suite has a larger install base. The problem is that neither app is quite comparable to Office, in my opinion; neither has stolen market share from Office. A divided community will close the gap even slower.
      - 0x12 15y ago
        Exactly. Fragmentation is the only thing that holds back the next level of open source adoption.
      - bkor 15y ago
        I was commenting on the remark that the fork should be merged. You cannot modify the source of Microsoft Office. Comparing office suites is an entirely different topic. I don't see a divided community. One project is really active and alive, then a year later OOorg tries to start something else. It seems inefficient to have this split. But that is the same for everything. Why have different languages, multiple OSes, multiple distributions, desktop environments, etc. Might be inefficient, but unless you take away peoples freedom to do what they want, I don't see this changing. Trying to compete with Microsoft Office seems futile anyway. I'd rather have a focus on making a good office suite. It doesn't really matter if it can do everything that Microsoft Office can.
        dutom 15y ago
        I believe IBM still support OOo. At the time of the fork, they were (and still are) making Lotus Symphony (free as-in beer, based on OOo code) OpenOffice.org - Apache License LibreOffice - LGPLv3
        bkor 15y ago
        I know that is the reason for starting the OOorg on Apache, so the license stuff is easier for IBM. I just don't think it'll work. Most distribution companies prefer GPL because in that case everybody benefits. You cannot take the work of all companies, then do your on thing on top and don't give back. Believe it would be easier to not have Lotus Symphony open source. That, or change strategy and rely on brandname. I don't think it matters much that something is fully open sourced and can be reused by another company. Marketing, trademark and strong brand (meaning: trusted, supported, reliable) goes a long way. Can still ask money for it, and if someone wants to give it away for free they'll have to use a different name for it (similar to the Firefox name in Debian).
    - joelhaasnoot 15y ago
      Whichever way they want to go about it, they should just merge already. Yes, they are different options in the same space with different ideas, but now is when the codebase is the closest it will likely ever be to being the same.
    - keeperofdakeys 15y ago
      The problem really is the license. LibreOffice is GPL, OpenOffice will be the Apache License, the difference being GPL requires the source of modifications to be released as GPL as well. There are many people who would want to contribute to something that isn't GPL, especially companies. A consequence of the licensing means LibreOffice can merge changes from OpenOffice, but OpenOffice can't do the same.
      - rbanffy 15y ago
        Why is being non-GPL that important?
        keeperofdakeys 15y ago
        GPL can be considered too free, forcing to to release your source code when you don't want to. This may not be desirable for some people, especially some companies, so they prefer non-GPL software. A real application of this is using a GPL piece of software in a much larger project (like a library). This would mean you would have to release the entire project as GPL, even if you don't want to release other parts as GPL. This is where things like LGPL and dual-licensing can come in, allowing you the 'freedom' to release your code with the license you want.
        rbanffy 15y ago
        If you contribute to an open-source project, your code is already released. What GPL prevents is a competitor using your code released as open-source and turning it into a competing proprietary product. Apache licenses allow that. if you fear your competitors may use your code, contributing to an Apache-licensed project is infinitely worse because then your competitors are allowed to derive their work from your contributions and never share back, something GPL would prevent.
        mcherm 15y ago
        It also prevents YOU from extending the product in some way, embedding it in your proprietary stuff, and then keeping the extensions you wrote secret from the rest of the world. Now, ME, I wouldn't be interested in keeping my extensions secret, because I don't really have anything to hide. But some folks, especially big companies, DO have something to hide. Perhaps, (not a real example) they mean to release a tablet with office software built in, but with a back-door built into the office software that allows it to secretly track all documents created and report back to the mother-ship. At least I HOPE that's not a real example.
  - pwaring 15y ago
    I'm not sure what the benefit would be to LibreOffice if they merged under the ASF. It's already a large project with lots of contributors (and an excellent 'how to get involved' section which more OSS projects should emulate), infrastructure, mailing lists etc., so what would be the benefit of being an Apache project? In my opinion, the best solution would be to leave OpenOffice.org to bitrot and ask developers to contribute to LibreOffice, given that it is the preferred suite of nearly every distribution already.
- wcchandler 15y ago
  I doubt they'll be much competition for libreoffice. Given Apache's repertoire I wouldn't be surprised if they went the cloud/web route and tried to compete with google docs or office 365.
natrius 15y ago
I was expecting a more explicit "let's get together and feel alright" overture.
swah 15y ago
What does that mean in practical terms?
tytso 15y ago
The biggest problem for OpenOffice.org as an Apache project, especially given the existence of a vibrant LibreOffice, is what companies are going to fund OpenOffice.org development and why? IBM will because they have a commercial product, sure, but who else? If there are no other companies funding significant development efforts (which in practice means they have to have a commercial product), then the rationale for a company to do all of their development in the open (and possibly risk a competitor taking their code and using it in a competing product with little or no effort contributed) tends to destroy the value of the Apache project. With Libreoffice taking away a large number of the community developers, it's not clear there will be enough non-IBM corporately funded developers to make OpenOffice.org successful.
- shareme 15y ago
  rumor has it that IBM is cancelling their commercial product..
  - tytso 15y ago
    I'm not sure that rumor is correct. Look at this comment to Brian Proffitt's article, "Has IBM kicked OpenOffice.org to the curb?". It's from an IBM'er claiming that IBM is investing a huge amount into the OpenOffice project: http://www.itworld.com/it-managementstrategy/212949/has-ibm-kicked-openofficeorg-curb#comment-14222039 http://www.itworld.com/it-managementstrategy/212949/has-ibm-...
- Stork 15y ago
  Are there really that many people working on LibreOffice/OpenOffice? Given the quality, I would say max a handful of parttime coders.
pronoiac 15y ago
Text-only Google cache: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:C82PuK6MZwoJ:https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation_statement+https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation_statement&hl=en&gl=us&strip=1 http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:C82PuK6...
ashrust 15y ago
I hope this gives rise to a web based platform for open office. I don't see it having a bright future as desktop only.
- bergie 15y ago
  There is some work related to that going on in http://webodf.org/ http://webodf.org/
RexRollman 15y ago
This whole thing was a fuck-you move by Oracle and I am surprised that Apache would be a part of this. They should defer to Libre Office and donate everything to them.
- burgerbrain 15y ago
  Can you expand on this? How is releasing their code under the Apache license, a less restrictive license than the libreoffice project uses, a "fuck-you move" to anyone?
  - RexRollman 15y ago
    Because they could have simply donated everything to Libre Office itself, instead of donating it to another organization under another license. There was no reason to do that aside from being sore losers.
    - burgerbrain 15y ago
      ... http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html
      - RexRollman 15y ago
        That doesn't solve the trademark issue.
        burgerbrain 15y ago
        The trademark issue is the only issue as far as I can tell, and I haven't actually heard anyone say that they're really bothered by it. OpenOffice.org was a pretty shitty trademark to begin with.
starik36 15y ago
Can someone give a coherent explanation as to why OpenOffice and LibreOffice should not merge?
- buff-a 15y ago
  Can you give a coherent explanation why the Republicans and Democrats should not merge? EDIT: Thank you, downvoters. I look forward to your excellent answers that do not involve politics and ideology. I'm sure you just downvoted me while you began working on your much better answers to the parent's question and I look forward to reading them.
  - burgerbrain 15y ago
    "I look forward to your excellent answers that do not involve politics and ideology." I downvoted you for not adhering to your own standards.
    - bluedanieru 15y ago
      I think he's implying that LibreOffice and OpenOffice will not merge for reasons of politics and ideology, rather than any technical reason. Strangely, choosing Democrats and Republicans to illustrate that point was probably a poor choice, considering.
- stephen_g 15y ago
  The LibreOffice project hoped they would, but Oracle didn't like the idea... Probably the biggest thing is that IBM wanted it with a more permissive licence so they could keep selling their commercial product without giving away any of their source, but the LibreOffice project wanted to keep the suite as free software (which is why all the new code that LibreOffice writes is LGPL). As it is, OpenOffice at Apache will probably bitrot - pretty much all Linux distros have switched to LibreOffice (so that's where all the developers who aren't employed by IBM or Oracle have gone), and LibreOffice can use Apache code in their product, but Apache OpenOffice can't use LibreOffice's code - so they won't benefit from the massive cleanup that the LibreOffice project has done to the codebase over the last year, or the new features they have brought in.
GameGamer43 15y ago
Unfortunately this doesn't matter given how far Libre Office has come since splitting off. I mean Libre Office already stated they have mobile version in the works, not to mention the other improvements they've brought to the project causing a lot of Linux distributions to switch to Libre Office as there default word processing suite. A little too late for Oracle and the Apache Foundation in my opinion.
adpaolucci 15y ago
Another step to kill Microsoft Office, my emotions can no be expressed in words of it actually were to kill it.

156 points by Garbage 15y ago

"We congratulate the LibreOffice community on their success over their inaugural year and wish them luck in their future endeavors. We look forward to opening up the dialogue between Open Document Format-oriented communities to deepen understanding and cease the unwarranted spread of misinformation." Interesting. I wonder how exactly they see their relationship with libreoffice going forward. Regardless, this is great news. Apache cannot possibly mishandle the project more than Sun/Oracle were.

joelhaasnoot 15y ago
I would completely understand that the LibreOffice folks are bitter about the whole Sun/Oracle situation, but you'd think it would be in the best interest of everyone to reconcile and merge the two branches. Yes, Apache Foundation would probably add bureaucracy, but that's not always bad.
- bkor 15y ago
  I don't see the point really. LibreOffice already has working infrastructure, did loads of cleanup and has a working community. I don't see the point of the Apache Foundation, nor rewriting stuff just so it can have a different license.
  - melling 15y ago
    Which community is bigger? Which app suite has a larger install base. The problem is that neither app is quite comparable to Office, in my opinion; neither has stolen market share from Office. A divided community will close the gap even slower.
    - 0x12 15y ago
      Exactly. Fragmentation is the only thing that holds back the next level of open source adoption.
    - bkor 15y ago
      I was commenting on the remark that the fork should be merged. You cannot modify the source of Microsoft Office. Comparing office suites is an entirely different topic. I don't see a divided community. One project is really active and alive, then a year later OOorg tries to start something else. It seems inefficient to have this split. But that is the same for everything. Why have different languages, multiple OSes, multiple distributions, desktop environments, etc. Might be inefficient, but unless you take away peoples freedom to do what they want, I don't see this changing. Trying to compete with Microsoft Office seems futile anyway. I'd rather have a focus on making a good office suite. It doesn't really matter if it can do everything that Microsoft Office can.
      - dutom 15y ago
        I believe IBM still support OOo. At the time of the fork, they were (and still are) making Lotus Symphony (free as-in beer, based on OOo code) OpenOffice.org - Apache License LibreOffice - LGPLv3
        bkor 15y ago
        I know that is the reason for starting the OOorg on Apache, so the license stuff is easier for IBM. I just don't think it'll work. Most distribution companies prefer GPL because in that case everybody benefits. You cannot take the work of all companies, then do your on thing on top and don't give back. Believe it would be easier to not have Lotus Symphony open source. That, or change strategy and rely on brandname. I don't think it matters much that something is fully open sourced and can be reused by another company. Marketing, trademark and strong brand (meaning: trusted, supported, reliable) goes a long way. Can still ask money for it, and if someone wants to give it away for free they'll have to use a different name for it (similar to the Firefox name in Debian).
  - joelhaasnoot 15y ago
    Whichever way they want to go about it, they should just merge already. Yes, they are different options in the same space with different ideas, but now is when the codebase is the closest it will likely ever be to being the same.
  - keeperofdakeys 15y ago
    The problem really is the license. LibreOffice is GPL, OpenOffice will be the Apache License, the difference being GPL requires the source of modifications to be released as GPL as well. There are many people who would want to contribute to something that isn't GPL, especially companies. A consequence of the licensing means LibreOffice can merge changes from OpenOffice, but OpenOffice can't do the same.
    - rbanffy 15y ago
      Why is being non-GPL that important?
      - keeperofdakeys 15y ago
        GPL can be considered too free, forcing to to release your source code when you don't want to. This may not be desirable for some people, especially some companies, so they prefer non-GPL software. A real application of this is using a GPL piece of software in a much larger project (like a library). This would mean you would have to release the entire project as GPL, even if you don't want to release other parts as GPL. This is where things like LGPL and dual-licensing can come in, allowing you the 'freedom' to release your code with the license you want.
        rbanffy 15y ago
        If you contribute to an open-source project, your code is already released. What GPL prevents is a competitor using your code released as open-source and turning it into a competing proprietary product. Apache licenses allow that. if you fear your competitors may use your code, contributing to an Apache-licensed project is infinitely worse because then your competitors are allowed to derive their work from your contributions and never share back, something GPL would prevent.
        mcherm 15y ago
        It also prevents YOU from extending the product in some way, embedding it in your proprietary stuff, and then keeping the extensions you wrote secret from the rest of the world. Now, ME, I wouldn't be interested in keeping my extensions secret, because I don't really have anything to hide. But some folks, especially big companies, DO have something to hide. Perhaps, (not a real example) they mean to release a tablet with office software built in, but with a back-door built into the office software that allows it to secretly track all documents created and report back to the mother-ship. At least I HOPE that's not a real example.
- pwaring 15y ago
  I'm not sure what the benefit would be to LibreOffice if they merged under the ASF. It's already a large project with lots of contributors (and an excellent 'how to get involved' section which more OSS projects should emulate), infrastructure, mailing lists etc., so what would be the benefit of being an Apache project? In my opinion, the best solution would be to leave OpenOffice.org to bitrot and ask developers to contribute to LibreOffice, given that it is the preferred suite of nearly every distribution already.
wcchandler 15y ago
I doubt they'll be much competition for libreoffice. Given Apache's repertoire I wouldn't be surprised if they went the cloud/web route and tried to compete with google docs or office 365.

natrius 15y ago

I was expecting a more explicit "let's get together and feel alright" overture.

swah 15y ago

What does that mean in practical terms?

tytso 15y ago

The biggest problem for OpenOffice.org as an Apache project, especially given the existence of a vibrant LibreOffice, is what companies are going to fund OpenOffice.org development and why? IBM will because they have a commercial product, sure, but who else? If there are no other companies funding significant development efforts (which in practice means they have to have a commercial product), then the rationale for a company to do all of their development in the open (and possibly risk a competitor taking their code and using it in a competing product with little or no effort contributed) tends to destroy the value of the Apache project. With Libreoffice taking away a large number of the community developers, it's not clear there will be enough non-IBM corporately funded developers to make OpenOffice.org successful.

shareme 15y ago
rumor has it that IBM is cancelling their commercial product..
- tytso 15y ago
  I'm not sure that rumor is correct. Look at this comment to Brian Proffitt's article, "Has IBM kicked OpenOffice.org to the curb?". It's from an IBM'er claiming that IBM is investing a huge amount into the OpenOffice project: http://www.itworld.com/it-managementstrategy/212949/has-ibm-kicked-openofficeorg-curb#comment-14222039 http://www.itworld.com/it-managementstrategy/212949/has-ibm-...
Stork 15y ago
Are there really that many people working on LibreOffice/OpenOffice? Given the quality, I would say max a handful of parttime coders.

pronoiac 15y ago

Text-only Google cache: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:C82PuK6MZwoJ:https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation_statement+https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation_statement&hl=en&gl=us&strip=1 http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:C82PuK6...

ashrust 15y ago

I hope this gives rise to a web based platform for open office. I don't see it having a bright future as desktop only.

bergie 15y ago
There is some work related to that going on in http://webodf.org/ http://webodf.org/

RexRollman 15y ago

This whole thing was a fuck-you move by Oracle and I am surprised that Apache would be a part of this. They should defer to Libre Office and donate everything to them.

burgerbrain 15y ago
Can you expand on this? How is releasing their code under the Apache license, a less restrictive license than the libreoffice project uses, a "fuck-you move" to anyone?
- RexRollman 15y ago
  Because they could have simply donated everything to Libre Office itself, instead of donating it to another organization under another license. There was no reason to do that aside from being sore losers.
  - burgerbrain 15y ago
    ... http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html
    - RexRollman 15y ago
      That doesn't solve the trademark issue.
      - burgerbrain 15y ago
        The trademark issue is the only issue as far as I can tell, and I haven't actually heard anyone say that they're really bothered by it. OpenOffice.org was a pretty shitty trademark to begin with.

starik36 15y ago

Can someone give a coherent explanation as to why OpenOffice and LibreOffice should not merge?

buff-a 15y ago
Can you give a coherent explanation why the Republicans and Democrats should not merge? EDIT: Thank you, downvoters. I look forward to your excellent answers that do not involve politics and ideology. I'm sure you just downvoted me while you began working on your much better answers to the parent's question and I look forward to reading them.
- burgerbrain 15y ago
  "I look forward to your excellent answers that do not involve politics and ideology." I downvoted you for not adhering to your own standards.
  - bluedanieru 15y ago
    I think he's implying that LibreOffice and OpenOffice will not merge for reasons of politics and ideology, rather than any technical reason. Strangely, choosing Democrats and Republicans to illustrate that point was probably a poor choice, considering.
stephen_g 15y ago
The LibreOffice project hoped they would, but Oracle didn't like the idea... Probably the biggest thing is that IBM wanted it with a more permissive licence so they could keep selling their commercial product without giving away any of their source, but the LibreOffice project wanted to keep the suite as free software (which is why all the new code that LibreOffice writes is LGPL). As it is, OpenOffice at Apache will probably bitrot - pretty much all Linux distros have switched to LibreOffice (so that's where all the developers who aren't employed by IBM or Oracle have gone), and LibreOffice can use Apache code in their product, but Apache OpenOffice can't use LibreOffice's code - so they won't benefit from the massive cleanup that the LibreOffice project has done to the codebase over the last year, or the new features they have brought in.

GameGamer43 15y ago

Unfortunately this doesn't matter given how far Libre Office has come since splitting off. I mean Libre Office already stated they have mobile version in the works, not to mention the other improvements they've brought to the project causing a lot of Linux distributions to switch to Libre Office as there default word processing suite. A little too late for Oracle and the Apache Foundation in my opinion.

adpaolucci 15y ago

Another step to kill Microsoft Office, my emotions can no be expressed in words of it actually were to kill it.