As different "technical press" outlets make their own derivations of other articles, there is incorrect quotation and reference to historical matters that have nothing to do with the present state and how we move forward.
For me, the LWN and ArsTechnica coverage is relatively fact-based. Now, there are some others that tend to be more responsible with regard to journalism: * PCWorld <http://www.pcworld.com/article/3116445/open-source-tools/openoffice-coders-debate-retiring-the-project.html>. * ZDNet, on the other hand, is lazily derivative by borrowing on other articles. It also shows ignorance of how Apache projects operate when it mentions "lack of funding." and perpetuates the idea that Microsoft Office or LibreOffice be switched to in the CVE advisory. The statement about other products was for testing dodgy Impress documents that users might be concerned about. In any case, now that there is a hotfix, Version 2.0 of the advisory does not need to address that. <http://www.zdnet.com/article/onetime-ms-office-challenger-openoffice-we-may-shut-down-due-to-dwindling-support/>. Finally, this discussion is not a zero-sum game. Striving to expand development coverage and address the need to be able to make timely maintenance updates for dangerous defects, including security vulnerabilities are all important. This [DISCUSS] is about anticipating all of the stages and moving parts to address as part of any graceful retirement. That there is also inspiration of non-retirement alternatives is very useful and the rush to address that is heartening. But all paths are contingent on having the capacity to act and adequate expert capabilities. If retirement is the direction taken, that must also be while there is the capacity to carry it out. It is also important to understand that this public list is *the* place to address all of that. It is how the Apache Software Foundation provides transparency and embraces its community in developing its technical approaches, always striving to serve the public interest as required in its Charter. Being suppressed by worries of outside scrutiny and adversarial articles and responses is not something that should dissuade us. Problems have to be faced bravely and openly. - Dennis > -----Original Message----- > From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org] > Sent: Friday, September 2, 2016 10:40 > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Involve? (long) > > And here's another: > <http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/09/openoffice-after- > years-of-neglect-could-shut-down/>. > > This one is also rather straightforward, using this list for its > sources. > > I looked through the comments. There is nothing that we haven't seen > before. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org] > > Sent: Friday, September 2, 2016 08:05 > > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Involve? > (long) > > > > Also, <http://lwn.net/Articles/699047/>. > > > > The article itself is very straightforward. The comments wander > around > > all over the place with the usual pontifications about corporate > > influence, etc. > > > > An important point is made, by the way, over how it is that > LibreOffice > > deployment is far easier than that for AOO, and also much improved. > > > > - Dennios > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: RA Stehmann [mailto:anw...@rechtsanwalt-stehmann.de] > > > Sent: Friday, September 2, 2016 04:01 > > > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Involve? > > (long) > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > our discussion became public: > > > > > > http://www.linux-magazin.de/content/view/full/106599 > > > > > > This shows a public interest. So "going public" seems not to > > difficult. > > > > > > Kind regards > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
