I am puzzled a little bit about the idea of "loyalty to the original"
OpenOffice.
1. The original OpenOffice.org was operated by a proprietary company, although
the code was made available as open-source. But ownership was held by Sun
Microsystems for their proprietary purposes. There was great value to
OpenOffice.org, but not so much because it was open-source. I think key
benefits were support for ODF format, multiple-platform support, and degree of
support for Microsoft formats. There was no open-source governance in this
arrangement.
When LibreOffice forked that code, as the license allowed, some were
unhappy in any case.
2. When Oracle acquired Sun Microsystems, OpenOffice.org became their property
in the same manner as at Sun.
3. When Oracle concluded that continuation of OpenOffice.org was not in their
interests, they chose to grant the ASF a license to use the code base and to
provide it under a license of the ASF's choosing (always Apache License of
course). This is how Apache OpenOffice arose. AOO became Apache Project after
being in Apache Incubator. People interested in supporting OpenOffice.org
signed-up to contribute to the incubator and some formed the original Project
Management Committee for AOO. AOO has always been an Apache Project.
What "original OpenOffice" is thought of here?
- Dennis
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jörg Schmidt [mailto:joe...@j-m-schmidt.de]
> Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2017 13:17
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
> Subject: Re: Community building: give our User a chance to contribute!
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@apache.org]
>
> > Apache Projects all produce software free to the public.
> > Nothing more.
>
> Is a office-programming-projekt under Apache Licence not a free project?
>
> > Coming into the Incubator means operating
> > under the Incubator PMC with an existing *software* project
> > that can stand on its feet better as part of Apache Community.
>
> yes, clear
>
> > I think it is appropriate to find the simplest thing that can
> > possibly work.
> >
> > I recommend following Raphael's recommendation.
>
> Sorry, but my interest is the original (= Openoffice) and no third party
> project.
>
> I do not think the ASF would allow a crowd funding campaign for AOO <TM>
> and a crowd funding campaign war Raphaels suggestion.
>
> > If at least
> > that can work, then one has a foundation for something.
>
> Yes, for a third party project ... for that I have no interest.
>
>
>
> My summary is:
> I am absolutely incomprehensible why in an Apache project always to
> point to the way out of a third party project, instead of thinking about
> developing own rules further.
>
> If we continue to do so, we will weaken the "OpenOffice" brand, although
> we should strengthen this brand.
>
>
> Greetings,
> Jörg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
