Mark Preston wrote: > > But to be honest, the code was such a tangled and complex > mess that I would have needed months of work just going through code > before I even tried to change a single command. > > I am slightly concerned that, even now, there is a damn good chance > the code for LibreOffice is still much the same tangled (and > uncommented) mess. > Interesting... If I were in a snarky mood, I might note that the word "kludge" comes from klug, a German adjective meaning smart/intelligent. (Most likely, though, this is only an exaggerated stereotype and cultural differences are not that large.)
But, if the original developers who are intimately familiar, from 10+ years of daily work, with the codebase are all still at Oracle... how is that knowledge going to migrate to LibreOffice? Also: what's to stop Oracle from doubling or tripling its resources on Oracle OpenOffice (not OpenOffice.org) development to pull far ahead of LibreOffice? This may be a very dumb question to ask, so please forgive my ignorance. To save yourself typing, feel free to point me at webpages where these questions were discussed already. Here are some pages that I've come across as I've looked for information: https://liorkaplan.wordpress.com/2010/12/16/oracle-open-office-3-3-vs-openoffice-org-3-3/#comment-1499 (highly critical of the LibreOffice "fork") https://lwn.net/Articles/414051/ (pretty bullish on LO) http://asay.blogspot.com/2005/09/analyst-nature-and-size-of-open-source.html (nuanced skepticism about the open source "community") -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Two-questions-about-course-of-LO-tp2757230p2761051.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted