On 01/06/2011 17:33, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Jukka Zitting<jukka.zitt...@gmail.com> wrote on 06/01/2011 12:13:09 PM:
Community
OpenOffice.org. seeks to further encourage developer and user
communities
during incubation, beyond the existing developers currently working on
the
project.
Any thoughts on how (or if) the LibreOffice community would fit into
this picture?
There are many projects, open source and proprietary that are derived from
Sun/Oracle's original OpenOffice project.
I made a diagram of this on a blog post a while ago:
http://www.robweir.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/oo-forks.png
http://www.robweir.com/blog/2010/11/the-legacy-of-openoffice-org.html
So I think we want to consider all of this. This code base, although not
your typical piece of componentry, does appear to have been treated as
something that could be customized, repackaged and redistributed. I don't
have the exactly numbers, but there are significant users of the following
OpenOffice derivatives:
- LibreOffice
- IBM Lotus Symphony
- EuroOffice
- BrOffice (which some would say is a derivative of LibreOffice)
- RedOffice
In all cases there are several overlapping communities:
- a community of developers
- a community of users
- a community of supporters, trainers, consultants, etc.
We'll need to work out how these related, and especially which of these
community functions are a good fit for an eventual Apache TLP, and which
things fit better outside of Apache. But my recommendation is that we
encourage the core development of the editors to occur in Apache, while
making it easy, via a modular extension mechanism, a modular install, etc.
for others to customize and redistribute as permitted by the Apache 2.0
license.
OK, but what about the TDF people. Where do they appear here? Is this
another donation of a dead brand after the OSS people forked off the
project and kept it going? Like the donation of Hudson to Eclipse after
the Jenkins fork?
I don't trust oracle since the Harmony mess. If they did support the
Apache license, why don't they provide the TCK for the JDK without
imposing Field of Use restrictions? That would be a sign of support for
apache-licensed code?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
