On 10/18/2010 01:52 PM, Italo Vignoli wrote:
This clearly shows that we are acting properly, and the people assuming that we are calling or considering them "Oracle bad guys" are wrong.
I think it's a challenge for people not in the inner circle of the OOo community (most of us) to differentiate between Oracle the company, which is rebuffing LibO (apparently), and Oracle the set of individuals, who have worked so hard over many years to make OOo great.
I don't know the Oracle employees, but I've heard many good things said about them on this list. I think Oracle the company is wrong/bad/a-disappointment for not wanting to join LibO. An independent foundation was contemplated from the beginning of opening OOo, Oracle should have expected it to come eventually if they didn't make it themselves, and it is the best way to encourage outside collaboration (which has been a big problem). By choosing not to join, Oracle will create an unnecessary split, duplication of effort for developers, and at least temporary confusion for users. If they continue to not participate or donate the OOo trademark, I think OOo will wither and LibO will grow -- but it's an unnecessary growing pain to have users learn that LibO is the more active continuation of the OOo suite they've already become used to. On the other hand, in the long term, having TDF against Oracle's will is better than not having TDF.
----Jon
--
E-mail to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted