Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora To Look At Reviving Apache OpenOffice

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Fedora To Look At Reviving Apache OpenOffice

    Phoronix: Fedora To Look At Reviving Apache OpenOffice

    Most Linux distributions have switched over to using LibreOffice in recent years for an office productivity suite on the Linux desktop after disturbances resulting in LibreOffice being forked from OpenOffice.org following Oracle's acquisition of Sun Microsystems. While Fedora is one of the distributions that has been living with LibreOffice, OpenOffice may come back as an option in Fedora 19...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTI4ODI

  • #2
    I heard IBM is contributing to OO 4 with its code of Symphony. But right now, what is the different between OO and libreoffice?( I know both story but talking about the features and software). Can anybody tell what is the point of using OO instead of Libreoffice?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Tiger_Coder View Post
      I heard IBM is contributing to OO 4 with its code of Symphony. But right now, what is the different between OO and libreoffice?( I know both story but talking about the features and software). Can anybody tell what is the point of using OO instead of Libreoffice?
      There is no point (anymore). LO has the bigger community *and* more industry support. I don't mind OO.o getting packaged again, but personally I would have left it to die long ago.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Tiger_Coder View Post
        I heard IBM is contributing to OO 4 with its code of Symphony. But right now, what is the different between OO and libreoffice?( I know both story but talking about the features and software). Can anybody tell what is the point of using OO instead of Libreoffice?
        License.

        OpenOffice.org was converted to the Apache license, while LibreOffice is (still) LGPL.

        Comment


        • #5
          Over time LO will grow faster since it can also import code from OOo. The other way is not permitted since OOo is under a non-copyleft license while LO is under LGPL.

          See here for more info.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
            License.

            OpenOffice.org was converted to the Apache license, while LibreOffice is (still) LGPL.
            That doesn't really change right?

            Originally posted by https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Re-Basing
            The MPLv2 is, intrinsically a quadruple license. Its language in section 1.12 and 2.4 allows switching to the GPLv2.0+, LGPLv2.1+, and the AGPLv3.0+.

            Comment


            • #7
              I wish OpenOffice and LibreOffice would merge back again, the open office suites has suffered a lot in terms of PR at a time so many institutions in Europe were considering it. In addition, the term "Libre" in LibreOffice just don't sound right, OpenOffice was a good name.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by efikkan View Post
                I wish OpenOffice and LibreOffice would merge back again, the open office suites has suffered a lot in terms of PR at a time so many institutions in Europe were considering it. In addition, the term "Libre" in LibreOffice just don't sound right, OpenOffice was a good name.
                Are you implying that the communist 'smell' of the word 'Libre' is posing a barrier to company's in a capitalist society from adopting it?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Rexilion View Post
                  Are you implying that the communist 'smell' of the word 'Libre' is posing a barrier to company's in a capitalist society from adopting it?
                  Not at all, "OpenOffice" just sounds better than "LibreOffice" in the English language. In addition, most people have heard about OpenOffice, and some people uses the problems with Oracle to call open source software unreliable, which is unfortunate.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Would like to have both Available.
                    That's it's in the repositories is enough for me.

                    I mean free software suppose to not be walled gardens (Apple, Nook style) right?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by efikkan View Post
                      In addition, the term "Libre" in LibreOffice just don't sound right, OpenOffice was a good name.
                      Funny. I would prefer Apache OpenOffice to win this battle simply because it has a more enterprise friendly name. Both "Apache" and "OpenOffice" are great brands.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by leif81 View Post
                        Funny. I would prefer Apache OpenOffice to win this battle simply because it has a more enterprise friendly name. Both "Apache" and "OpenOffice" are great brands.
                        I then sincerely hope that since there are no licensing costs involved, people will look at the technical aspects of each package and choose what bests suits them. Instead of going with the next hype.

                        Brand names, are just that: names.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          i wonder if Michael read Fedora/bsd hoax.

                          No harm in having openoffice as a choice.

                          Though it may be best for an uninformed user for them to be offered Libreoffce if they search for 'openoffice' in a package manager. Right now AOO is effectively equivalent to installing an old version of LO. I suspect that a lot of people who use AOO are just unaware of LO.

                          It looks like the AOO folk will make sure that they ship the symphony stuff before LO can ( https://lwn.net/Articles/532665/ ), so maybe soon AOO will have additional features to distinguish it from LO.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Honestly I'm rooting for the two projects to merge back. The (legitimate) problem with Oracle is now gone, I see no reason to keep duplicating efforts at this point.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I have actually always despised the name OpenOffice.org (and remember that was the name, not OpenOffice) so I personally much prefer LibreOffice (I honestly do not get the hate, and I only know English and grew up in a primarily English speaking country). That being said, I do kind of agree that having two suites with basically the same goals is kind of stupid and that they should probably merge, under whatever name.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X