Apache OpenOffice vs LibreOffice: Make love, not war.

By Christian Grobmeier

Before a good while something terrible happened at Oracle. The result was that a lot of developers made a fork of OpenOffice.org and called it LibreOffice from that day on. We can be glad about that. It is my personal opinion that without this fork Oracle would not have donated OpenOffice.org to the Apache Software Foundation to become Apache OpenOffice. When this happened some people spread FUD around Apache OpenOffice (no reference – the web is full of it). Despite this the people around Apache OpenOffice managed to create a few new versions and graduated from the Apache Incubator (where all projects start. Or lets say most). Apache OpenOffice has proven that it is able to operate and create new releases.

Meanwhile some people are calling Apache OpenOffice a “dead horse”. I am not sure why there are so much emotions around it. It is a project as many projects. There are people working in their spare time because they want to do it. Terms like calling Open Source projects “dead horse” is not only dismissive it is a bad signal. It tells me, that the outside community is not thinking about the individuals who have fun coding Open Source. They are looking at brands. There is no rational reason to look at brands in Open Source, except maybe for evaluation purposes.

For example, take Apache Commons. This project has had a lot activity in the past and many great components. Now there is Guava. And Apache Commons is not longer so hot as it was in the past. I am a Committer to Apache Commons. Am I pissed because Guava attracts more people? No. Of course I am looking at Guava and try to find out why they are so cool. And yes, I am even using Guava when it matches better than a similar Component in Commons. Finally there is some motivation in it when other people do the same things – just better (somehow). It is competition. Competition in Open Source is not making prices low. It makes the Quality better.

Usually. But sometimes too much emotions (or marketing?) on brands let us forget that competition is a good thing.

I am afraid the marketing people of LibreOffice were a little to enthusiastic with their numbers. Rob Weir wrote one and then another blog post evaluating what’s wrong with them.

As he mentioned, after the first blog post he became the “number one enemy” of LibreOffice. I was pretty surprised to read something like that.

Rob does only refer to this message. Luckily there are some other opinions as well. Marc Paré for example said the team needs to try to get better and provide verificable numbers. He said they need to work hard on it to determine the health of their community.

He is right on that. And he is right when he later used the word “soap box”. He is not the only one who uses such a phrasing. Golem is one the biggest it news publishers in Germany and they wrote an article about this. They looked at what Rob wrote and agreed the numbers might look strange mentioned the argumentation is justifiable. But finally they came to the conclusion that Robs posts sound pedantic and like he was a sore loser. In my opinion, news portals should stay as objective as possible. The whole last paragraph is really questionable.

Let us hold on for one moment.

Freedom by Josef Grunig (Flickr)

Freedom by Josef Grunig

There are no enemies in Open Source. Everybody can make mistakes. We don’t know how these numbers were produced, but probably it’s an error. Or the creators simply didn’t know. It’s hard to judge. If you want to discuss that, it’s time to join the LibreOffice mailing lists.

We should remember that there is no LibreOffice vs Apache OpenOffice. There is just two groups of people who could benefit greatly from each other. It’s two great Office-Products. And now comes the best part: it’s two products with different licenses. GPL and AL. It’s up to you which fits better for you or your project. Both have great benefits.

Here is my suggestion: calm down. There is no battle. We have two winners out there. If somebody next to you tells you about dead horses, enemies, lost games or something else make him shut up. Open Source is not about marketing. It’s about fun creating great software. $$$ is secondary.

Imagine what happens if two such great, powerful and influencing projects help each other? Make love, not war. Soap Box operas just do harm to Open Source in general. We should all come back to what Open Source really is about: fun, freedom, software.


Follow me on Twitter :-)

  • Sam S

    I agree that LibreOffice was a good move at that time, since its likely it motivated Oracle’s “donation” of OpenOffice to Apache.

    Right now though, we have two parallel forks with almost exactly the same code base now that will likely diverge over time.

    No one wins in that. As much fun as open source is, I’m really hoping the open-source community can pull off a winner in the Office software space – neither of these is powerful and usable enough right now to challenge MS Office, and a split will only make it worse.

  • http://www.farfuglar.com Björn Sveinbjörnsson

    Hi!

    I am a developer working in OSX and Linux. Used to work in Windows. I am part of a team that writes spellchecking plugins for people with dyslexia. Our clients are mostly students in schools in Sweden.

    I can say that LibreOffice is the one that is used/recommended office suite when the discussion comes up about MS Office alternatives. Many Mac clients are also using iWork (Pages).

    OpenOffice has lost a lot of momentum in the field and as a Linux user the choice is clear. What Linux distro has OpenOffice as a default option?

    I have been following this “split” and I must say that my open source Linus heart is very much on the LibreOffice side. Getting rid of the Java code, eliminating dead code, removing German comments, and other things are all steps in the right direction. What I see from Rob is big corp (IBM) propaganda channeled through The Apache Foundation which is a shame. On the other side I see happy Linux hackers.

    Behind this you have Oracle and IBM with the handling of the Java Community Process. The picture is pretty clear to me.

    The most hilarious part is code sharing. LibreOffice can use code from OpenOffice but the opposite is not true. OpenOffice can not use GPLed code from LibreOffice.

    Anyway. Who am I to know. I only work with real students in real schools in real cities.

    Happy hacking.
    /björn

  • http://www.grobmeier.de Christian Grobmeier

    Hello Björn,

    I just want to make one comment to your comment. Rob does not channel through the Apache Software Foundation. He wrote this on his personal blog and I (myself being an Apache guy) would strongly oppose against such a post. I see your point, just want to make clear this is not a position or an statement from the ASF. Nor is it my own blogpost.

    Cheers
    Christian

  • Steve

    The LibreOffice fork happened for good reasons. The Apache OpenOffice fork happened because Oracle is a bad looser.

    (See what happened with Jenkins/Hudson for another example.)

    I more or less lost all my respect for the ASF as a whole due to their behaviour. If they lack the backbone to say “no” to being Oracle’s pawn, I can’t imagine how they can defend their projects when there would be some actual trouble.

    The Apache Software Foundation is a software graveyard.

  • http://www.grobmeier.de Christian Grobmeier

    Hello Steve,

    most web servers are run with httpd.apache.org. Apache cares on modern frameworks like Deltaspike or Cordova. This proves pretty much the ASF is not a graveyard.

    When it comes to OpenOffice, it is the Apache people who decide. We decided that we would like to give space for the people who want to maintain OpenOffice. Now they are part of our community and Oracle does not longer matter to OpenOffice.

    Actual trouble – what do you mean with that? The Foundation cares on their project as you probably have seen with the Oracle/Google case (Google using Apache Harmony as base for Android).

    Cheers

  • Steve

    > When it comes to OpenOffice, it is the Apache people who decide.

    Yes, you acted only in your best interests, damaging the rest of the open-source ecosystem. Nothing wrong with that … I guess.

    > Actual trouble – what do you mean with that? The Foundation cares on their project as you probably have seen with the Oracle/Google case (Google using Apache Harmony as base for Android).

    BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
    You mean were Oracle said “No test-suite for you” and Apache responded with “Mhh, OK.” instead of dragging Oracle to the court?

    That’s exactly what I meant with “the ASF has no backbone”.

  • http://www.grobmeier.de Christian Grobmeier

    I don’t think the rest of the open source eco-system is damaged. Actually I think you are completely wrong with that. But this has been discussed in detail on the mailing list and I don’t want to discuss it again. Here is a reference: http://bit.ly/SL8Q1j

    Backbone: No, I meant when Oracle suited Google because they used “copyrighted” material. Which ultimately came out of Apache Harmony. No problem for the Apache people.

    Apache is a non-profit organization and we live a do-cracy. You can’t say “ASF has no backbone”. You need to say:”Nobody at the ASF hat an interested in going to court”. Here is a link which might help you understand better: http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html

  • Wolfram

    “Apache OpenOffice vs LibreOffice: Make love, not war”

    Make… tests, not comments! Where are the tests? I was expecting to see a side-by-side comparison between the two office suites. Starting with the list of available features, and ending with the loading time + resources consumption. In the absence of a rigorous, thorough, complete test, any discussion is more or less pointless.-

  • http://www.grobmeier.de Christian Grobmeier

    This blog post is not about a comparison. It is about community. This is something I am interested in and which is worth discussion.

  • Thiadmer Riemersma

    If “news portals should stay as objective as possible”, then read the statements again. The newspaper concluded that “the [LibreOffice] numbers might look strange” and that “Rob [Weir]‘s posts sound pedantic”. These are two remarks in the same category. Yet, you accept one and take exception to the other.

    Further down you emphasize that “Open Source is not about marketing”. That is not how Rob Weir feels, see http://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/call_for_marketing_volunteers.

    In an answer to a comment, you wrote “Rob does not channel through the Apache Software Foundation.” That is not entirely accurate. Mr. Weir writes on both his own blog and on the blog of the ASF. So Björn Sveinbjörnsson is correct in stating that Rob writes through the ASF channels (that fact that Björn does not mention other blogs that Rob may also write to, does not invalidate this).

  • http://www.grobmeier.de Christian Grobmeier

    @Thiadmer: I can’t find the wording “numbers might look strange”. They wrote, the argumentation of Weir makes sense. This is pretty different to what your wrote. But I agree, the whole last paragraph should have been deleted.

    “Open Source” is not about marketing – this is my personal opinion as everything else on this blog. I don’t care how Rob feels about that. Of course he can recruit people to market OO, but this is not to my taste. That said, the blog you are referring is an official blog post, so it seems to be the opinion of the OO PMC, not only of Rob Weir.

    Rob writes on the ASF blog, that is true; but this article has not been published on the official project blog and thus is personal opinion of Rob and NOT the opinion or statement of the OpenOffice project. Please do not mix up these two things. The blog post I was referring to was NOT ON AN ASF CHANNEL, unless you show me a link.

    In addition I would like to mention that I do not see any good of Robs personal blog post, nor do I see any good from the LO list nor do I see any good from the news article. I think it is all pretty useless and people should stop here before we have an Office-Suite war which only Microsoft can win.

  • Thiadmer Riemersma

    Christian, with all respect, I can take criticism, but don’t try to suggest that I weasel with words. Here is the entire paragraph:

    —–
    He is right on that. And he is right when he later used the word “soap box”. He is not the only one who uses such a phrasing. Golem is one the biggest it news publishers in Germany and they wrote an article about this. They looked at what Rob wrote and agreed the numbers might look strange. But finally they came to the conclusion that – despite the well observed justified critics – Robs posts sound pedantic and like he was a sore loser. In my opinion, news portals should stay as objective as possible. This is not the case with this remark. But it reflects the harm such marketing posts cause.
    —–

    The phrase that “the numbers might look strange” is in the 5th sentence. If that is not what the newspaper wrote, then you misquoted the newspaper, not me.

    I do agree that the Rob Weir’s article was on his personal blog. That is not at issue. The issue is that you claimed that “Rob does not channel through the Apache Software Foundation”. In the context of this particular blog post of Rob Weir, ok, granted. However, I read Björn Sveinbjörnsson’s comment as a general remark. In the general context, the statement “Rob does not channel through the Apache Software Foundation” is not correct.

  • http://www.grobmeier.de Christian Grobmeier

    @Thiadmer: Please calm down – didn’t want to suggest anything :-) This post is a bit older, I didn’t get what you were referring too. That said, you are right. My quotation is not good. I updated my blog post to reflect that better.

    On the general context of channeling I want to add another note. The official OO blog is a channel of the OpenOffice project. It is not the blog of Rob. And usually votes (with lazy consens) are held prio a blog post. Blogs are discussed somewhere on the OO mailinglists and the Apache OpenOffice PMC can interfere to each of them (Note: Rob is not on the PMC at the time of this writing, see: http://people.apache.org/committers-by-project.html#openoffice-pmc ). This is why I still say he does not “channel” through the ASF. He is part of a team and well, if you call that “channeling through” the ASF you are right. I don’t see it like that.

  • Kelly

    LibreOffice kept crashing for me and I lost most of what I wrote.

  • grobmeier

    Have you tried to contact the maintainers about it? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/