I fear this is what Sun/Microsoft want of OOo, to leave room for the StarOffice brand, but sadly this is a self-immolating strategy. It is
Please, not the paranoid Sun/Microsoft story again! Sun could have easily pulled out all engineers if Sun had wanted to.
one reason why GPL'ing and restructuring the project through a foundation may be the only way to make it effective again. Look at the
I'm not a Sun executive, and therefore I'm not the one who could make such a decision, but from my past messages and conversations people should know that I am generally open to the idea of a foundation. However, so far I haven't seen a solid business case for a foundation and AFAIK Sun has not been approached by any major vendors who seriously wanted to support a foundation.
release slippage; look at the code bloat; look at the forks producing
Like you Sam, I'm not an OpenOffice.org "hacker". Thus, I don't know all the details, but I can say for sure (and various community members have confirmed this) that past OpenOffice.org 2.0 builds had some serious stability issues. I'm not sure how a different license or a foundation would have helped here. In addition, some OpenOffice.org build environments may appear more open than Sun's, but Sun in contrast has to care about more than just one platform. All the best, Erwin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
