On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 5:20 AM, FR web forum <ooofo...@free.fr> wrote: > ----- Mail original ----- >>De: "Rob Weir" <robw...@apache.org> >>However, inserting a point of view regarding what is and isn't a >>'fork" is not something that will be well received by other Wikipedia >>editors. They want factual information, a neutral point of view, >>backed by authoritative citations. > > You are right Rob > And french WP editors confirm: AOO is a fork. > Reason: old releases are not supported by ASF
That is an odd definition of a fork. Microsoft does not support versions of Microsoft Office before Office 2003. Does that mean Microsoft Office is a fork also? > and english WP article is a Marketing message. > See: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion:Apache_OpenOffice.org > If you have some information to contradict them, you should publish > your official position on Apache blog. > You can also find a citation for an opposing view point and then change the article to say, "Some authors saying that AOO is a fork, others point out that AOO is a direct continuation of the code, the website and the trademark..." -Rob
