Rob,

That's not an apt comparison.  There is a historical way of dropping off 
"support" in the OO.o line and the LO line.  I would expect support for 3.2.x 
to be minimal (although there is some concern now for a security fix back that 
var).  But the license and other matters make it very difficult for us to even 
do a security patch for OO.o 3.3.0, let alone a maintenance release, as 
everyone here knows.  I still get automatic updates for Windows XP SP3 and 
Office 2007 (haven't looked at my Office 2003 updates, will have to do that).  
Office 2000 and 2002 are how old?

I tend to think of Apache OpenOffice as the *reboot* of OpenOffice.org, which 
is different than the fork, because of the bringing along, at great effort, of 
http://*.openoffice.org, its various services, the extension site, etc.  I 
suppose possession of the bugzilla counts for something too.  The mailing list 
and email/ID system are below the line and will certainly look like a break in 
continuity with regard to the extended community.  

I wonder what is French for "reboot."

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 03:59
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: OpenOffice.org on Wikipedias in various languages

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 5:20 AM, FR web forum <[email protected]> wrote:
> ----- Mail original -----
>>De: "Rob Weir" <[email protected]>
>>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

Reply via email to