--- Lun 19/12/11, Simon Phipps <[email protected]> ha scritto: > > On 19 Dec 2011, at 16:56, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: > > > On 12/17/11 4:44 PM, Simon Phipps wrote: > >> Surely that's just a matter of fact, though? When > AOO makes a new release, > >> it will be a different codebase under a different > brand, so on both charts > >> would show as a new block. > > > > why do you think that it is a different code base? It > is exactly the code base granted by Oracle to the ASF. Ok we > cleaned up the code base, removed external libs, replace > some and developed some new things. I would say normal work > in the broadest sense ... Otherwise the code base would > change for every release and we have blocks for each of > them. > > The elimination of all non-Apache-licensed code from the > former codebase is hardly "normal work", and the replacement > of the functions it performed with other code from other > sources won't be either. >
We have basically removed broken code so consider it licensing bugfixes. Oracle should have done them they just didn't have the motivation to fix them. > All this pretence that AOO somehow a "business as usual" > continuation of the former project is frankly unhelpful. AOO 3.4 will be not be significantly different from OOo 3.4-RC, I forecast 3.5 will only bring in stuff from the CWSs, if you are looking for a new project look somewhere else. > Just face up to the fact this is a new project in a new > venue with new rules, a new license, a new brand, and strong > historic links to the former codebase. As Graham keeps > hinting, treating this as a strength seems to be both the > right marketing policy and a great opportunity to move > beyond past hurts. > I think the only new feature and strength is the licensing. > S. > >
