I think it is correct that non-essential differences between the products are surmountable, with prospects for excellent interoperability if the differences between the projects could be diffused. As Hagar suggests, I don't think that is likely.
In open source work, forking is a feature. And there is no self-interest and certainly no altruistic purpose that seems to overcome that in this particular case. So the differences that Hagar notes are indeed determinative. - Dennis -----Original Message----- From: Hagar Delest [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 12:43 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Importing back improvements from LibreOffice Le lun. 04 juin 2012 22:25:34 CEST, Mikkel Bang <[email protected]> a écrit : >> There are also some real differences at play here - many of those >> differences are technical in nature, some are of a business model type >> and others are just colloquial in nature, but they are all valid >> differences of opinion between intelligent individuals. >> > > These are small differences. Differences that are easily set aside (all is > fair in love and war) - if both parties want it enough - if both parties > care more about creating the world's finest office suite than they do > sowing disunity, flaunting their egos, or showcasing their hatred for a > third party (Oracle) that isn't even around any more. Small differences??? On the contrary, the license difference for example is a key point. There are 2 projects with opposite business models: a copyleft LibreOffice and a permissive license for Apache OpenOffice. BTW, have you asked the same question on the LibO ML? Hagar --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
