Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Preston Gralla's picture
Preston Gralla

Seeing Through Windows

Is version 3.0 the last great version for OpenOffice.org?

The just-released OpenOffice.org 3.0 office suite is an impressive piece of work, which rivals and in some ways beats Microsoft Office. But there's growing evidence that the project may be suffering from virtual arteriosclerosis, and 3.0 may be the last great version of the software.

OpenOffice.org is an Open Source project, but it's overseen by Sun, and there's some evidence that friction between Sun, Novell, and other open source contributors spells trouble for future versions of the software. Ars Technica notes:

Allegations continually emerge that Sun's management of the project is impeding acceptance of some third-party code contributions and is deterring additional corporate involvement.

Ars Technica adds that

Sun's process for vetting new features is often viewed as excessively bureaucratic by third-party contributors and some are also concerned about Sun's copyright assignment requirements.

There's a lot of history here, and some bad blood, and I won't bore you with the details. But as evidence of the woes, Ars Technica cites a recent blog by Novell's Michael Meeks, an active OpenOffice.org developer.

In his blog, Meeks analyzes statistics gathered from OpenOffice.org's version control system. In Ars Technica's words, here's what he found:

He says that the latest statistics demonstrate a universal decline in involvement in the OOo project, from both Sun and independent community members. He sees this as a sign that the project is no longer healthy, and he warns that the consequences could be dire if the problem isn't resolved.

On his blog, Meeks doesn't mince his words. He calls OpenOffice.org:

a profoundly sick project, and worse, one that doesn't appear to be improving with age.

His recommendation: Cut what he sees as too much bureaucracy on the project, and “distance the project from Sun.”

I won't take sides on this one, and for me the point is that there are even sides to take. It's not good if it's true that development work is lagging, and if the project is starting to get bogged down in politics. Version 3.0 of the suite is an impressive piece of work. Let's hope there's an equally impressive version 4.

Like this blog? Subscribe to the RSS feed!

What People Are Saying

I've felt this for some time

I've felt this for some time. Some of the bug reports go back 7 years and are still open.

The initial request for 'skinning' the UI has been ignored and yet would have yielded huge benefits in allowing the community to roll innovative forms of layout and iconography, even to rival the MS ribbon. Had skinning been implimented early we would not have nonsense like every release boasting of 'clean new icons' as though this was a major innovation.

Why there is resource to re-write icon files but not to fix the aliasing problems of the graphics I do not understand.