Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last

At 12:06 9-9-2011, Tom Davies wrote:
Hi :)
I think IBM have a lot of power in this relationship. If Oracle are being slow about passing IBMs contribution to Apache then i think IBM might be able to make that happen faster.

I have no evidence that anyone is deliberately being slow. It may simply be a matter of resources that can be used for it. (But I admit I was beginning to lose my patience.)

I heard that Oracle and Apache are in court fighting each other at the moment or fairly recently about things that are nothing to do with OOo. Oracle seemed to be just playing with OOo without any really clear objectives other than just trying to make money from it somehow. They seemed to treat it as though it was a mill-stone around their neck because of it's OpenSource part.

Making money is a very clear objective, if you ask me ;-)
Not making enough money was why Sun got acquired by Oracle in the first place. (Sun also asked IBM if they wanted to buy them, but IBM said no.)

Apache have a strong passion for projects that are at least partly OpenSource. IBM seems to need OOo to be developed with strength and determination to be strongly viable against MS Office rather than just being allowed to crumble.

Straying off topic once more ;-) :
From IBM's point of view, which office suite should have been that competitor?, IBM Lotus Symphony or both? IBM has an "IBM Lotus Symphony Savings Calculator" at
Not buying MS Office licenses for its 400,000 employees (or a bit less if you count only those who need an office suite) probably saves IBM enough money to finance / IBM Lotus Symphony development.

So it seems that IBM were able to push Oracle into handing OOo to Apache who are not struggling as much as Oracle possibly hoped. Perhaps delaying the transfer of IBM's gift is the most they can do to make things difficult for Apache? Maybe IBM has some leverage there?

Delaying the IAccessible2 code (if that is what is happening; we don't really know that; and Dennis Hamilton sent us a URL to the Mercurial CWS'es where that code may be available) does not benefit Oracle or create difficulties for Apache, as far as I can tell. The only victims would be people with disabilities on Windows who want to use a free and/or open source office suite, and this group is not involved in the lawsuit between Oracle and Apache.

Best regards,


Regards from
Tom :)

--- On Fri, 9/9/11, Christopher Chaltain <> wrote:

From: Christopher Chaltain <>
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-accessibility] IAccessible2 / LibreOffice /
Date: Friday, 9 September, 2011, 3:46

I haven't looked into this issue as much as others, but what's left here
for IBM to do? It sounds like they've already donated the code. BTW, who
in IBM did you contact? I used to know some of the guys working on
accessibility inside IBM.

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Christophe Strobbe
K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD
Research Group on Document Architectures
Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442
B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee
tel: +32 16 32 85 51
Twitter: @RabelaisA11y
Open source for accessibility: results from the AEGIS project
Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other "social networks". You may have agreed to their "privacy policy", but I haven't.

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.