In case you missed the legal case of Oracle Vs Google there is no Java in Android

I use USB passthrough with my KVM guests fine on Fedora 19 ...

Have Windows (XP and 7) VMs with full virtio drivers installed along with the SPICE agent etc etc

If you read the detail you would see he lost a grand total of three commits ... that he then took from LKML and promptly reapplied to his new instance.

I've gone with BTRFS drives in a RAID1 profile for data storage with a daily (keep past three days) subvolume snapshot (COW so minimal space used for it) for the accidental deletion events.

But did any version of MS Office actually use the ISO/IEC 29500:2008 standard in the end?

There was so much hand waving and so on - especially given the Office spec this was based on used the ECMA standard - and a few ethereal promises later on ...

But did they ever (so far as was possible given the appalling state of the spec) actually get to implementing what was agreed on?

This appears to be SOP for him throughout the comments...

It's sad really - seems a different Rob Weir from several years back and the OOXML ISO saga ...

I'm rapidly mentally filing him under the same categories I keep the likes of Florian Muller and Miguel de Icaza in...

If the LibreOffice guys were smart, they'd be contributing as many of their changes as possible to the upstream project,

Can we please get past calling AOO the upstream project of LO? This is like calling gorillas the upstream project of humans...

Yes they share a common ancestry but that is it at this point... sure some stuff can be transplanted from one to the other but there is no upstream/downstream relationship that one would usually understand that term as in the FOSS world (eg Fedora -> RHEL).

*blink* ...

Seriously Rob - go back up and check the comment thread ... you have wandered off track here - I'm not entirely surprised given how many threads you are responding to but seriously... re-read the trail...

I will reiterate I am not the anonymous coward who made the 5% comment - I was never part of that argument or discussion ... we had a brief foray into discussing ohloh statistics and how much meaning it's possible to derive from them elsewhere with some incredible twisting of the stats that you performed but that's it...

My comment in this chain of comments was merely replying to the first 'Palestrina' comment I saw going down the page to ask for your view on the negative light from that blog and for curiosity on why you use such a different nick here than elsewhere ... I mean it's not even remotely similar!

I understand you are feeling under pressure and that there is a general negative stance towards Apache Open Office for many reasons but there is no need to be on such an offensive posture ... I once visited your blog daily and praised your opinion and level headedness during the MS OOXML ISO saga with much of the information in a blog post I wrote at the time learned from your writing but this lashing out at present is pretty poor behaviour.

So before you accuse me of changing the subject for a third time let me remind you I am not that anonymous coward ...

Oh and I had a look at ohloh in more detail and I do see it hitting trunk ... over three times as many LOC for less features... ouch...

Rob I think you have lost track of who your are replying to and why ...

There was no ad hominem attack on my side just a curiosity as to why you choose a nick that is so far different from your usual (reddit, lwn, etc) given this is another social network and if you had balance to bring that blog post which paints a rather negative light...

I never made that 5% claim - that was an anonymous coward and I stay logged in here... Incidentally I disagree with your position that no one ever benefits from the small commits... just as DNA changes very slowly over generations those do add up to larger changes and a clean code base being nicer to work on and get started with means a feasibly larger contribution from people in future.

Also does it definitely only count 'trunk' over ah ohloh? It says there are 23 million LOC in AOO but only 7 million in LO ... Given the huge change of size I would have though it would have been looking at the entire AOO svn ...

Rob why do you go by the nick Palestrina here rather than the usual rcweir you use elsewhere?

Interesting blog post I came across just now - care to comment?

The point is that without the Apache guys there wouldn't be a sidebar in either project. LibreOffice has done a lot of stuff but none if it is as visible as the Apache guys have done.

This is nonsense... The sidebar stuff wasn't written by anyone in Apache - it was IBM code from the symphony project/fork donated to Apache that was then merged into AOO and merged (with small improvements like resizing) into LO as well...

As for the not visible bit have a look through the new features and fixes in 4.0 and 4.1.

There's a lot of nice new content with visible useful features such as chart import and export as both ODC and images in calc, presentation mode in Impress, visio import in Draw (that was LO 3.5), huge reduction of java dependencies, refactor how calc views cells internally for much faster performance on large spreadsheets, MS Publisher import, and the list goes on ....

As for letting the code speak for itself ... yes please do and it's obvious which project is currently healthier and better overall.

Too bad users use the product and don't gain direct productivity merely from looking at Ohloh stats.

But the stats do paint the picture of the direct benefit to the users...

See all those deleted lines? That's code clean up that is... That means less bugs and easier to maintain and also easier for new people to help with when they get an itch they need to scratch.

It shows that the average AOO contributor makes twice the number of commits as the average LO contributor. And the average AOO commit is far more significant, touching twice the number of files as the average LO commit. Net it out and the average AOO contributor is 4x as productive compared to the average LO contributor!

Way to twist the statistics...

In a way what you say is absolutely true but then that misses the mark but quite an impressive amount. It's almost to the point I feel a need to call you out on this as being literally true so no one can call you a liar but that truth being represented in such a way as to mask the real situation.

The recent libreoffice blog post covers the the growth of committers and includes a brief discussion of "the long tail" with a large number of people in the community submitting small fixes here and there because they can and to scratch a small itch... this is not happening on the AOO code base.

To me that shows a healthier development community of in the LO camp.

Put it this way if a project has 100 people each committing to 2 files over a code base and another project which had 2 people committing to 100 files over another fork which would you say was "more productive" and would you equate that with project healthiness?

Well since they laud the new sidebar so much for better use of widescreen monitors they should love the fact that LibreOffice will have it within a few days...

4.1 is due in a matter of days which has an improved sidebar that's resizeable and not just a static part of the screen.

I really question what the point of AOO is at this juncture given that LO is clearly the more active project and has two years of code clean up and development over AOO due to the way Oracle let it stagnate for so long.

If you want to try 4.1 now it is on the pre-releases page and it's the final RC there ... ie the same that will be released as final GA in a few days.

I installed the beta yesterday ... The installer overall was decent with just one exception - partitioning still sucks for user controlled situations... Specifically it being mandatory to have /boot and /boot/efi on different partitions was painful on my Macbook Pro 8,2 (admittedly an edge case)... I'd just love an 'advanced' checkbox which effectively tells anaconda to bypass its checks and just install per the user directed mount points ... I'll give it another test later in a VM but so far as I could see I couldn't precreate the partitions as I wanted via gparted/parted and tell it to use those either which would help advanced cases... That being said I picked the BTRFS option and the behaviour of putting /home in a subvolume (and root for that matter) was a fantastic result ... was expecting to have to do some juggling to get a subvolume home and was very pleasantly surprised!