Seems on the surface like a fine idea, there are some problems just beneath that surface and it wasn't a success. Hahahahaha' because that requires an expert to acknowledge the edit. Like Wikipedia, except bored middle school kids can't change the page on Elizabeth I to say 'You eat doodoo. You can find plenty of projects where the bureaucracy lives on while its intended purpose is, shall we say, moribund.įor example Citizendium was a project conceived as a peer-reviewed expert encyclopedia. Unfortunately it is in the nature of a bureaucracy, like a war, to serve primarily itself. But, the bureaucracy has to exist to serve some larger purpose or it is futile. I assume he'll be retracting that shortly. I recall, back when ASF was considering taking on OpenOffice, Jim Jagielski assuring people the ASF would have no problems keeping up to expectations on software for end users. The project appears to have time to post excuses to blogs (so many excuses!) and embark on call-to-action marketing attacks on a Wikipedia article, but not in the past five months to remove one file from the AOO installer and stop installing security holes on their users' PCs.

'Cos that's the sort of thing that definitely hasn't historically led to any fallout. This outraged the AOO 'dev' list sufficiently that the esteemed Rob Weir tried to coordinate a marketing attack on Wikipedia, and on me personally, on a public list. I was sufficiently horrified to find yet another person running office software with a five months unfixed security hole that I wrote a blog post that is my biggest Tumblr hit to date. No, it's not a bureaucracy taking time - it's a bureaucracy with nobody to actually run it. Posted 18:55 UTC (Mon) by davidgerard (guest, #100304)

Apache openoffice 4.1.2 review