On 07/11/2012 07:28 AM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Natxo Asenjo <natxo.asenjo@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Most informed people know how much Oracle has
>> contributed to OSS, but also how it has tried 'monetize' other stuff
> Gee, someone could think that they are a for-profit corporation, like
> IBM (whose DB2 is NOT open source, or Lotus Notes, also NOT open
> source), yet I don´t see the level of IBM hatred that I routinely see
> wrt ORCL.
>
> When any corporation puts money into the development of FOSS
> technologies (like IBM, Oracle, and RedHat has done, I applaud them).
> Yet, some people always find a need to bash those, as having an evil
> agenda, namely *god forbid* the PROFIT word...
I think it is more the fact the Oracle seems to be two faced in their dealings with foss as
opposed to IBM.

> But like you say business as usual or "move along, nothing to see here".
>
> FC
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>


--
Stephen Clark
*NetWolves*
Director of Technology
Phone: 813-579-3200
Fax: 813-882-0209
Email: steve.clark@netwolves.com
http://www.netwolves.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

On 11 July 2012 13:06, Steve Clark <sclark@netwolves.com> wrote:
> I think it is more the fact the Oracle seems to be two faced in their dealings with foss as
> opposed to IBM.
So correct. Way back in 2001, in London I was there when IBM clearly
stated they are going to spend one billion on Linux on that year. They
did, all of us benefited, IBM got sued by SCO because of that (the
lawsuit was for $1b damages)... All I see from Oracle is talk and then
a bit of shafting and backstabbing. They do good work (OCFS2, some of
the PHP stuff, btrfs come to mind) and then they do some very ugly
stuff (undercutting TUV with the hope of... What exactly I haven't
figured out yet).

They do a great database product. I only wished they stuck to doing just that.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

On Wednesday 11 July 2012, Fernando Cassia <fcassia@gmail.com> wrote:

> The jihadists against Sun Contributor Agreement created the so-called
> "exodus" of programmers from OpenOffice.org to "Libre" Office, then
> spit Oracle in the eye and subsequently invited them for dinner (to
> join "the document foundation"). Actually, the so-called "exodus"
> left about 50-60 employees at ORCL, but still that wasn´t enough to
> contribute development.

I think this is getting dangerously close to trolling.

--
Yves Bellefeuille <yan@storm.ca>
"La Esperanta Civito ne rifuzas anticipe la kunlaboron de erarintoj, se
ili konscias pri sia eraro." -- Heroldo Komunikas, n-ro 473.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 9:16 AM, Yves Bellefeuille <yan@storm.ca> wrote:
> I think this is getting dangerously close to trolling.

Not really, I just wanted to express my POV, which is not the
mainstream opinion.
I didn t come here to argue against LO in CentOS, the OP did. For me,
fine, I'll just ignore it, as I don't use ANY office suite on
servers..
End of story as far as I'm concerned.

FC
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Steve Clark <sclark@netwolves.com> wrote:
> I think it is more the fact the Oracle seems to be two faced in their
> dealings with foss as
> opposed to IBM.

Since the Sun acquisition, and despite the LO-OpenOffice spat (which
btw the 'community' forkers destroyed the future of the former Sun
StarOffice, in the name of freedom, of course), most of the former Sun
FOSS projects -at least the mainstream ones- have been doing well:
Virtualbox, GPL Java SE (OpenJDK), NetBeans, Glassfish J2EE server,
MySQL, even while Oracle had other proprietary products in its arsenal
that would overlap (ie JDeveloper freeware overlaped with NetBeans,
yet Oracle continued with Netbeans development nevertheless, with v7.2
just released and extended for better PHP/C++ support).

Having said that, I wouldn't touch Oracle's propietary offerings even
with the proverbial 20ft pole -mostly because I cannot afford any and
there are worthy alternatives which are totally free- but Sun's FOSS
projects I care about are alive and doing well (even OO under
Apache's).

I recorded some of the doom and gloom predictions (ie "MySQL will
die") vs the reality on a news story last year
http://news.techeye.net/software/despite-anti-oracle-hysteria-firm-is-an-open-source-powerhouse

After that they even complied with their promise of starting to open
source JavaFX 2.0
http://openjdk.java.net/projects/openjfx/

OK, now let's concentrate on CentOS...

FC
--
During times of Universal Deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act
- George Orwell
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Hakan Koseoglu <hakan@koseoglu.org> wrote:

> On 11 July 2012 13:06, Steve Clark <sclark@netwolves.com> wrote:
> > I think it is more the fact the Oracle seems to be two faced in their dealings with foss as
> > opposed to IBM.
> So correct. Way back in 2001, in London I was there when IBM clearly
> stated they are going to spend one billion on Linux on that year. They

IBM is also two faced with their OSS engagement.

They treat linux different from others.

Jörg

--
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
joerg.schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Hakan Koseoglu <hakan@koseoglu.org> wrote:
>
>> On 11 July 2012 13:06, Steve Clark <sclark@netwolves.com> wrote:
>> > I think it is more the fact the Oracle seems to be two faced in their
>> dealings with foss as opposed to IBM.
>> So correct. Way back in 2001, in London I was there when IBM clearly
>> stated they are going to spend one billion on Linux on that year. They
>
> IBM is also two faced with their OSS engagement.
>
> They treat linux different from others.

Well, but IBM *loves* Linux, and I saw that 10-12 years ago. Let me put it
this way: you're one of the world's largest companies, and you make a
wider range of computers than pretty much anyone, and you've been doing it
longer than almost anyone.

Now, would you like to support S/38 (I'm sure some are still running),
AS400, RISC6000, AIX, DOS/SP/VME (and I have no idea how many more
acronyms have been added since I last worked on one in the mid-nineties),
MVS, etc, etc... or run Linux on *everything*, and tell users, when they
want to go to a larger system, "sure, same o/s, nobody needs to learn a
new system, just recompile your in-house software...."

mark

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

On Tue, July 10, 2012 23:22, Joseph Spenner wrote:
> On Jul 10, 2012, at 7:17 PM, "Michel Donais" <donais@telupton.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Why in 6.3 they move OpenOffice to LibreOffice?
>>
>>
>> ---
>> Michel Donais
>> _______________________________________________
>> CentOS mailing list
>> CentOS@centos.org
>> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
> Not sure. Probably same reason SciFi changed to SyFy; bored marketing
> people trying to 'add value'.
>

The main reason for the switch to LO from OO is Oracle Corporation's
buyout of Sun. Shortly after that event the principal developers of
OO left that project and forked LibreOffice. Oracle went through some
handwaving exercise about being committed to open source but
development of OO stalled, either by design or neglect. Evential
Oracle turned OO over to Apache.org but by then a large portion of the
OO audience had already switched to LO and never looked back.

OO has had its first release since being adopted by the Apache
Foundation but that release did not support any form of English other
than en_US. I do not know what other language packs are available
now.

Since Oracle is now out of the picture it is possible that LO and OO
may again merge into a single project, eventually. On the other hand,
maybe not.


--
*** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel ***
James B. Byrne mailto:ByrneJB@Harte-Lyne.ca
Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca
9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241
Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757
Canada L8E 3C3

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos