EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

11.27.07

Quick Mention: Novell is Very Busy with GNOME’s OpenOffice.org (Corrected)

Posted in GNOME, Novell, Office Suites, OpenOffice at 1:28 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

[Thanks to a reader for the headsup]

IIt is rather hard to ignore the fact that, at the time of writing, each and every commit as shown in this dynamic page comes from someone @ Novell (or SuSE). Jeff Waugh claimed that Novell’s intervention in GNOME is not exceptional, but with OOXML involved in this debate (e.g. Kohei adding OOXML-related patches), one cannot help wondering.

When it comes to GNOME’s build of OpenOffice.org Novell’s branch of OpenOffice.org [Correction: see more details below], Novell keeps very busy. Maybe it’s a good thing, but maybe it’s also a cause for concern [1, 2, 3, 4, 5].

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

16 Comments

  1. 2234e534e4355t6546 said,

    November 27, 2007 at 5:36 pm

    Gravatar

    OpenOffice is not a GNOME project, it’s a Sun-Novell-IBM cooperation mainly…

    Don’t you know anything? Stop being embarrassing.

    Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from a known, pseudonymous, nymshifting, abusive Internet troll

  2. Jeff Waugh said,

    November 27, 2007 at 6:08 pm

    Gravatar

    I’m not going to continue participating on this site as part of a discussion, but I’ll probably make brief notes on insinuations or conspiracy theories that are raised here.

    In this case, the ooo-build stuff in GNOME SVN is not a “GNOME build” of OpenOffice.org, it’s the set of patches and build tool for OpenOffice.org that Michael Meeks has maintained since he began working on OpenOffice.org for Ximian way back when we thought that OpenOffice.org would become a GNOME project. He continues to maintain his stuff there mostly because he’s a GNOME hacker, it’s existing and reliable infrastructure, and that’s where it began.

    There is nothing about ooo-build’s existence on the GNOME infrastructure that is controversial or problematic, and I don’t imagine it would ever be raised as a problem in the GNOME community unless Michael was doing something wrong (such as breaking the law or hosting proprietary code or something so obviously bad).

    I’m sure there’s lots of room for conspiracy theorists to have fun with this, but there’s no substance to these insinuations at all — it has been there long before Novell’s involvement in GNOME or any of the issues with Microsoft, OOXML, etc.

  3. Roy Schestowitz said,

    November 27, 2007 at 7:29 pm

    Gravatar

    Jeff, have a look here:

    http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/ooo-build?view=revision&revision=10223

    Log Message:
    2007-09-06 Kohei Yoshida

    * configure.in: updated the oox package to oox.2007-09-05.tar.bz2.

    * patches/ooxml/xmlfilter-sc.diff: updated the code to latest from
    upstream.

    And here:

    http://mail.gnome.org/archives/svn-commits-list/2007-September/msg01512.html

    Author: kyoshida
    Date: 2007-09-06 14:26:58 +0100 (Thu, 06 Sep 2007)
    New Revision: 10223
    ViewCVS link: http://svn.gnome.org/viewcvs/ooo-build?rev=10223&view=rev

    Modified:
    trunk/ChangeLog
    trunk/configure.in
    trunk/patches/ooxml/xmlfilter-sc.diff
    Log:
    2007-09-06 Kohei Yoshida

    * configure.in: updated the oox package to oox.2007-09-05.tar.bz2.

    * patches/ooxml/xmlfilter-sc.diff: updated the code to latest from
    upstream.

    That seems like the Gnome build. Novell is pushing OOXML into the GNOME build of OpenOffice.org.

  4. Jeff Waugh said,

    November 27, 2007 at 7:58 pm

    Gravatar

    It’s not a “GNOME build of OpenOffice.org” (I mean, you don’t see us releasing that anywhere, do you?), but it is a GNOME SVN repository that Michael and the other Novell hackers have used to work on their branch of OpenOffice.org for a very long time now.

    Sorry, but your suggestion that this is a GNOME issue, regardless of where the SVN repository is hosted, is not correct. End of story.

  5. Roy Schestowitz said,

    November 27, 2007 at 9:18 pm

    Gravatar

    Wait, wait. It’s not “end of story” just because you want it to end.

    It does seem weird that Kohei Yoshida from Novell is not on the members list but would have access to the SVN.

    http://foundation.gnome.org/membership/members.php

    Oh, and of course they have not released it, they are still working on it.

    I am also not sure if this works:

    So they are using

    http://cia.vc/stats/project/gnome/ooo-build?s_message=0

    and

    http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/ooo-build?view=revision&revision=10223

    They basically hack the same thing. This makes little or no sense to me.

    I am not sure about this, but the following looks suspicious as well:

    http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/ooo-build/trunk/

    Even if GNOME’s build will not have OOXML, it is just further proof of Novell’s influence in the project.

  6. Jeff Waugh said,

    November 27, 2007 at 10:11 pm

    Gravatar

    I said “end of story” because my answer really is the sum total of the issue. You’re not satisfied, and looking for further intrigue, but there really is nothing here of value to your cause. Sorry.

    Not all svn committers are members of the Foundation and not all members of the Foundation are svn committers. We have a very open community, and host quite a few things in GNOME svn that are not directly related to GNOME itself.

    It looks like you have absolutely no understanding of what CIA is either. That’s unfortunate, because it ought to be a very informative place for you to do research.

    CIA is a revision control stats site, providing information about revision control repositories of projects throughout the FLOSS world. What you’re seeing on the CIA site is a report of what’s happening in GNOME svn. It is not a separate svn repository.

    What looks suspicious about the viewvc page, which simply displays what’s in GNOME svn?

    Novell build their OpenOffice.org from this set of patches, as do numerous other distributions. This is where the work is done, that is all. It is not a “GNOME build” or a “GNOME version” of OpenOffice.org.

    The existence of the ooo-build module isn’t proof or evidence of Novell’s influence in the project. It was created years ago before Novell bought Ximian, and work there continues to this day.

    I would absolutely welcome your queries about these issues in order to help you, but you have been entirely unwilling to do so. Sorry Roy, you’re just looking everywhere you possibly can for evidence of some nefarious scheme, and showing your inexperience and lack of knowledge in the process.

  7. Roy Schestowitz said,

    November 27, 2007 at 10:37 pm

    Gravatar

    I said “end of story” because my answer really is the sum total of the issue. You’re not satisfied, and looking for further intrigue, but there really is nothing here of value to your cause. Sorry.

    I don’t think one can just announce that an argument has been resolved without the approval of its opposing side. That’s like the United States stating that Japan has already forgiven it for the nukes.

    Not all svn committers are members of the Foundation and not all members of the Foundation are svn committers. We have a very open community, and host quite a few things in GNOME svn that are not directly related to GNOME itself.

    Fair point, Jeff. I hope you’ll agree with me that such thing can sometimes raise suspicion though. It was only yesterday that I found out about a member who resigned silently. He happened to be ‘just’ the president. My point is probably more of a case of lateral thinking, but it’s a suspicion that I have nonetheless.

    What looks suspicious about the viewvc page, which simply displays what’s in GNOME svn?

    Oh, I see. My bad. You’re right and I was wrong on this one.

  8. Jeff Waugh said,

    November 27, 2007 at 10:49 pm

    Gravatar

    I don’t think one can just announce that an argument has been resolved without the approval of its opposing side.

    I didn’t Roy. I said “end of story” because that was the end of the story of what the issue was. Don’t be petty.

    Fair point, Jeff. I hope you’ll agree with me that such thing can sometimes raise suspicion though.

    I don’t agree, and I don’t think your approach is reasonable or justified. You just parrot insinuations and conspiracies with no regard for the people or communities you’re talking about. You’re actively looking for devils, and trying very hard to publicise your suspicions to make them controversies.

    You’re right and I was wrong on this one.

    Thank you. Next time, hopefully you’ll do your research *before* publishing such nasty, wrongful accusations. That’s a much nicer way to do things, and much more trustworthy to your readers and the community that you purport to service.

    I hope you have learned something from this, and change your behaviour.

  9. Roy Schestowitz said,

    November 27, 2007 at 11:20 pm

    Gravatar

    I didn’t Roy. I said “end of story” because that was the end of the story of what the issue was. Don’t be petty.

    Oh, I must have misunderstood. I thought you suggested that I ought to stop asking further questions.

    I don’t agree, and I don’t think your approach is reasonable or justified. You just parrot insinuations and conspiracies with no regard for the people or communities you’re talking about.

    These are not insinuation and conspiracies (words with bad connotation notes). These are perfectly legitimate questions that simply complete a story filled with missing information.

    You’re actively looking for devils, and trying very hard to publicise your suspicions to make them controversies.

    Again, the word “devil” is used. It’s a word with a negative connotation. This is something which Stallman has spoken about quite a lot recently, e.g. from this brand-new new article by Bruce Byfield:

    Anyone looking for a summary of the free software movement’s concerns needs only to look at Richard M. Stallman’s essay “Some Confusing or Loaded Words and Phrases that are Worth Avoiding.”

    It’s almost as though I’m seeing more demonisation attempts against this site. I only wrote about this yesterday.

    To say more on self-serving selection of terminology, here is a new article from Glyn Moody. He cited Stallman.

    For readers of Linux Journal, “IP” almost certainly refers to the Internet Protocol, part of the TCP/IP suite that underpins the Internet. But to most people, if it means anything, “IP” refers to something known as “intellectual property”. This widespread recognition is rather curious, because “intellectual property” does not exist.

    Ironically, such techniques are mastered by ‘angels’ like SCO, the RIAA (the word “pirate”), and Microsoft.

  10. Roy Schestowitz said,

    November 27, 2007 at 11:41 pm

    Gravatar

    An afterthought: in any case, having other GNOME applications ‘supporting’ OOXML would make it seem almost un-reasonable that Meeks, who “forked” the Novell/Sun OOo, works on the GNOME OOo. This whole scenario is a little bizarre, especially with OOXML coming to GNOME from through vectors: OpenOffice.org (via Novell) and Gnumeric (Jody Goldberg, who used to work at Novell, IIRC).

    So many coincidences, so I’m merely looking for answers.

  11. Jeff Waugh said,

    November 27, 2007 at 11:49 pm

    Gravatar

    These are perfectly legitimate questions that simply complete a story filled with missing information.

    So why don’t you ask questions and find out the truth first, so that what you publish doesn’t have to be a bunch of flat out incorrect suspicions and insinuations? I’ve asked time and time again. You’re just irresponsible.

    Again, the word “devil” is used. It’s a word with a negative connotation.

    Sure. You’re looking for the absolute worst in all of these things, and will rely on the thinnest of evidence — and usually a complete *lack* of evidence, just leading questions and insinuations — to land your attack.

    the GNOME OOo

    Again, I refute, and again your repeat this incorrect assertion: There is no “GNOME OOo”.

  12. Roy Schestowitz said,

    November 28, 2007 at 12:12 am

    Gravatar

    Again, I refute, and again your repeat this incorrect assertion: There is no “GNOME OOo”.

    Oops. I should have phrased it differently, like “OOo, which is available for GNOME users”. What I’m trying to say is that OOXML will be reaching Linux applications from multiple directions. As I’ve stated earlier via E-mail to you, “the translator involves C#, which leads to Novell’s exclusionary Mono protection.” Only Novell has a lot to benefit from all of this. GNOME users have a _lot_ to lose here and in the future they’ll have more and more Mono right on their desktop, amid times when Microsoft ‘cracks down’ on businesses and demands money for patent violations (yes, it’s already extracting money from GNU/Linux extortions). I wonder if you already know about this at all. The media does not cover this, but it’s true. It’s almost scary.

  13. Jeff Waugh said,

    November 28, 2007 at 4:46 am

    Gravatar

    Oops. I should have phrased it differently, like “OOo, which is available for GNOME users”.

    This is again casting aspersions on GNOME where it is not relevant. If you had any desire to be accurate, or had done any research about the issue, you’d say “Novell’s branch of OpenOffice.org”. You’ve not updated the article, either.

  14. Roy Schestowitz said,

    November 28, 2007 at 4:53 am

    Gravatar

    I just have. Thanks for this. What about the remainder of my comment? There are some very important points in there which are worth addressing.

  15. Jeff Waugh said,

    November 28, 2007 at 4:57 am

    Gravatar

    Wow, you’ve corrected the reference, but none of the insinuations! Really nice! Way to keep a site up to date with all the latest information and respectful of the community you purport to serve! Nasty and shameful.

    I didn’t think the rest of your comment was interesting or relevant.

  16. Roy Schestowitz said,

    November 28, 2007 at 5:01 am

    Gravatar

    What about the remainder of my comment? Namely:

    “OOXML will be reaching Linux applications from multiple directions. As I’ve stated earlier via E-mail to you, “the translator involves C#, which leads to Novell’s exclusionary Mono protection.” Only Novell has a lot to benefit from all of this. GNOME users have a _lot_ to lose here and in the future they’ll have more and more Mono right on their desktop, amid times when Microsoft ‘cracks down’ on businesses and demands money for patent violations (yes, it’s already extracting money from GNU/Linux extortions). I wonder if you already know about this at all. The media does not cover this, but it’s true. It’s almost scary.”

    The more this discussion gets suppressed, the more suspicious one can become. I also worry that companies like IBM will look at this and be worried.

What Else is New


  1. Links 28/6/2016: Red Hat Summit 2016, Hadoop Events

    Links for the day



  2. Today's Media Coverage Says Microsoft Loves Linux, But Today Microsoft Extorted Linux Using Software Patents Again

    Luna Mobile has just been extorted by Microsoft (using dubious software patents, as usual) for using Android/Linux, but Microsoft-influenced media carries on spreading the lie that "Microsoft loves Linux"



  3. New Efforts to Work Around Barriers to UPC in Light of 'Brexit'; Behind These Efforts Are Self-Serving Patent Profiteers

    look at who's trying to work around the latest barriers to the widely-unwanted (by the public) Unitary Patent regime and what is being planned behind the scenes, or behind closed doors (by and for those who stand to profit from the Unitary Patent regime)



  4. Injunction Against Battistelli's Investigative Unit (Known Internally as 'Gestapo') Amid Serious Injustices and Bogus 'Trials'

    SUEPO, the EPO's staff union, steps up its spiel in a case against the "European Patent Organization" as defendant and "SUEPO/VEOB" (Trade Union of the European Patent Office) as claimants



  5. [ES] Con la UPC Muerta por el Resto del Termino de Battistelli, No Hay Razón para que la EPO o el Consejo Administrativo Sigan Manteniéndolo Más

    Pensamientos acerca de lo que pasará al líderazgo de la EPO después de ‘Brexit’ (salida Británica de la EU), lo que sevéramente socava el proyecto más grande de Battistelli el que usaba habituálmente para justificar sus increíbles abusos



  6. [ES] El Caradura Benoît Battistelli Debería Renunciar a Luz de la Filtrada Nueva Decisión en Su Vendeta en Contra de un Juez que se Atrevió a Decir la Verdad (Actualizado)

    Benoît Battistelli continúa quebrando las propias reglas de la EPO, no sólo las leyes naciónales, como una nueva decisión ayuda a revelar



  7. [ES] Cada Vez Más Parece Que Battistelli está Escondiéndo ‘Evidencia’ Falsa y/o Ilegalmente Obtenda de la Unidad Investigativa de la EPO

    El porqué creemos que Benoît Battistelli está cada vez mas desesperado de esconder operaciónes ilícitas de reunir ´evidencia´ lo que eventuálment lo puso a él mismo — no al acusado — en una situación catastrófica situacion que lo puede forzar (esperamos) a us renuncia



  8. Links 28/6/2016: Vista 10 Updategate, OpenMandriva 3.0 Beta 2

    Links for the day



  9. Links 27/6/2016: Linux 4.7 RC 5, OpenMandriva Lx 3.0 Beta 2

    Links for the day



  10. From Alleged Organised Crime to Vice-President of the European Patent Office (EPO)

    Željko Topić's situation in Croatia illuminated by means of recent documents from the authorities



  11. Battistelli May Still be on the Way Out as Pressure Grows in Germany, UPC in Shambles

    Pressure on Battistelli is growing even from within circles that are traditionally protective of him and a long letter is sent to Dr. Christoph Ernst, who some believe will replace Battistelli



  12. Caricature: European Patent Office (EPO) Under Battistelli

    The latest caricature about the state of the European Patent Office (EPO)



  13. Techrights (Almost) at 10: From Software Patents to Novell and to Present Focus on EPO

    A short story about how and why we ended up writing so much about the European Patent Office (EPO) and the impact beyond Europe



  14. Patents Roundup: Bad Quality (USPTO), Bad Analysis (India), Bad Microsoft, Bad Actors (Trolls), Bad Scope (Software Patents), and the Ugly

    A mishmash of news about patents, mostly regarding the United States, and what can be deduced at the moment



  15. Links 26/6/2016: IceCat 38.8.0, Wine 1.9.13

    Links for the day



  16. With UPC Dead for Battistelli's Entire Remaining Term, No Reason for the EPO or the Administrative Council to Keep Battistelli Around

    Thoughts about what happens to the EPO's leadership after 'Brexit' (British exit from the EU), which severely undermines Battistelli's biggest project that he habitually used to justify his incredible abuses



  17. Links 24/6/2016: Xen Project 4.7, Cinnamon 3.0.6

    Links for the day



  18. Benoît Battistelli Should Resign in Light of New Leak of Decision in His Vendetta Against Truth-Telling Judge (Updated)

    Benoît Battistelli continues to break the EPO's own rules, not just national laws, as a new decision helps reveal



  19. Fake Patents on Software From Fake Australian 'Inventor' of Bitcoin and the Globally-Contagious Nature of EPO Patent Scope

    News from Australia regarding software patents that should not be granted and how patent lawyers from Australia rely on European patent law (EPO and UK-IPO) for guidance on patent scope



  20. Patent Lawyers Love (and Amplify) Halo and Enfish, Omit or Dismiss Cuozzo and Alice

    By misinterpreting the current situation with respect to software patents and misusing terms like "innovation" patent lawyers and others in the patent microcosm hope to convince the public (or potential clients) that nothing in effect has changed and software patents are all fine and dandy



  21. Looks Increasingly Plausible That Battistelli is Covering up Bogus and/or Illegally-Obtained 'Evidence' From the EPO's Investigative Unit

    Why we believe that Benoît Battistelli is growingly desperate to hide evidence of rogue evidence-collecting operations which eventually landed himself -- not the accused -- in a catastrophic situation that can force his resignation



  22. As Decision on the UK's EU Status Looms, EPO Deep in a Crisis of Patent Quality

    Chaotic situation at the EPO and potential changes in the UK cause a great deal of debate about the UPC, which threatens to put the whole or Europe at the mercy of patent trolls from abroad



  23. Another Demonstration by European Patent Office (EPO) Staff on Same Day as Administrative Council's Meeting

    SUEPO (staff union of the EPO) continues to organise staff actions against extraordinary injustice by Benoît Battistelli and his flunkies whom he gave top positions at the EPO



  24. Links 23/6/2016: Red Hat Results, Randa Stories

    Links for the day



  25. Interview With FOSSForce/All Things Free Tech

    New interview with Robin "Roblimo" Miller on behalf of FOSSForce



  26. Links 22/6/2016: PulseAudio 9.0, GNOME 3.21.3 Released

    Links for the day



  27. IP Europe's UPC Lobbying and the EPO Connection

    The loose but seemingly ever-growing connections between AstroTurfing groups like IP Europe (pretending to represent SMEs) and EPO staff which is lobbying-centric



  28. EPO “Recruitment of Brits is Down by 80%”

    Letter says that “recruitment of Brits is down by 80%” and "the EPO lost 7% of UK staff in one year"



  29. The Conspiracy of Patent Lawyers for UPC and Battistelli's Role in Preparing by Firing People

    The parasitic firms that lobby for the UPC and actually create it -- firms like those that pass money to Battistelli's EPO -- are doing exactly the opposite of what Europe needs



  30. Patent Lawyers, Having Lost Much of the Battle for Software Patents in the US, Resort to Harmful Measures and Spin

    A quick glance at how patent lawyers and their lobbyists/advocates have reacted to the latest decision from the US Supreme Court (Justice Breyer)


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts