The Apache Foundation could simply have accepted the OpenOffice.org codebase+trademarks from Oracle, then donate to LibreOffice.

But they did not do so. The Apache Foundation does not have experience with software that end-users use. They have experience with server software. That was their undoing.

As I recall Sun and IBM had a contract cause OOo was used for Lotus Notes. Then Oracle bought Sun. Oracle had obligations to IBM from that contract. Oracle could not figure-out how to make money on OOo so wanted to get rid of it. Oracle offered it to IBM but IBM did not want it. Instead IBM suggested ASF take it on. So Oracle relicensed under ASL and transferred everything hence Apache OpenOffice was born. IBM provided most of the devs to the project at that point, even hired some Star and Sun folks for it.

While this was all happening LibreOffice formed from... what was it... Goo go or something like that, the folks that were behind the build system and distro patches that most people outside of Solaris were actually running. I have a suspicion that there were terms agreed to between IBM, Oracle, and ASF that prevented ASF from donating anything to anyone.

Now IBM has scaled back support and at this point it's an LGPL v APL religious war.

> I have a suspicion that there were terms agreed to between IBM, Oracle, and ASF that prevented ASF from donating anything to anyone.

There were no secret deals. The Apache Incubator PMC voted on a public proposal (<http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenOfficeProposal>) which included both a community and the promise of assets. Those assets were later delivered as promised. The incubation process then proceeded as it has for scores of other projects. It would have been completely inappropriate, unthinkable, for the Incubator (which oversees incubating projects) or the ASF Board (which oversees all projects) to take the assets away from that nascent community.

Tank you for the excellent link, my speculation was false. I wonder then why reuniting did not pan-out. Here is a working version of the link: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenOfficeProposal

At the time of the donation, The Document Foundation had an (understandably) antagonistic relationship with Oracle and legal foundations which were firming up but not yet solid. The assets were not going to TDF from Oracle directly.

In accepting the proposal for a new Apache OpenOffice project, the ASF accepted not only the assets from Oracle but also a community, distinct from the LibreOffice community, that wanted to work with those assets. That community had to be given a chance. Without all those things, the deal could not have been completed.

Even at the time of donation, LibreOffice had already gained a substantial set of the former Sun/Oracle developers: Stephan Bergmann (to Red Hat), Bjoern Michaelsen (to Canonical), Eike Rathke (to RedHat), Michael Stahl (to Red Hat). Together with other former Sun developers like e.g. Thorsten Behrens and Caolán McNamara, LibreOffice had more of the old Sun developers than Apache OpenOffice had at any point in time. Incidentally, they also made a lot of contributions that allowed LibreOffice to strife past other derivatives: like build system cleanup, static code analysis and fuzzing, bibisecting.

What community? The only community around OpenOffice.org were the Sun/Oracle devs + the Go-OO devs getting it to work on Linux.

The Go-OO devs forked it into LibreOffice and then Oracle shuttered their own work and reassigned their devs to other projects. Only a tiny handful of devs not part of Go-OO remained, and they had not been instrumental in actually maintaining the codebase as these other two groups had.

There was no community around Apache OpenOffice.

There were enough people on the "Initial Committers" list here to persuade the Apache Incubator PMC to adopt the project: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenOfficeProposal

Subsequently, there were enough people to vet and prepare multiple releases over the next couple years after that.

In fact, Oracle didn't even have many committers on OOo at the time - they'd reassigned most of the StarDivision devs to the abortive CloudOffice. At the time of the fork, LO had more dev resources on the codebase than Oracle did.

You forgot the /s at the end of the line :-).

Committing on both repositories is not practical, because the source code has diverged too much between the two. It's now too much effort and requires brain power to do.

I have not seen blame from LibreOffice developers and I do not understand what is being said in the AOO discussion.

Instead, the Apache OpenOpenOffice people took advantage of the openoffice.org domain. They should have put on openoffice.org that the old OOo has been forked into AOO, LibreOffice and NeoOffice. However, what they did is not mention at all that LibreOffice is one of the options out of the defunct OpenOffice.org.

Here is another curlpipesh: https://fixubuntu.com/

You can do that for all of these, just request the file directly and copy it out of the browser.