User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Then they ignore you

Then they ignore you

Posted Nov 3, 2012 11:08 UTC (Sat) by Wol (guest, #4433)
Parent article: LibreOffice and OpenOffice clash over user numbers (OStatic)

Why, every time I see something like this, is it OO that is kicking up the fuss? As others have pointed out, these sort of statistics are terribly unreliable.

Tip to Rob - take a leaf out of LO's book and blow your own trumpet. Ignore what the others are doing, it just makes you look small!

Oh - and we've got a coalition government over here - I'm not changing the subject - honest. But it was brought to my attention some while back that if the junior partners don't make a racket, they fade away. The more racket you make, the more obvious it is that you're the bit player.

Just use your own IBM and Apache connections to grow your own market, and forget about what the LO guys are doing. Anything else makes you look small, and increases the chances of you getting even smaller.

Cheers,
Wol


(Log in to post comments)

Then they ignore you

Posted Nov 3, 2012 13:40 UTC (Sat) by mjw (subscriber, #16740) [Link]

Yeah, it is somewhat strange that Apache/IBM seems so focused on TDF/LibreOffice. And why focus on a somewhat hard to track (at least for a free software project) metric like downloads/users?

If you look at the communications from TDF/LibreOffice last month (http://blog.documentfoundation.org/) downloads and users estimates are only mentioned twice in passing. And Apache isn't even mentioned once.

I would happily read about Apache Office success stories and their development metrics if they publish them, but trying to compare them across such different project/communities seems doomed to fail.

I just tried to compare commits/developers between projects on ohloh. But even that is comparing apples to oranges, since LibreOffice only counts their core code/developers, while Apache includes even their website/marketing/wiki edits. Also LibreOffice is worth less because they removed so much dead code :) https://www.ohloh.net/p/compare?project_0=LibreOffice&...

Then they ignore you

Posted Nov 4, 2012 23:39 UTC (Sun) by man_ls (guest, #15091) [Link]

It is obvious: because they have nothing else to show for their efforts. Relicensing their code to ASL 2.0 didn't really matter to anyone (having GPL and MPL), so now they are really behind in features. They cannot reuse LibreOffice code anymore. And probably they have no idea about what new features to add to their stagnant code base. Hence: badmouth the competition.

Then they ignore you

Posted Nov 5, 2012 12:17 UTC (Mon) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link]

Actually, relicencing their code to ASL2 *DID* matter.

If they hadn't, LO would be LGPL3-only. I don't know how far LO has got with relicencing their code to MPL, but if it weren't for the Apache code drop, they wouldn't be able to - all the legacy Sun/Oracle code would be stuck on LGPL3.

And I know LO has ripped a lot of that code out, but it probably still makes up 80%-plus of shipping code.

Cheers,
Wol

Then they ignore you

Posted Nov 5, 2012 5:31 UTC (Mon) by shmget (subscriber, #58347) [Link]

"I just tried to compare commits/developers between projects on ohloh. But even that is comparing apples to oranges"

Yep... back in June this year, Rob Weir, in preparation for their 'graduation', added their wiki and website as 'repos' in ohloh... making him the 3rd most prolific coder, in the last 12 month, for the project -- with 410 commits or about 9% of the total, despite having 0(zero) code commit -- and more than doubling overnight all the ohloh metrics for his project.

Then again... he wrote the book on these techniques:
http://www.robweir.com/blog/2012/04/free-software-marketi...

It is only fitting that he followed his own advices....

Then they ignore you

Posted Nov 7, 2012 0:32 UTC (Wed) by rcweir (guest, #48888) [Link]

What is in Ohloh is not relevant. The point is what you promote in your press releases and fundraising materials. The point is the public claims you make, how you represent your project in your official communications.

If Apache was issuing press releases claiming a core developer community count based on HTML editors or other non-coders, then you would be quite correct is calling that out as improper. But they haven't done that, have they?

(And btw, AOO goes into some detail on their Stats page about their Ohloh stats: http://www.openoffice.org/stats/)

Then they ignore you

Posted Nov 10, 2012 17:00 UTC (Sat) by mjw (subscriber, #16740) [Link]

Apache seems to still use subversion which makes it a bit hard to easily get the raw statistics. Luckily there is a way to import it all into git, it just takes a really long time. But then the raw data can be more easily compared.

ApacheOffice:
git svn clone https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/trunk/main apacheoffice

last 30 days, 61 commits by 10 different authors.
last 8 weeks, 166 commits by 17 different authors.
last 6 months, 950 commits by 26 different authors.
last 1 year, 1887 commits by 29 different authors.

LibreOffice:
git clone git://anongit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core libreoffice

last 30 days, 1361 commits by 68 different authors.
last 8 weeks, 3039 commits by 97 different authors.
last 6 months, 9591 commits by 213 different authors.
last 1 year, 19111 commits by 380 different authors.

So OpenOffice at Apache isn't dead yet, but compared to the giant community and activity of LibreOffice at The Document Foundation it doesn't look very healthy.

Then they ignore you

Posted Nov 10, 2012 23:46 UTC (Sat) by cesarb (subscriber, #6266) [Link]

> Apache seems to still use subversion which makes it a bit hard to easily get the raw statistics. Luckily there is a way to import it all into git, it just takes a really long time.

Apache has git-svn mirrors for their projects at http://git.apache.org/. Unfortunately, it does not seem to have a mirror for Apache OpenOffice yet.

Also, be careful when comparing the number of commits. Git and Subversion tend to encourage different commit patterns, so what is a lot of small commits in one could be a few large commits in the other. The same with the number of authors: Git has separate fields for "author" and "committer", while Subversion has only the committer.

Then they ignore you

Posted Nov 11, 2012 10:59 UTC (Sun) by mjw (subscriber, #16740) [Link]

Yeah, comparing commits against projects is always a little iffy. But in this case it does seem somewhat comparable. They are both branches of the same code base and the commits in both cases are generally small, with an occasional bigger commit in between. So LibreOffice sees approx 10 times the number of changes that Apache Office sees in the same timeframe. Still OpenOffice at Apache with ~60 commits by ~10 different people per month is far from dead. That is even a respectable amount of work for a lot of free software projects (I work on some smaller projects that see far less activity than that). But it really looks like what Apache Office does in 1 year is comparable to what LibreOffice does each and every month. Which does make sense if you see the momentum behind The Document Foundation and how much bigger the contributor base is for LibreOffice. The large amount of new features they add for each release is another indicator. But take all cross-project commit statistics with a grain of salt. It is just a coarse indicator of developer activity.

Then they ignore you

Posted Nov 16, 2012 3:37 UTC (Fri) by steffen780 (guest, #68142) [Link]

60 commits by 10 people in a month would be GREAT for a small project, especially one that goes with no or almost no funding. But AOO is neither small, nor does it have to make do without funding. For a project of this size 60 commits in a month is a complete joke.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds