Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice

> There are a lot of open issues to be implemented in the future. Issue A may request a certain GUI, issue B a different GUI...
Yes, so what? Again, here's the list of criteria for some feature F that would justify a fork:
- it must be impossible to implement in LibreOffice, be it for technical or social or some other reason. Otherwise, it's clearly best to simply implement it there and be done with it, since you'll otherwise end up with dozens of office suites, each of which implements a different subset of the features any given user needs
- it must be implementable in Apache OpenOffice in theory as well as practice. Otherwise both alternatives won't have it, making neither product better in that respect
If you cannot name such a feature, you failed to apply your argument to the situation at hand. And in fact, the only feature meaningful feature that AOO ever brought to the table, the sidebar, was rapidly ported to LO, making AOO redundant. That alone proves your argument doesn't fly *at all*.

> Look at the current M$ office market share...
The numbers alone don't mean *anything at all* as long as they're not accompanied by a theory as to why they are the way they are. In fact, it's easy to argue the other way around: MS's market share clearly indicates that interoperability issues, thin spreading of developer resources etc. have left the open source office suites unable to compete, thus resulting in a monopoly of MS Office. Now I'm not saying that's actually the case, but you'll have to provide some sort of argument as to why this assessment of the situation is so much more likely to be wrong than your's if you want to be taken seriously.