Government // Enterprise Architecture
Commentary
12/31/2008
11:19 AM
Serdar Yegulalp
Serdar Yegulalp
Commentary
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Why OpenOffice Is Mired In Sun's Swamp

While I was out getting my fill of Christmas turkey, a brouhaha erupted online about the state of the OpenOffice.org project. One of the developers on the Novell side, Michael Meeks, wrote a widely circulated blog post in which he chastised Sun for its heavy-handed handling of arguably one of the most significant open source projects of our time.

While I was out getting my fill of Christmas turkey, a brouhaha erupted online about the state of the OpenOffice.org project. One of the developers on the Novell side, Michael Meeks, wrote a widely circulated blog post in which he chastised Sun for its heavy-handed handling of arguably one of the most significant open source projects of our time.

Meeks sees a small, and dwindling, number of core contributors to the project as being one of the big reasons for its relative stagnation. I'm betting my use of "relative" will have people wincing -- I know, relative to what? -- but I'd say you could make a case that OO.o has not enjoyed much development compared with the way things like Firefox have evolved. It's fallen largely to third parties -- the Novel/Go-oo team, or IBM's Symphony people -- to do really advanced and creative things with the code.

The other reason the fountain seems to be drying up ties into the way Sun has handled open source projects in general: It's too difficult for outside developers to get involved and contribute because the code base is such a cryptic snarl. The work required to clear the decks and make OO.o into something cleaner and more refined might be more than Sun can manage.

I'm wondering if the major contributions would end up going to a project like Symphony, which stands more of a chance of being rethought along much cleaner lines. (Times like this I wish I were a programmer so I could look at the two codebases and see how they shape up against each other, but that sounds like an obscenely major undertaking.)

The source of the problem, as I see it, is Sun being Sun: It doesn't know when to let a good thing flourish according to its own needs, instead of its top-down management style. Small wonder some people were deeply nervous when Sun acquired MySQL; they were worried a similar approach would be imposed on that company, and MySQL would end up foundering as a result. That hasn't happened, thank goodness, but probably because MySQL already had its own development culture apart from anything Sun gave to it (read: imposed on it).

Matt Asay has weighed in on the whole problem and suggested that the solution is to have OO.o spun off into a separate foundational entity, à la Eclipse. That might help, but I have too much skepticism about Sun's agility as a whole -- and its future as a company -- to expect that to work. I'd sooner bet on Novell or IBM to offer a real way forward.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
White Papers
Current Issue
InformationWeek Tech Digest, Dec. 9, 2014
Apps will make or break the tablet as a work device, but don't shortchange critical factors related to hardware, security, peripherals, and integration.
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
InformationWeek Radio
Archived InformationWeek Radio
Join us for a roundup of the top stories on InformationWeek.com for the week of December 14, 2014. Be here for the show and for the incredible Friday Afternoon Conversation that runs beside the program.
Sponsored Live Streaming Video
Everything You've Been Told About Mobility Is Wrong
Attend this video symposium with Sean Wisdom, Global Director of Mobility Solutions, and learn about how you can harness powerful new products to mobilize your business potential.