OpenOffice, after years of neglect, could shut down
on
Get link
Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps
As LibreOffice soars, OpenOffice management considers retiring the project.
Jon Brodkin
OpenOffice, once the premier open
source alternative to Microsoft Office, could be shut down because there
aren't enough developers to update the office suite. Project leaders
are particularly worried about their ability to fix security problems.
"It is my considered opinion that there is no
ready supply of developers who have the capacity, capability, and will
to supplement the roughly half-dozen volunteers holding the project
together," Hamilton wrote.
No decisions have been made yet, but Hamilton
noted that "retirement of the project is a serious possibility," as the
Apache board "wants to know what the project's considerations are with respect to retirement."
Few updates and a lingering security hole
Many developers have abandoned OpenOffice to work on LibreOffice, a fork that got its first release in January 2011. While LibreOffice issues frequent updates, OpenOffice's most recent version update
was 4.1.2 in October 2015. That was the only OpenOffice release in
2015, and there were only two updates in all of 2014. LibreOffice got 14 version updates in 2015 alone.
In July, OpenOffice issued an advisory about a
security vulnerability that had no fix. The problem could let attackers
craft denial-of-service attacks and execute arbitrary code. One of the workarounds suggested
by the OpenOffice project was to use LibreOffice or Microsoft Office
instead. A patch for that problem that can be applied to existing
versions of OpenOffice was released in late August, but concerns about fixing future security problems remain.
Though the vulnerability didn't become public until recently, Hamilton wrote that
the problem and a proof of concept was reported to the OpenOffice team
just as version 4.1.2 was about to be released. Developers figured out a
source code fix in March this year, but "we were sitting on the fix
because we didn't want to give anyone ideas when they saw it applied to
the source code unless there was a release in the works," Hamilton
wrote.
The person who reported the vulnerability
became "concerned about sitting on the disclosure any longer," but
OpenOffice worked out a compromise "to create a hotfix instead of
attempting to work up a full maintenance release (e.g., a 4.1.3),"
Hamilton wrote.
"In the case of Apache OpenOffice, needing to
disclose security vulnerabilities for which there is no mitigation in an
update has become a serious issue," Hamilton wrote. By the time a new
version release incorporates the fix, it will likely be "a year since
the release of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.2."
The ASF board asked the OpenOffice project
management committee "to account for this inability and to provide a
remedy," and ASF wants monthly updates rather than the usual quarterly
ones, Hamilton wrote.
How a shutdown would proceed
While the board hasn't ordered any specific
solution, Hamilton noted that ending the project is one option and
described a possible process for retiring OpenOffice. Source code would
remain available for anyone interested in using it, but the project
would provide no means of committing changes. Installable binaries would
be retained in an archive system, but there would be "no further
additions." The mechanism for announcing updates to the latest version
of OpenOffice would be adjusted to provide "advice to users about
investigating still-supported alternatives."
Various other components of the project would
have to be shut down, including public discussion mailing lists and
mailing lists for developers. OpenOffice would shut down its blog and
Twitter and Facebook accounts. The project management committee would be
disbanded, but Apache would maintain an e-mail address that accepts
requests to make use of the OpenOffice brands.
While this is still hypothetical, Hamilton
said he sketched out the details of the retirement plan because he wants
to make sure "any retirement happen[s] gracefully. That means we need
to consider it as a contingency. For contingency plans, no time is a
good time, but earlier is always better than later."
One response to Hamilton's e-mail came from
Jim Jagielski, a software engineer who co-founded and serves as a board
member of the Apache Software Foundation.
"What is obvious is that the AOO [Apache
OpenOffice] project cannot support, at the present time, being an
end-user focused effort. I would suggest we focus on not being one, but
instead being a framework or library that can be consumed by actual
end-user implementations," Jagielski wrote.
Despite LibreOffice success, OpenOffice has many users
OpenOffice became an open source project in
2000 after Sun Microsystems acquired StarOffice and released the code.
The LibreOffice fork was created after Sun was acquired by Oracle in
2010. After the fork, Oracle contributed OpenOffice to the ASF, which
renamed it Apache OpenOffice.
LibreOffice is maintained by The Document Foundation, whose advisory board
includes free software groups such as the Free Software Foundation and
GNOME and companies such as Canonical, Google, and Red Hat. The
existence of LibreOffice is fortunate because it provides OpenOffice
users new features and a likely more secure alternative to switch to.
LibreOffice is already the default office suite on major Linux
distributions, and it has more than 100 million active users.
But OpenOffice still has plenty of users on
Windows and Mac in part due to name recognition resulting from its long
history. OpenOffice was downloaded more than 29 million times in 2015,
for a cumulative total of more than 160 million downloads since May
2012, according to project statistics.
Developers want to keep OpenOffice alive
There is still support for continuing OpenOffice. Developer Phillip Rhodes wrote
that "even broaching this topic is a mistake" because it will become "a
'3rd party fulfilling prophecy' as soon as this hits the press."
"I know a lot of people prefer to contribute to LO [LibreOffice] and not AOO, and that losing the people IBM was paying was a big hit," Rhodes also wrote.
"But I can't help but think there's a way to get more people involved
and contributing here. So I'd rather see discussion around 'how do we
attract additional contributors (or fix whatever other problems we
have)?' than talk about a 'retirement plan.'"
Developer Jorg Schmidt argued
that OpenOffice is "excellent software" but suffers from "pretty bad
public relations," while LibreOffice is "good" software with "excellent
public relations."
Roberto Galoppini called it "inappropriate at best to discuss anything related to the shutdown at this time."
Developer Pedro Giffuni wrote
that having a retirement plan is important for users and the Apache
Software Foundation, but that "we should focus now on the next release.
It is clear to me that even if AOO were to be retired, we still have to
push out a new release mainly because we do have stuff that should see
the light of a release."
It's theoretically possible that OpenOffice
could be revitalized by being transferred to an independent entity
outside of Apache, but Hamilton argued that the odds are against that happening.
"My considered opinion is that the greatest
barrier is lack of a meaningful business/operation/funding model," he
wrote. "In addition, there is an insufficient supply of developers
having the capacity, capability, and will to provide material
improvements to Apache OpenOffice. Whatever the pool might be, it is
aging and shrinking for many reasons. The affliction that Apache
OpenOffice suffers under in that respect also besets any organization
set up to support the code, even with paid developers."
Comments
Post a Comment