Editing OpenOffice.org (section)

==== Apache OpenOffice ====
{{main|Apache OpenOffice}}

In June 2011, Oracle contributed the OpenOffice.org code and trademarks to the Apache Software Foundation. The developer pool for the Apache project was proposed to be seeded by IBM employees, Linux distribution companies and public sector agencies.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/raw/%3C4DE65D8F.8060002@oracle.com%3E/2|title=Proposal|first=Luke|last=Kowalski|work=attachment|access-date=23 September 2013|archive-date=2 July 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160702010257/http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/raw/%3C4DE65D8F.8060002@oracle.com%3E/2|url-status=dead}}; attachment to {{cite web|url=https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/%3C4DE65D8F.8060002@oracle.com%3E|title=OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal|first=Luke|last=Kowalski|work=incubator-general mailing list|publisher=Apache Software Foundation|date=1 June 2011|access-date=23 September 2013|archive-date=1 September 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180901115423/https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/%3C4DE65D8F.8060002@oracle.com%3E|url-status=live}}</ref> IBM employees did the majority of the development,<ref name=infoworld20130826>{{cite magazine|url=http://www.infoworld.com/print/225555|title=In defense of Apache|magazine=InfoWorld|first=Andrew|last=Oliver|date=26 August 2013|access-date=28 August 2013|archive-date=27 August 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130827150444/http://www.infoworld.com/print/225555|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="hillesley20120404">{{cite news|url=http://www.linuxuser.co.uk/news/apache-openoffice-who-knows-where-the-time-goes|title=Apache OpenOffice: who knows where the time goes?|last=Hillesley|first=Richard|date=4 April 2012|publisher=LinuxUser|access-date=11 June 2013|archive-date=4 April 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160404082126/http://www.linuxuser.co.uk/news/apache-openoffice-who-knows-where-the-time-goes|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="sjvn20121028">{{cite news|url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/does-openoffice-have-a-future/|title=Does OpenOffice have a future?|last=Vaughan-Nichols|first=Steven J.|work=ZDNet Linux and Open Source|publisher=ZDNet|date=28 October 2012|access-date=27 December 2012|archive-date=4 December 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141204142233/http://www.zdnet.com/does-openoffice-have-a-future-7000006480/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="brillblog"/><ref>{{cite web|url=http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2012/05/open-source-suites-highly-active/index.htm|title=Open Source Suites Highly Active|first=Simon|last=Phipps|work=Simon Says|publisher=Computerworld UK|date=9 May 2012|access-date=2 July 2013|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130921054858/http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2012/05/open-source-suites-highly-active/index.htm|archive-date=21 September 2013|df=dmy-all}}</ref> including hiring ex-Star Division developers.<ref name="sjvn20121028"/> The Apache project removed or replaced as much code as possible from OpenOffice.org 3.4 beta 1, including fonts, under licenses unacceptable to Apache<ref name=asflegal>{{cite web |url=https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html |title=ASF Legal Previously Asked Questions |publisher=Apache Software Foundation |access-date=5 January 2013 |archive-date=6 February 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180206232339/http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html |url-status=live }}</ref> and released 3.4.0 in May 2012.<ref name="aoo340">{{cite web|url=http://www.openoffice.org/development/releases/3.4.0.html|title=AOO 3.4.0 Release Notes|work=Apache OpenOffice|publisher=Apache Software Foundation|access-date=30 September 2013|archive-date=24 September 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130924085701/http://www.openoffice.org/development/releases/3.4.0.html|url-status=live}}</ref>

The codebase for IBM's Lotus Symphony was donated to the Apache Software Foundation in 2012 and merged for Apache OpenOffice 4.0,<ref name="symphony_allegro_moderato"/> and Symphony was deprecated in favour of Apache OpenOffice.<ref name="brillblog">{{cite web |first=Ed |last=Brill |url=http://edbrill.com/ebrill/edbrill.nsf/dx/more-on-the-lotus-symphony-and-desktop-productivity-roadmap |title=More on the Lotus Symphony and desktop productivity roadmap |publisher=Ed Brill |date=5 February 2012 |access-date=18 October 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120606140010/http://edbrill.com/ebrill/edbrill.nsf/dx/more-on-the-lotus-symphony-and-desktop-productivity-roadmap |archive-date=6 June 2012 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

While the project considers itself the unbroken continuation of OpenOffice.org,<ref>{{cite web|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130825090723/http://www.openoffice.org/about/|url=http://www.openoffice.org/about/|archive-date=25 August 2013|access-date=3 October 2013|title=About Apache OpenOffice|url-status=dead|df=dmy-all}}</ref> others regard it as a fork,<ref name="thonline2011"/><ref name=infoworld20130826/><ref name="hillesley20120404"/><ref name=cloudave>{{cite web|url=http://www.cloudave.com/13293/oracle-donates-openoffice-org-to-apache-a-quick-analysis/|title=Oracle Donates OpenOffice.org To Apache: A Quick Analysis|first=Krishnan|last=Subramanian|date=1 June 2011|access-date=1 October 2013|work=CloudAve|publisher=Cloud Avenue LLC|archive-date=10 August 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170810205917/https://www.cloudave.com/13293/oracle-donates-openoffice-org-to-apache-a-quick-analysis/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/06/11/apache_openoffice_ship_when_ready/|title=Apache devs: 'We'll ship no OpenOffice before its time'|first=Neil|last=McAllister|work=The Register|publisher=Situation Publishing|date=11 June 2013|access-date=2 October 2013|archive-date=24 October 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171024125840/http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/06/11/apache_openoffice_ship_when_ready/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://opensource.com/life/13/1/software-wars|title=Software Wars: A film about FOSS, collaboration, and software freedom|first=Jason|last=Hibbets|work=opensource.com|publisher=Red Hat|date=15 January 2013|access-date=2 October 2013|archive-date=10 August 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170810205937/https://opensource.com/life/13/1/software-wars|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pcworld.com/article/2048446/apache-openoffice-4-0-review-new-features-easier-to-use-still-free.html|title=Apache OpenOffice 4.0 review: New features, easier to use, still free|first=Ian|last=Harac|work=Download This|publisher=PCWorld|date=23 September 2013|access-date=13 October 2013|archive-date=15 August 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170815151734/http://www.pcworld.com/article/2048446/apache-openoffice-4-0-review-new-features-easier-to-use-still-free.html|url-status=live}}</ref> or at the least a separate project.<ref name="gamalielsson2013">{{Cite journal | last1 = Gamalielsson | first1 = J. | last2 = Lundell | first2 = B. R. | title = Sustainability of Open Source software communities beyond a fork: How and why has the LibreOffice project evolved? | doi = 10.1016/j.jss.2013.11.1077 | journal = Journal of Systems and Software | volume = 89 | pages = 128–145 | year = 2013 | doi-access = free }}</ref>

In October 2014, [[Bruce Byfield]], writing for [[Linux Magazine]], said the project had "all but stalled [possibly] due to IBM's withdrawal from the project."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.linuxpromagazine.com/Online/Blogs/Off-the-Beat-Bruce-Byfield-s-Blog/LibreOffice-OpenOffice-and-rumors-of-unification|first=Bruce|last=Byfield|date=30 September 2014|title=LibreOffice, OpenOffice, and rumors of unification|work=Linux Pro Magazine|publisher=Linux New Media|access-date=7 October 2014|archive-date=8 October 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141008203914/http://www.linuxpromagazine.com/Online/Blogs/Off-the-Beat-Bruce-Byfield-s-Blog/LibreOffice-OpenOffice-and-rumors-of-unification|url-status=live}}</ref> {{As of|2015}}, the project has no release manager,<ref>[https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/msg20922.html Retirement announcement] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220328195545/https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/msg20922.html |date=28 March 2022 }}, October 2014; [http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.incubator.ooo.devel/49631 note of position still being unfilled] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170204195222/http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.incubator.ooo.devel/49631 |date=4 February 2017 }}, March 2015</ref> and itself reports a lack of volunteer involvement and code contributions.<ref name="ASF Board minutes January 2015">{{cite web|url=http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2015/board_minutes_2015_01_21.txt|title=The Apache Software Foundation Board of Directors Meeting Minutes January 21, 2015|publisher=Apache Software Foundation|date=21 January 2015|access-date=3 May 2015|archive-date=20 June 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150620113743/http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2015/board_minutes_2015_01_21.txt|url-status=live}}</ref> After ongoing problems with unfixed [[computer security|security]] [[Vulnerability (computing)|vulnerabilities]] from 2015 onward,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://lwn.net/Articles/695562/|title=Apache OpenOffice and CVE-2016-1513|date=27 July 2016|first=Jake|last=Edge|work=[[LWN.net]]|access-date=4 August 2016|archive-date=1 September 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160901144206/http://lwn.net/Articles/695562/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="asfboard201701">{{cite web|url=http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2017/board_minutes_2017_01_18.txt|title=Board of Directors Meeting Minutes|date=18 January 2017|publisher=Apache Foundation|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170418162204/https://www.apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2017/board_minutes_2017_01_18.txt|archive-date=18 April 2017|url-status=dead|access-date=18 April 2017|quote=There will be at least one security fix in the under-development release 4.1.4.}}</ref><ref name="regfeb2019">{{cite web|url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/02/04/apache_openoffice_no_patch/|title=LibreOffice patches malicious code-execution bug, Apache OpenOffice – wait for it, wait for it – doesn't|last=Claburn|first=Thomas|date=4 February 2019|work=The Register|access-date=28 February 2019|archive-date=28 February 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190228192327/https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/02/04/apache_openoffice_no_patch/|url-status=live}}</ref> in September 2016 the project started discussions on possibly retiring AOO.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://lwn.net/Articles/699047/|title=Contemplating the possible retirement of Apache OpenOffice|work=[[LWN.net]]|date=2 September 2016|access-date=3 January 2017|archive-date=3 September 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160903175541/https://lwn.net/Articles/699047/|url-status=live}}</ref>