in reply to Luis Villa

It seems clear to me that the embarrassment lands squarely on the tech media, who should be far better at communicating "#OpenOffice is not what you're looking for, use #LibreOffice @libreoffice instead". That's firmly within the tech media's job.

The job of @TheASF lies primarily in maintaining software. Let them maintain whatever software, for as long as people want it maintained.

This entry was edited (1 month ago)
in reply to Luis Villa

@bignose @libreoffice Eg, the OpenOffice website could say “please don’t download this, we just do it for fun and as a result this often has security vulnerabilities. If you want an free office suite that is maintained to a high level of professionalism and security, please go to libreoffice.org”. But instead it not only encourages downloads, it misleads a banner stating “380M downloads”, giving the impression that it is an active (and presumably secure) project.
in reply to some reatarded wood

@somereatardedwood @bignose @libreoffice it’s unfortunate but this is the case. Elsewhere in this thread I’ve posted at least three situations where a security researcher did proper bug filing against OOo, and then no release was done until after the security researcher had done the correct thing (waited, waited, and only then with reluctance published the vulnerability). And given that Libreoffice is doing regular security releases from a similar codebase, there’s almost certainly more.