The “donation” of the code to ASF was met coolly by The Document Foundation (TDF), the organization of developers that spun off LibreOffice in September 2010 from OpenOffice in response to Oracle’s handling of the project, including the decision to charge for the previously free Open Document Format plugin that allowed interoperability between OpenOffice and Microsoft Office suite. TDF lists its supporters, which include most of the big names in Linux: Red Hat, Canonical, Novell, Google and more.

TDF issued a statement, explaining that this move was not all they had hoped for:

The Document Foundation would welcome the reuniting of the OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice projects into a single community of equals in the wake of the departure of Oracle. The step Oracle has taken today was no doubt taken in good faith, but does not appear to directly achieve this goal. The Apache community, which we respect enormously, has very different expectations and norms – licensing, membership and more – to the existing OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice projects. We regret the missed opportunity but are committed to working with all active community members to devise the best possible future for LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org.

This move by Oracle doesn’t seem to be as “open” claim in its press materials on the matter, and TDF’s grumblings won’t go unnoticed by the open source community. One of the key hang-ups is the change of software licensing under Apache. Previously, OpenOffice code was licensed under the GPL, LGPLv3 and MPL. Under Apache’s license, modifications to the code do not need to be given back, which contrasts with the previous licensing versions.

Notably, IBM is supporting the move, and Bob Sutor has issued his own analysis and reaction on his blog.

More on OpenOffice and ASF
Oracle watchers speculate on future of OpenOffice

ASF Incubator: What does that mean?

My recent story on the dimming of the LAMP stack sparked a thoughtful reader response from John Locke, the manager of Seattle-based Freelock Computing. The story concluded that while an all-open source stack is still a valid concept, there are many more open source options that LAMP (Linux, Apache, MySQL and Perl, Python, PHP) is largely irrelevant.  I made a single exception for Apache, the popular Web server.

Locke argued, however, that even Apache has a growing array of alternatives such as the Lighttpd Web server, the Apache FastCGI Web interface,  the Nginx proxy server and others.

But what undercuts the LAMP stack more than the advent of additional open source options is the emergence of cloud frameworks, Locke said.

Initially, cloud computing meant renting compute power on demand from the likes of Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2). This meant renting a host virtual machine, programming the top layer, adding libraries and then when it was all done, managing the host and the virtual application, Locke said.

The problem with this model is that data centers are responsible for scaling the application up or down in response to changing volume requirements, he said. To solve this problem, Google, as well as Microsoft’s recently announced Azure platform, go beyond computing-on demand and manage the entire process with frameworks. All you do is write the application code (yes, you still need the P in LAMP), put it atop an application framework, and the framework will scale the application up and down as needed. No further involvement required. No LAMP stack required either.

Two successful examples of cloud frameworks are Salesforce.com and Facebook, he said.

The downside of frameworks, however, are loss of control and potential vendor lock-in, Locke said. The risk is less with Amazon EC2 since its controls are far more limited, he said. When writing an application for a specific vendor’s framework, however, a customer can lose portability because the provisioning and scaling mechanisms are behind-the-scenes and the source code and licensing are not necessarily readily available, he said.

The biggest challenge to LAMP as well as the Java and .NET stacks, therefore, is not the growth of additional choices but the cloud frameworks which may make all the stacks irrelevant. While handing over management and control is convenient, it also has its downside: you have to live by someone else’s rules, Locke said. Just  like a condo or regulated housing community, you’ve delegated the work, but you’ve also lost your freedom. Time will tell if you’ve made a good bet.

Well, close, but not quite. Apache continued its “winning streak” in September over Microsoft’s Internet Information Server, but by a smaller margin than the month before (when Netcraft, which watches these kinds of things like a hawk, said that IIS was poised to challenge Apache’s market share lead sometime soon).

Part of this — as we’ve reported before — is due to Tomcat and to Google’s big server switch in 2006. Both of these phenomenons had a profound affect on Apache’s numbers, but were not in and of themselves an indicator of any slippage.

However, all that said, IIS is growing thanks to a rise in social networking sites like MySpace and Windows Live Spaces, both of which use ISS.

Says Netcraft:

The high growth so far this year has been largely driven by the increasing number of online blogging and social networking communities. This month sees strong growth in the number of sites at Windows Live Spaces, MySpace, and Blogger appearing in the survey. The increased popularity of these blog hosting services continues to have a dramatic effect on the web server market shares: Apache suffered a sudden decline in share when sites at Blogger switched to Google’s GFE.

Apache gains over 3 million hostnames, and around 0.9 million active sites this month. But this is not enough to prevent its market share declining closer to the 50% mark, as Microsoft also gained over 3 million hostnames (a large part of which come from MySpace and Live Spaces, both of which use its Internet Information Server).

So the battle continues.

Or does it?

The August Netcraft report, out on Monday, showed that the trends established over the past year concerning Apache Web server and Microsoft IIS have continued unabated. We reported on the trend last month in our article, Apache loses more ground in latest Netcraft report, and we found that things are not what they first seemed. Yes, Microsoft IIS is seeing an uptick, but the Apache decline is not entirely a result of that growth.

Mark Brewer, CEO of Covalent Technologies, an Apache support provider based in Walnut Creek, Calif., spoke with us for that article, and his analysis then still applies to the August report. Part of the decline can be blamed on Apache Tomcat, a Web container developed by the Apache Software Foundation, which also created the Apache Web server. According to Forrester Research Inc., 51% of enterprise-class production-level deployments run Tomcat. So, simple deduction: As Apache Tomcat increases, Apache Web server decreases.

“When doing a Netcraft lookup on Web sites that are known to be using Tomcat, [the search] frequently does not report as Apache,” Brewer told us during a visit to our offices in Needham, Mass. Examples include the JBoss site, the Sakai site and Wal-Mart Stores Inc.’s digital photo center Web site.

Additionally, Brewer said most Web sites that use Tomcat to serve up Web content via HTTP would show up in surveys as a “mod_jl.conf” entry — not Apache — and thus would not be counted as sites that use Apache servers.

Google’s “to blame” too. Netcraft originally classified Google servers as Apache machines, but earlier this year the firm began reclassifying these servers in their own unique category. The move affected Apache market share

But this isn’t the whole story. Even as Tomcat/Google cannibalizes Apache, IIS is seeing gains. Netcraft’s report says, “It’s worth noting that Apache has lost market share to another open source server, lighttpd (1.2% of all sites), and Google (4.4%) as well as Windows. But if Microsoft continues to gain share at its current pace, it could close the gap on Apache sometime in 2008.”

That’s a key point, because 2008 is when the new Microsoft Server is *supposed* to come out. We’ll be watching.