NOW LET US – AI RAG SaaS Studio TP.HCM
NOW LET US
Digital Product Studio
Back to news
DEV-TOOLS...6 min read

TDF ejects its core developers

Share
NOW LET US Article – TDF ejects its core developers

Michael Meeks, a key figure in the LibreOffice community, criticizes The Document Foundation (TDF) for removing long-time core developers, alleging poor governance and electoral gerrymandering within the board.

Stuff Michael Meeks is doing |

Older items: 2023: ( J F M A M J ), 2022: ( J F M A M J J A S O N D ), 2021, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, legacy html

For a rather more polished write-up, complete with pretty pictures please see TDF ejects its core developers. Here is a more personal take. My feeling is that this action has been planned by the TDF rump board's majority for many months, if not for some years. While we have tried to avoid this outcome, it has been eventually forced on us.

There are many great ways to contribute to FLOSS projects and coding is only one of them - let me underline that. However - coding is the primary production that drives many of the other valuable contributions: translation, marketing, etc. We have been blessed to have many excellent developers around LibreOffice but coder's board representation has been declining. This means losing a valuable part of the board's perspective on the complexity of the problem. The elected board is (typically) ten people - seven full board members, and three deputies as spares if needed, here is how that looks:

Another way of looking at board composition is to look at board members' affiliations over time. Of course affiliations change - sometimes during a board term, but this is the same graph broken down by (rough) affiliation:

One of the major surprises of the 2024 election is the 'TDF' chunk in which I bucket paid TDF staff, and those closely related to them. The current chair of the TDF board (Eliane) who manages the Executive Director (ED) is curiously related to a staff member who is managed by the (ED) - arguably an extremely poor governance practice. Having three TDF affiliated directors is also in contradiction of the statutes.

It is also worth noting that for over two years, no Collaboran or any of our partners have been on the TDF board. It was hoped that this would give ample time and space to address any of the issues left from previous boards.

TDF is defined as a meritocracy in its statutes. Why is that ? the experience we had from the OpenOffice project was that often those who were doing the work were excluded from decision making. That made it hard to get teams to scale, and to make quick decisions, let leaders grow in areas, and also gives an incentive to contribute more among many other reasons.

Some claim that the sole manifestation of the statute's requirement for meritocracy is a flat entry / membership criteria (as every other organization has). This seems to me to be near to the root of the problems here. Those used to functioning FLOSS projects find it hard to understand why you wouldn't at least listen to those who are working hardest to improve things in whatever area. These days some at TDF seem to emphasize equality instead.

It is interesting then to see the (controversially appointed) Membership Committee overturning the last election - ejecting people without any thanks or apology who have contributed so very much over so many years. We built a quick tool to count those. This excludes the long departed Sun Microsystem's release engineers who committed many other people's patches for them - and it struggles to 'see' into the CVS era where branches were flattened; but ... as far as git and gitdm-alias files can easily tell this is the picture of the top committers to the largest 'core' code repository over all time.

| Name | Commits | Last commit | Affiliation | |---|---|---|---| | Caolán McNamara | 37,556 | Collabora | | | Stephan Bergmann | 21,732 | Collabora | | | Noel Grandin | 20,851 | Collabora | | | Miklos Vajna | 10,466 | Collabora | | | Tor Lillqvist | 9,233 | Collabora | | | Michael Stahl | 8,742 | Collabora | | | Kohei Yoshida | 5,655 | Collabora | | | Eike Rathke | 5,398 | Volunteer/RedHat | | | Markus Mohrhard | 5,230 | Volunteer | | | Frank Schönheit | 5,025 | 2011 | Sun/Oracle | | Michael Weghorn | 4,956 | TDF | | | Mike Kaganski | 4,864 | Collabora | | | Andrea Gelmini | 4,582 | Volunteer | | | Xisco Fauli | 4,215 | TDF | | | Julien Nabet | 4,031 | Volunteer | | | Tomaž Vajngerl | 3,797 | Collabora | | | David Tardon | 3,648 | 2021 | RedHat | | Luboš Luňák | 3,201 | Collabora | | | Hans-Joachim Lankenau | 3,007 | 2011 | Sun/Oracle | | Ocke Janssen | 2,852 | 2011 | Sun/Oracle | | Oliver Specht | 2,699 | Sun/Oracle | | | Jan Holesovsky | 2,689 | Collabora | | | Mathias Bauer | 2,580 | 2011 | Sun/Oracle | | Olivier Hallot | 2,561 | TDF | | | Michael Meeks | 2,553 | Collabora | | | Bjoern Michaelsen | 2,503 | Volunteer/Canonical | | | Norbert Thiebaud | 2,176 | 2017 | Volunteer | | Thomas Arnhold | 2,176 | 2014 | Volunteer | | Andras Timar | 2,099 | Collabora | | | Philipp Lohmann | 2,096 | 2011 | Sun/Oracle |

It is a humbling privilege for me to serve in such a dedicated team of people who have contributed so much. Take just one example - Cáolan has worked from StarDivision to Sun to Oracle to RedHat to Collabora; 37000 commits in ~25 years - ~four per day sustained, every day. By grokking his commits quickly you can see that this is far more than a job - over 6000 of those were at the weekend, and of course commits don't show the reviews, mentoring, love and care and more. That is just one contributor - but the passion scales across the rest of the team.

While writing this a response from TDF showed up. While there are things to welcome, it seems that this speculative concern about individual contributors is at the core of the concern:

"people made decisions in the interest of their employers rather than in the interest of The Document Foundation."

Really!? the primary privilege that members of TDF have is voting for their representatives in elections, and this right is earned only by contribution. Elections are secret ballots. So it seems the most plausible reason for disenfranchising so many is a unhealthy fear of the electorate. Is it possible that the board majority want to avoid accountability for their actions at the next election (which is already delayed without adequate explanation), like this:

I have no idea how our staff voted in past elections - but I have to assume they did this with integrity and for the best for TDF as they saw it at the time. It seems that a more plausible reason to remove such long term contributors is electoral gerrymandering.

After 15+ years of service with LibreOffice, it is unfortunate to be ejected. It is possible to imagine a counter-factual world where this might actually be necessary. But even in this case - to do so with no thank-you, or apology is unconscionable. It is great to see the team making up for that by publicly thanking their colleagues as they are kicked out. I found it deeply encouraging to remember and celebrate all the fantastic work that has been contributed, let me add my own big thank you to everyone!

Well much more can be said, perhaps I'll update this later with more details as they emerge, but for now we're re-focusing on making Collabora Office great, getting our gerrit and CI humming smoothly, and starting to dung-out bits we are not using in the code-base. If you're interested in getting involved have a wave in #cool-dev:matrix.org and join in, we welcome anyone to join us. Thanks for reading and trying to understand this tangled topic !

© 2026 Now Let Us. All rights reserved.

Source: Hacker News

Advertisement
Ad slot ready: 5887729102

More in this category

NOW LET US Related – Treating pancreatic tumours may have revealed cancer's master switch

dev-tools

Treating pancreatic tumours may have revealed cancer's master switch

A promising new drug called daraxonrasib has shown breakthrough results in treating pancreatic cancer, doubling median survival times. This achievement could pave the way for an entirely new class of cancer treatments.

NOW LET US Related – Leaving Mozilla

dev-tools

Leaving Mozilla

A poignant and candid reflection from a 15-year Mozilla veteran upon their departure. The author highlights the leadership's missteps in trying to emulate tech giants and urges Mozilla to return to its core values: community and uniqueness.

NOW LET US Related – Shepherd's Dog: A Game by the Most Dangerous AI Model

dev-tools

Shepherd's Dog: A Game by the Most Dangerous AI Model

A developer tested Anthropic's latest, supposedly 'too dangerous' AI model by asking it to build a long-held game idea in a single shot. The model succeeded, generating a complete 2,319-line game after a 45-minute reasoning session.

NOW LET US Related – Open source AI must win

dev-tools

Open source AI must win

If artificial intelligence becomes a utility rented only from a few closed institutions, humanity loses its operational freedom. Open-source AI is a vital infrastructure for the future of our digital society.

NOW LET US Related – Statement on US government directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5

dev-tools

Statement on US government directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5

The US government has issued an export control directive forcing Anthropic to suspend all access to its Fable 5 and Mythos 5 models due to national security concerns, a move the AI safety startup strongly disputes.

NOW LET US Related – Electric motors with no rare earths

dev-tools

Electric motors with no rare earths

Renault Group is pioneering the development of electrically excited synchronous motors (EESM) that eliminate the need for rare earth magnets, reducing dependency on global monopolies while driving efficiency and sustainability.

EXPLORE TOPICS

Discover All Categories

Deep dive into the specific technology sectors that matter most to you.