Discussed 9 times in various forms over the last month: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=pastMonth&prefix=false&que...

don't fall for it, this is an old fork that was recently vibe-coded to hide its origin. the repo shows it's a fork of an old repo related to https://www.onlyoffice.com/

see for example the readme history: https://github.com/Euro-Office/web-apps/commits/main/Readme....

This could even be malicious given the weird history

Yes they tried to hide the fact that it's a OnlyOffice fork so hard that they openly state it on the organization page in a whole section.

Where does it show that? Cursory probes put the created_at dates around the two to three weeks mark, e.g. for DocumentServer. The before-mentioned web-apps was created "2025-10-14T07:56:45Z", or so says the github API.

Can you provide sources for the vibe coding allegations?

emojis in commit messages

(oh no I'm an ai lololol)

> One of the first changes made to the Euro-Office codebase was to remove licensing terms deemed to be "unenforceable and non-obligatory" additions to the GNU AGPL licence. Three days later, the developers of OnlyOffice responded by publicly calling these changes a licensing violation. [1]

> ONLYOFFICE flags license violations in “Euro-Office” project by Nextcloud and IONOS [2]

Yes. IONOS. Sorry - I am out. I will never again touch anything this "little" shithole has an affiliation with if I can in any way help it. Burn me once, shame on you. Burn me twice, shame on me. I won't let that happen.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euro-Office [2]: https://www.onlyoffice.com/blog/2026/03/onlyoffice-flags-lic...

I read section 7 of AGPLv3 quite differently from OnlyOffice: it clearly calls it "Additional Permissions" throughout, and also says this:

  When you convey a copy of a covered work, you may at your option remove any additional permissions from that copy, or from any part of it.
  ...
  All other non-permissive additional terms are considered "further restrictions" within the meaning of section 10. If the Program as you received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that it is governed by this License along with a term that is a further restriction, you may remove that term.

And hosted on github.com

I’ve always seen section 7 of the gplv3 as been problematic - ever since encountering it with a flash video player of some sort back in the day. Felts very much like it was stomping on my freedom, unlike gplv2 which said “do whatever you want as long as you don’t stop anyone else doing whatever they want”.

HN doesn’t like the gpl as their consider it restricts their freedom to reduce other people freedom. I get it, HN are temporary embarrassed billionaires waiting to use free software to create the next unicorn. I’m from an older generation who just wants freedom to use software however I want.

this is another attempt to give credibility to this vibe coded project but it's probably a fake project, the wikipedia page is only 2 weeks old

Ironic that this sketchy project hosts itself on GitHub, then.

I love the smell of government projects in the morning. How EuroOffice and the LibreOffice/TDF/Colabora drama should be viewed should be through the sovereign software push in the EU. Consulting for the open software which will be adopted in the different institutions will be huge and well-paid and many people are positioning themselves to drink as close to the source as possible. It is reasonable. Not reasonable is the drama and ugly catfights happening in the push for positioning. I hope that the final result will be projects that are robust, funded, free, user oriented, with healthy communities, and not captured by small interests.

Is this a government project?

No, but all kinds of people are waiting for those to become government required in different institutions. Selling consulting and integration services could be a big windfall if so.