Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

2017-12-01 Thread Jim Jagielski 
I went ahead and copied the 4.1.4 page and created:

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.5 


Of course, it needs to be further cleaned up. I can RM if that's OK
with everyone.

> On Dec 1, 2017, at 4:37 PM, Keith N. McKenna  
> wrote:
> 
> On 12/1/2017 8:18 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>> Remember we also have the 4.1.5 branch, which is a lower risk solution
>> to some 4.1.4 regressions.
>> 
>> I think it is time to decide whether to release it, and if so, what the
>> timing should be relative to the start of the 4.2 beta test. There is
>> something to be said for a single announcement so that we can explain
>> the relationship.
>> 
>> On 12/1/2017 5:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> I see that Pat has committed the security patches to trunk, which is
>>> fantastic!
>>> Maybe we should take the next few business days and go thru Bugz
>>> and see what, if anything, would be low-risk patches to trunk and
>>> pencil in, say, Dec 7th as a "code freeze" date for builds...
>>> 
>>> I can provide builds for all 4 platforms.
>>> 
 On Dec 1, 2017, at 1:34 AM, Mechtilde  wrote:
 
 Hello
 
 I like this idea, too. it makes it visible that we aren't dead.
 
 Regards
 
 Mechtilde
 
 Am 01.12.2017 um 03:41 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> I like it. I already have Linux, Windows and macOS 4.2.0-dev builds
> available
> (http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/
> ) for some langs
> 
> 
>> On Nov 30, 2017, at 5:15 PM, Marcus  wrote:
>> 
>> Am 30.11.2017 um 21:26 schrieb Dave Fisher:
>>> In light of our current situation with getting builds together but
>>> not having a lot of people doing more than simple QA what does the
>>> team think about releasing a Public Beta for 4.2.0? I think that
>>> this would be an advantage for the project and might serve to
>>> bring in more of the community as QA volunteers.
>> 
>> I thought it's without discussion that we need a (long) beta test
>> phase for 4.2.0. So, yes for your proposal.
>> 
>> We can create a new entry on the download webpage, some advertising
>> areas on the other webpages, and other fine things to make it visible.
>> 
>> And - also this should be clear already - we need several builds of
>> 4.2.0 with further included bugfixes; to show an increasing quality
>> towards the final release build.
>> 
>> For me the real question is " *When* do we start the beta? ". ;-) I
>> would like to have a specific level of quality that we give to our
>> users. Otherwise we will get spammed by bug reports which nobody
>> wants to handle.
>> 
>> Marcus
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>> 
> 
> 
 
 -- 
 Mechtilde Stehmann
 ## Apache OpenOffice.org
 ## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
 ## Debian Developer
 ## Loook, calender-exchange-provider, libreoffice-canzeley-client
 ## PGP encryption welcome
 ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899  39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F
 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 
> +1 to this. We need to get out the corrections for the 4.1.4 regressions
> soon as possible.

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

2017-12-01 Thread Keith N. McKenna 
On 12/1/2017 8:18 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> Remember we also have the 4.1.5 branch, which is a lower risk solution
> to some 4.1.4 regressions.
> 
> I think it is time to decide whether to release it, and if so, what the
> timing should be relative to the start of the 4.2 beta test. There is
> something to be said for a single announcement so that we can explain
> the relationship.
> 
> On 12/1/2017 5:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> I see that Pat has committed the security patches to trunk, which is
>> fantastic!
>> Maybe we should take the next few business days and go thru Bugz
>> and see what, if anything, would be low-risk patches to trunk and
>> pencil in, say, Dec 7th as a "code freeze" date for builds...
>>
>> I can provide builds for all 4 platforms.
>>
>>> On Dec 1, 2017, at 1:34 AM, Mechtilde  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> I like this idea, too. it makes it visible that we aren't dead.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Mechtilde
>>>
>>> Am 01.12.2017 um 03:41 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
 I like it. I already have Linux, Windows and macOS 4.2.0-dev builds
 available
 (http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/
 ) for some langs


> On Nov 30, 2017, at 5:15 PM, Marcus  wrote:
>
> Am 30.11.2017 um 21:26 schrieb Dave Fisher:
>> In light of our current situation with getting builds together but
>> not having a lot of people doing more than simple QA what does the
>> team think about releasing a Public Beta for 4.2.0? I think that
>> this would be an advantage for the project and might serve to
>> bring in more of the community as QA volunteers.
>
> I thought it's without discussion that we need a (long) beta test
> phase for 4.2.0. So, yes for your proposal.
>
> We can create a new entry on the download webpage, some advertising
> areas on the other webpages, and other fine things to make it visible.
>
> And - also this should be clear already - we need several builds of
> 4.2.0 with further included bugfixes; to show an increasing quality
> towards the final release build.
>
> For me the real question is " *When* do we start the beta? ". ;-) I
> would like to have a specific level of quality that we give to our
> users. Otherwise we will get spammed by bug reports which nobody
> wants to handle.
>
> Marcus
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>


>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Mechtilde Stehmann
>>> ## Apache OpenOffice.org
>>> ## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
>>> ## Debian Developer
>>> ## Loook, calender-exchange-provider, libreoffice-canzeley-client
>>> ## PGP encryption welcome
>>> ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899  39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F
>>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>
+1 to this. We need to get out the corrections for the 4.1.4 regressions
soon as possible.




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

2017-12-01 Thread Dave Fisher 
Hi Jim -

Works and fixes both 4.1.4 bugs on both 10.7.5 and 10.12.6.

Seems to require Java 6 for Base to work on 10.7.5.

Regards,
Dave

> On Dec 1, 2017, at 11:08 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> My latest 4.2.0-dev builds are available at
> 
>http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/AOO-4.2.0-dev-r1816768/ 
> 
> 
> But these are dmg's not installers.
> 
>> On Dec 1, 2017, at 11:58 AM, Matthias Seidel  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Jim,
>> 
>> Did you have the opportunity to install 4.2.0 on macOS?
>> 
>> I would be interested if the new icon does show up:
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/setup_native/source/mac/ooo3_installer.icns
>> 
>> I created it on Windows with a program called "iConvertIcons" and had no
>> chance to test it.
>> 
>> Regards, Matthias
>> 
>> 
>> Am 01.12.2017 um 03:41 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> I like it. I already have Linux, Windows and macOS 4.2.0-dev builds 
>>> available
>>> (http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ 
>>> ) for some langs
>>> 
>>> 
 On Nov 30, 2017, at 5:15 PM, Marcus  wrote:
 
 Am 30.11.2017 um 21:26 schrieb Dave Fisher:
> In light of our current situation with getting builds together but not 
> having a lot of people doing more than simple QA what does the team think 
> about releasing a Public Beta for 4.2.0? I think that this would be an 
> advantage for the project and might serve to bring in more of the 
> community as QA volunteers.
 I thought it's without discussion that we need a (long) beta test phase 
 for 4.2.0. So, yes for your proposal.
 
 We can create a new entry on the download webpage, some advertising areas 
 on the other webpages, and other fine things to make it visible.
 
 And - also this should be clear already - we need several builds of 4.2.0 
 with further included bugfixes; to show an increasing quality towards the 
 final release build.
 
 For me the real question is " *When* do we start the beta? ". ;-) I would 
 like to have a specific level of quality that we give to our users. 
 Otherwise we will get spammed by bug reports which nobody wants to handle.
 
 Marcus
 
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

2017-12-01 Thread Jim Jagielski 
My latest 4.2.0-dev builds are available at

http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/AOO-4.2.0-dev-r1816768/ 


But these are dmg's not installers.

> On Dec 1, 2017, at 11:58 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Did you have the opportunity to install 4.2.0 on macOS?
> 
> I would be interested if the new icon does show up:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/setup_native/source/mac/ooo3_installer.icns
> 
> I created it on Windows with a program called "iConvertIcons" and had no
> chance to test it.
> 
> Regards, Matthias
> 
> 
> Am 01.12.2017 um 03:41 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> I like it. I already have Linux, Windows and macOS 4.2.0-dev builds available
>> (http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ 
>> ) for some langs
>> 
>> 
>>> On Nov 30, 2017, at 5:15 PM, Marcus  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Am 30.11.2017 um 21:26 schrieb Dave Fisher:
 In light of our current situation with getting builds together but not 
 having a lot of people doing more than simple QA what does the team think 
 about releasing a Public Beta for 4.2.0? I think that this would be an 
 advantage for the project and might serve to bring in more of the 
 community as QA volunteers.
>>> I thought it's without discussion that we need a (long) beta test phase for 
>>> 4.2.0. So, yes for your proposal.
>>> 
>>> We can create a new entry on the download webpage, some advertising areas 
>>> on the other webpages, and other fine things to make it visible.
>>> 
>>> And - also this should be clear already - we need several builds of 4.2.0 
>>> with further included bugfixes; to show an increasing quality towards the 
>>> final release build.
>>> 
>>> For me the real question is " *When* do we start the beta? ". ;-) I would 
>>> like to have a specific level of quality that we give to our users. 
>>> Otherwise we will get spammed by bug reports which nobody wants to handle.
>>> 
>>> Marcus
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 
>> 
> 
>

Re: AOO 4.2.0-dev builds

2017-12-01 Thread Damjan Jovanovic 
Yes it is :)

Thank you.

On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Matthias Seidel 
wrote:

> Am 26.11.2017 um 19:47 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
> > When you get that error, before clicking "OK", please attach gdb and run
> > "thread apply all bt", and post the output.
> >
> > Damjan
>
> Hi Damjan,
>
> I will do this as soon as I figured out how it works... ;-)
>
> gdb=Gnu Debugger?
>
> Regards, Matthias
>
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 8:30 PM, Matthias Seidel <
> matthias.sei...@hamburg.de
> >> wrote:
> >> Thanks, I could download and install the build now.
> >>
> >> However, the bug [1] is still present for me on Ubuntu 16.04.3 (64bit).
> >>
> >> So it is not only an issue when building on Ubuntu 14.04 (like our
> >> buildbots do).
> >>
> >> Regards, Matthias
> >>
> >> [1] https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127315
> >>
> >>
> >> Am 26.11.2017 um 15:03 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> >>> should be fixed now.
> >>>
>  On Nov 26, 2017, at 5:54 AM, Matthias Seidel <
> >> matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> wrote:
>  Am 26.11.2017 um 00:09 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> > I am uploading to:
> >
> >http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ <
> >> http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/>
> > 4.2.0-dev builds for Linux64 and Windows... After that will
> > come Linux32 and macOS (assuming it builds... I've had
> > issues before).
> >
> > These are based on HEAD of trunk, ~r1816311. The Linux builds
> > are built on CentOS 6.9.
>  "You don't have permission to access
>  /~jim/AOO-builds/AOO-4.2.0-dev-r1816311/de/Apache_
> >> OpenOffice_4.2.0_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_de.tar.gzon
>  this server."
> 
>  ;-)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >>> -
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>

Re: AOO 4.2.0-dev builds

2017-12-01 Thread Matthias Seidel 
Am 26.11.2017 um 19:47 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
> When you get that error, before clicking "OK", please attach gdb and run
> "thread apply all bt", and post the output.
>
> Damjan

Hi Damjan,

I will do this as soon as I figured out how it works... ;-)

gdb=Gnu Debugger?

Regards, Matthias

>
> On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 8:30 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote:
>> Thanks, I could download and install the build now.
>>
>> However, the bug [1] is still present for me on Ubuntu 16.04.3 (64bit).
>>
>> So it is not only an issue when building on Ubuntu 14.04 (like our
>> buildbots do).
>>
>> Regards, Matthias
>>
>> [1] https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127315
>>
>>
>> Am 26.11.2017 um 15:03 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> should be fixed now.
>>>
 On Nov 26, 2017, at 5:54 AM, Matthias Seidel <
>> matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> wrote:
 Am 26.11.2017 um 00:09 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> I am uploading to:
>
>http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ <
>> http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/>
> 4.2.0-dev builds for Linux64 and Windows... After that will
> come Linux32 and macOS (assuming it builds... I've had
> issues before).
>
> These are based on HEAD of trunk, ~r1816311. The Linux builds
> are built on CentOS 6.9.
 "You don't have permission to access
 /~jim/AOO-builds/AOO-4.2.0-dev-r1816311/de/Apache_
>> OpenOffice_4.2.0_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_de.tar.gzon
 this server."

 ;-)




>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type

2017-12-01 Thread Marcus 

Am 01.12.2017 um 18:09 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
For me the existance is not a strong argument. The bug is with 149 votes 
quite popular. The discussion there is a repeatance that this is basic 
feature.


but we don't know from when the votes are. Or is there a possiblity to 
see in Bugzilla? The issue report is old as we can see on the ID. The 
extension could have been created after all or the most votes were done.



I quote from bugzilla:


This is absolutely a basic feature, i don't understand why there are more
advanced regression types such as logaritmepic or poware when a 
polynomial

regression is lacking.

Besides, the rest of the regression are very limited. There are no 
options to

manually adjust regressions.


So what is basic and what is not? If we do not integrate this extention 
into Open Office then we need to explain this.


Maybe because we have an *Office* Suite and not a *Mathematical* Suite? 
;-) Seriously, I see  this as special mathematical featute and not a 
basic feature for a software suite that contains also a word processor, 
drawing, a presentation application and also database.


I think to refer to a extention is not self speaking. And we must clear 
out any impression that there are 2 class developers.
Imho we must try to incorperate extention developers closer to the core 
team. If we want new people, there is the source of volunteers.


OK, this is a very good point that we can follow. Maybe we can indeed 
get some people that are willing to stay longer and to help us with the 
core application.


Marcus




On 01.12.2017 16:44, Marcus wrote:

Am 01.12.2017 um 16:38 schrieb Peter kovacs:

The discussion does not answer what we prefer to do with the bug.
It seems to be more about backporting work from Libre Office.
Not about integrating an Apache Openoffice Extention.
Our extention page does not say anything about license. If I do not 
find anything in the extentionfile itself I will reach out to the 
maintainers, if they are willed to support an include process into AOO.

I would loop in the list as CC.  Objections?


I don't see an advantage to integrate an already existing function. 
That's the purpose of an extension: To add functionality into the base 
program.


I would suggest to close the issue.

Marcus



Am 1. Dezember 2017 10:06:54 MEZ schrieb FR web forum 
:

Already discussed in 2013:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openoffice-dev/201308.mbox/%3c5200fd92.3000...@gmail.com%3e 




- Mail original -
De: "Mechtilde" 
À: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Envoyé: Vendredi 1 Décembre 2017 07:45:58
Objet: Re: Fwd: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type

Hello Peter,

the extension is under which license?

After this information we can discuss how to work further on it

Kind regards


Am 01.12.2017 um 06:16 schrieb Peter kovacs:

Hi all ,
what we do with this report?
There is an extension that handled this but there is still the

complain to add this to the basic install.

So do we want o implement another regression type?
Or instead add the extention to our build?
Or leave it as is and close the issue?

All the Best
Peter


 Ursprüngliche Nachricht 
Von: bugzi...@apache.org
Gesendet: 30. November 2017 23:15:53 MEZ
An: iss...@openoffice.apache.org
Betreff: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type

https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20819

--- Comment #78 from Robert Pollak  ---
Let me mention that LibreOffice has got polynomial regression since

2014, see

https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/4.2#Chart.



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type

2017-12-01 Thread Peter Kovacs 
For me the existance is not a strong argument. The bug is with 149 votes 
quite popular. The discussion there is a repeatance that this is basic 
feature.

I quote from bugzilla:


This is absolutely a basic feature, i don't understand why there are more
advanced regression types such as logaritmepic or poware when a polynomial
regression is lacking.

Besides, the rest of the regression are very limited. There are no options to
manually adjust regressions.


So what is basic and what is not? If we do not integrate this extention 
into Open Office then we need to explain this.
I think to refer to a extention is not self speaking. And we must clear 
out any impression that there are 2 class developers.
Imho we must try to incorperate extention developers closer to the core 
team. If we want new people, there is the source of volunteers.


All the best
Peter

On 01.12.2017 16:44, Marcus wrote:

Am 01.12.2017 um 16:38 schrieb Peter kovacs:

The discussion does not answer what we prefer to do with the bug.
It seems to be more about backporting work from Libre Office.
Not about integrating an Apache Openoffice Extention.
Our extention page does not say anything about license. If I do not 
find anything in the extentionfile itself I will reach out to the 
maintainers, if they are willed to support an include process into AOO.

I would loop in the list as CC.  Objections?


I don't see an advantage to integrate an already existing function. 
That's the purpose of an extension: To add functionality into the base 
program.


I would suggest to close the issue.

Marcus



Am 1. Dezember 2017 10:06:54 MEZ schrieb FR web forum 
:

Already discussed in 2013:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openoffice-dev/201308.mbox/%3c5200fd92.3000...@gmail.com%3e 




- Mail original -
De: "Mechtilde" 
À: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Envoyé: Vendredi 1 Décembre 2017 07:45:58
Objet: Re: Fwd: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type

Hello Peter,

the extension is under which license?

After this information we can discuss how to work further on it

Kind regards


Am 01.12.2017 um 06:16 schrieb Peter kovacs:

Hi all ,
what we do with this report?
There is an extension that handled this but there is still the

complain to add this to the basic install.

So do we want o implement another regression type?
Or instead add the extention to our build?
Or leave it as is and close the issue?

All the Best
Peter


 Ursprüngliche Nachricht 
Von: bugzi...@apache.org
Gesendet: 30. November 2017 23:15:53 MEZ
An: iss...@openoffice.apache.org
Betreff: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type

https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20819

--- Comment #78 from Robert Pollak  ---
Let me mention that LibreOffice has got polynomial regression since

2014, see

https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/4.2#Chart.



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

2017-12-01 Thread Matthias Seidel 
Hi Jim,

Did you have the opportunity to install 4.2.0 on macOS?

I would be interested if the new icon does show up:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/setup_native/source/mac/ooo3_installer.icns

I created it on Windows with a program called "iConvertIcons" and had no
chance to test it.

Regards, Matthias


Am 01.12.2017 um 03:41 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> I like it. I already have Linux, Windows and macOS 4.2.0-dev builds available
> (http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ 
> ) for some langs
>
>
>> On Nov 30, 2017, at 5:15 PM, Marcus  wrote:
>>
>> Am 30.11.2017 um 21:26 schrieb Dave Fisher:
>>> In light of our current situation with getting builds together but not 
>>> having a lot of people doing more than simple QA what does the team think 
>>> about releasing a Public Beta for 4.2.0? I think that this would be an 
>>> advantage for the project and might serve to bring in more of the community 
>>> as QA volunteers.
>> I thought it's without discussion that we need a (long) beta test phase for 
>> 4.2.0. So, yes for your proposal.
>>
>> We can create a new entry on the download webpage, some advertising areas on 
>> the other webpages, and other fine things to make it visible.
>>
>> And - also this should be clear already - we need several builds of 4.2.0 
>> with further included bugfixes; to show an increasing quality towards the 
>> final release build.
>>
>> For me the real question is " *When* do we start the beta? ". ;-) I would 
>> like to have a specific level of quality that we give to our users. 
>> Otherwise we will get spammed by bug reports which nobody wants to handle.
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type

2017-12-01 Thread Marcus 

Am 01.12.2017 um 16:38 schrieb Peter kovacs:

The discussion does not answer what we prefer to do with the bug.
It seems to be more about backporting work from Libre Office.
Not about integrating an Apache Openoffice Extention.
Our extention page does not say anything about license. If I do not find 
anything in the extentionfile itself I will reach out to the maintainers, if 
they are willed to support an include process into AOO.
I would loop in the list as CC.  Objections?


I don't see an advantage to integrate an already existing function. 
That's the purpose of an extension: To add functionality into the base 
program.


I would suggest to close the issue.

Marcus




Am 1. Dezember 2017 10:06:54 MEZ schrieb FR web forum :

Already discussed in 2013:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openoffice-dev/201308.mbox/%3c5200fd92.3000...@gmail.com%3e


- Mail original -
De: "Mechtilde" 
À: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Envoyé: Vendredi 1 Décembre 2017 07:45:58
Objet: Re: Fwd: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type

Hello Peter,

the extension is under which license?

After this information we can discuss how to work further on it

Kind regards


Am 01.12.2017 um 06:16 schrieb Peter kovacs:

Hi all ,
what we do with this report?
There is an extension that handled this but there is still the

complain to add this to the basic install.

So do we want o implement another regression type?
Or instead add the extention to our build?
Or leave it as is and close the issue?

All the Best
Peter


 Ursprüngliche Nachricht 
Von: bugzi...@apache.org
Gesendet: 30. November 2017 23:15:53 MEZ
An: iss...@openoffice.apache.org
Betreff: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type

https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20819

--- Comment #78 from Robert Pollak  ---
Let me mention that LibreOffice has got polynomial regression since

2014, see

https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/4.2#Chart.



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type

2017-12-01 Thread Peter kovacs 
The discussion does not answer what we prefer to do with the bug.
It seems to be more about backporting work from Libre Office.
Not about integrating an Apache Openoffice Extention.
Our extention page does not say anything about license. If I do not find 
anything in the extentionfile itself I will reach out to the maintainers, if 
they are willed to support an include process into AOO.
I would loop in the list as CC.  Objections?

Best
Peter

Am 1. Dezember 2017 10:06:54 MEZ schrieb FR web forum :
>Already discussed in 2013:
>http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openoffice-dev/201308.mbox/%3c5200fd92.3000...@gmail.com%3e
>
>
>- Mail original -
>De: "Mechtilde" 
>À: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>Envoyé: Vendredi 1 Décembre 2017 07:45:58
>Objet: Re: Fwd: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type
>
>Hello Peter,
>
>the extension is under which license?
>
>After this information we can discuss how to work further on it
>
>Kind regards
>
>
>Am 01.12.2017 um 06:16 schrieb Peter kovacs:
>> Hi all ,
>> what we do with this report?
>> There is an extension that handled this but there is still the
>complain to add this to the basic install.
>> So do we want o implement another regression type?
>> Or instead add the extention to our build?
>> Or leave it as is and close the issue?
>> 
>> All the Best
>> Peter
>> 
>> 
>>  Ursprüngliche Nachricht 
>> Von: bugzi...@apache.org
>> Gesendet: 30. November 2017 23:15:53 MEZ
>> An: iss...@openoffice.apache.org
>> Betreff: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type
>> 
>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20819
>> 
>> --- Comment #78 from Robert Pollak  ---
>> Let me mention that LibreOffice has got polynomial regression since
>2014, see
>> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/4.2#Chart.
>> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

2017-12-01 Thread Peter kovacs 
+1

Am 1. Dezember 2017 14:42:44 MEZ schrieb Jim Jagielski :
>I also like that we announce 4.1.5-GA at the same time we announce
>4.2.0-B1.
>
>Should we clone the 4.1.4 release Wiki page (to create a 4.1.5) and
>start keeping track there?
>
>> On Dec 1, 2017, at 8:18 AM, Patricia Shanahan  wrote:
>> 
>> Remember we also have the 4.1.5 branch, which is a lower risk
>solution to some 4.1.4 regressions.
>> 
>> I think it is time to decide whether to release it, and if so, what
>the timing should be relative to the start of the 4.2 beta test. There
>is something to be said for a single announcement so that we can
>explain the relationship.
>> 
>> On 12/1/2017 5:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> I see that Pat has committed the security patches to trunk, which is
>fantastic!
>>> Maybe we should take the next few business days and go thru Bugz
>>> and see what, if anything, would be low-risk patches to trunk and
>>> pencil in, say, Dec 7th as a "code freeze" date for builds...
>>> I can provide builds for all 4 platforms.
 On Dec 1, 2017, at 1:34 AM, Mechtilde  wrote:
 
 Hello
 
 I like this idea, too. it makes it visible that we aren't dead.
 
 Regards
 
 Mechtilde
 
 Am 01.12.2017 um 03:41 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> I like it. I already have Linux, Windows and macOS 4.2.0-dev
>builds available
> (http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/
>) for some langs
> 
> 
>> On Nov 30, 2017, at 5:15 PM, Marcus  wrote:
>> 
>> Am 30.11.2017 um 21:26 schrieb Dave Fisher:
>>> In light of our current situation with getting builds together
>but not having a lot of people doing more than simple QA what does the
>team think about releasing a Public Beta for 4.2.0? I think that this
>would be an advantage for the project and might serve to bring in more
>of the community as QA volunteers.
>> 
>> I thought it's without discussion that we need a (long) beta test
>phase for 4.2.0. So, yes for your proposal.
>> 
>> We can create a new entry on the download webpage, some
>advertising areas on the other webpages, and other fine things to make
>it visible.
>> 
>> And - also this should be clear already - we need several builds
>of 4.2.0 with further included bugfixes; to show an increasing quality
>towards the final release build.
>> 
>> For me the real question is " *When* do we start the beta? ". ;-)
>I would like to have a specific level of quality that we give to our
>users. Otherwise we will get spammed by bug reports which nobody wants
>to handle.
>> 
>> Marcus
>> 
>> 
>>
>-
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>> 
> 
> 
 
 -- 
 Mechtilde Stehmann
 ## Apache OpenOffice.org
 ## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
 ## Debian Developer
 ## Loook, calender-exchange-provider, libreoffice-canzeley-client
 ## PGP encryption welcome
 ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899  39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F
 
>>>
>-
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>> 
>
>
>-
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

2017-12-01 Thread Jim Jagielski 

> On Dec 1, 2017, at 9:35 AM, Patricia Shanahan  wrote:
> 
> Switching positions, the last time we discussed release planning, 11/22, 
> Damjan needed a month or two to finish PostgreSQL driver work before he would 
> recommend releasing 4.2.0. That seems more like early next year, rather than 
> early December
> 
> I am not sure we should wait that long before 4.1.5-GA.

I agree w/ that.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

2017-12-01 Thread Patricia Shanahan 
Switching positions, the last time we discussed release planning, 11/22, 
Damjan needed a month or two to finish PostgreSQL driver work before he 
would recommend releasing 4.2.0. That seems more like early next year, 
rather than early December


I am not sure we should wait that long before 4.1.5-GA.

On a personal note, I will be busy and/or traveling from early January 
until mid-March. My AOO activity will be limited.


On 12/1/2017 5:42 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:

I also like that we announce 4.1.5-GA at the same time we announce 4.2.0-B1.

Should we clone the 4.1.4 release Wiki page (to create a 4.1.5) and
start keeping track there?


On Dec 1, 2017, at 8:18 AM, Patricia Shanahan  wrote:

Remember we also have the 4.1.5 branch, which is a lower risk solution to some 
4.1.4 regressions.

I think it is time to decide whether to release it, and if so, what the timing 
should be relative to the start of the 4.2 beta test. There is something to be 
said for a single announcement so that we can explain the relationship.

On 12/1/2017 5:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:

I see that Pat has committed the security patches to trunk, which is fantastic!
Maybe we should take the next few business days and go thru Bugz
and see what, if anything, would be low-risk patches to trunk and
pencil in, say, Dec 7th as a "code freeze" date for builds...
I can provide builds for all 4 platforms.

On Dec 1, 2017, at 1:34 AM, Mechtilde  wrote:

Hello

I like this idea, too. it makes it visible that we aren't dead.

Regards

Mechtilde

Am 01.12.2017 um 03:41 schrieb Jim Jagielski:

I like it. I already have Linux, Windows and macOS 4.2.0-dev builds available
(http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ 
) for some langs



On Nov 30, 2017, at 5:15 PM, Marcus  wrote:

Am 30.11.2017 um 21:26 schrieb Dave Fisher:

In light of our current situation with getting builds together but not having a 
lot of people doing more than simple QA what does the team think about 
releasing a Public Beta for 4.2.0? I think that this would be an advantage for 
the project and might serve to bring in more of the community as QA volunteers.


I thought it's without discussion that we need a (long) beta test phase for 
4.2.0. So, yes for your proposal.

We can create a new entry on the download webpage, some advertising areas on 
the other webpages, and other fine things to make it visible.

And - also this should be clear already - we need several builds of 4.2.0 with 
further included bugfixes; to show an increasing quality towards the final 
release build.

For me the real question is " *When* do we start the beta? ". ;-) I would like 
to have a specific level of quality that we give to our users. Otherwise we will get 
spammed by bug reports which nobody wants to handle.

Marcus


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org






--
Mechtilde Stehmann
## Apache OpenOffice.org
## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
## Debian Developer
## Loook, calender-exchange-provider, libreoffice-canzeley-client
## PGP encryption welcome
## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899  39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

2017-12-01 Thread Jim Jagielski 
I also like that we announce 4.1.5-GA at the same time we announce 4.2.0-B1.

Should we clone the 4.1.4 release Wiki page (to create a 4.1.5) and
start keeping track there?

> On Dec 1, 2017, at 8:18 AM, Patricia Shanahan  wrote:
> 
> Remember we also have the 4.1.5 branch, which is a lower risk solution to 
> some 4.1.4 regressions.
> 
> I think it is time to decide whether to release it, and if so, what the 
> timing should be relative to the start of the 4.2 beta test. There is 
> something to be said for a single announcement so that we can explain the 
> relationship.
> 
> On 12/1/2017 5:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> I see that Pat has committed the security patches to trunk, which is 
>> fantastic!
>> Maybe we should take the next few business days and go thru Bugz
>> and see what, if anything, would be low-risk patches to trunk and
>> pencil in, say, Dec 7th as a "code freeze" date for builds...
>> I can provide builds for all 4 platforms.
>>> On Dec 1, 2017, at 1:34 AM, Mechtilde  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello
>>> 
>>> I like this idea, too. it makes it visible that we aren't dead.
>>> 
>>> Regards
>>> 
>>> Mechtilde
>>> 
>>> Am 01.12.2017 um 03:41 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
 I like it. I already have Linux, Windows and macOS 4.2.0-dev builds 
 available
 (http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ 
 ) for some langs
 
 
> On Nov 30, 2017, at 5:15 PM, Marcus  wrote:
> 
> Am 30.11.2017 um 21:26 schrieb Dave Fisher:
>> In light of our current situation with getting builds together but not 
>> having a lot of people doing more than simple QA what does the team 
>> think about releasing a Public Beta for 4.2.0? I think that this would 
>> be an advantage for the project and might serve to bring in more of the 
>> community as QA volunteers.
> 
> I thought it's without discussion that we need a (long) beta test phase 
> for 4.2.0. So, yes for your proposal.
> 
> We can create a new entry on the download webpage, some advertising areas 
> on the other webpages, and other fine things to make it visible.
> 
> And - also this should be clear already - we need several builds of 4.2.0 
> with further included bugfixes; to show an increasing quality towards the 
> final release build.
> 
> For me the real question is " *When* do we start the beta? ". ;-) I would 
> like to have a specific level of quality that we give to our users. 
> Otherwise we will get spammed by bug reports which nobody wants to handle.
> 
> Marcus
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> 
 
 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Mechtilde Stehmann
>>> ## Apache OpenOffice.org
>>> ## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
>>> ## Debian Developer
>>> ## Loook, calender-exchange-provider, libreoffice-canzeley-client
>>> ## PGP encryption welcome
>>> ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899  39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F
>>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

2017-12-01 Thread Patricia Shanahan 
Remember we also have the 4.1.5 branch, which is a lower risk solution 
to some 4.1.4 regressions.


I think it is time to decide whether to release it, and if so, what the 
timing should be relative to the start of the 4.2 beta test. There is 
something to be said for a single announcement so that we can explain 
the relationship.


On 12/1/2017 5:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:

I see that Pat has committed the security patches to trunk, which is fantastic!
Maybe we should take the next few business days and go thru Bugz
and see what, if anything, would be low-risk patches to trunk and
pencil in, say, Dec 7th as a "code freeze" date for builds...

I can provide builds for all 4 platforms.


On Dec 1, 2017, at 1:34 AM, Mechtilde  wrote:

Hello

I like this idea, too. it makes it visible that we aren't dead.

Regards

Mechtilde

Am 01.12.2017 um 03:41 schrieb Jim Jagielski:

I like it. I already have Linux, Windows and macOS 4.2.0-dev builds available
(http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ 
) for some langs



On Nov 30, 2017, at 5:15 PM, Marcus  wrote:

Am 30.11.2017 um 21:26 schrieb Dave Fisher:

In light of our current situation with getting builds together but not having a 
lot of people doing more than simple QA what does the team think about 
releasing a Public Beta for 4.2.0? I think that this would be an advantage for 
the project and might serve to bring in more of the community as QA volunteers.


I thought it's without discussion that we need a (long) beta test phase for 
4.2.0. So, yes for your proposal.

We can create a new entry on the download webpage, some advertising areas on 
the other webpages, and other fine things to make it visible.

And - also this should be clear already - we need several builds of 4.2.0 with 
further included bugfixes; to show an increasing quality towards the final 
release build.

For me the real question is " *When* do we start the beta? ". ;-) I would like 
to have a specific level of quality that we give to our users. Otherwise we will get 
spammed by bug reports which nobody wants to handle.

Marcus


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org






--
Mechtilde Stehmann
## Apache OpenOffice.org
## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
## Debian Developer
## Loook, calender-exchange-provider, libreoffice-canzeley-client
## PGP encryption welcome
## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899  39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Public Beta for 4.2

2017-12-01 Thread Jim Jagielski 
I see that Pat has committed the security patches to trunk, which is fantastic!
Maybe we should take the next few business days and go thru Bugz
and see what, if anything, would be low-risk patches to trunk and
pencil in, say, Dec 7th as a "code freeze" date for builds...

I can provide builds for all 4 platforms.

> On Dec 1, 2017, at 1:34 AM, Mechtilde  wrote:
> 
> Hello
> 
> I like this idea, too. it makes it visible that we aren't dead.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Mechtilde
> 
> Am 01.12.2017 um 03:41 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> I like it. I already have Linux, Windows and macOS 4.2.0-dev builds available
>> (http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/ 
>> ) for some langs
>> 
>> 
>>> On Nov 30, 2017, at 5:15 PM, Marcus  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Am 30.11.2017 um 21:26 schrieb Dave Fisher:
 In light of our current situation with getting builds together but not 
 having a lot of people doing more than simple QA what does the team think 
 about releasing a Public Beta for 4.2.0? I think that this would be an 
 advantage for the project and might serve to bring in more of the 
 community as QA volunteers.
>>> 
>>> I thought it's without discussion that we need a (long) beta test phase for 
>>> 4.2.0. So, yes for your proposal.
>>> 
>>> We can create a new entry on the download webpage, some advertising areas 
>>> on the other webpages, and other fine things to make it visible.
>>> 
>>> And - also this should be clear already - we need several builds of 4.2.0 
>>> with further included bugfixes; to show an increasing quality towards the 
>>> final release build.
>>> 
>>> For me the real question is " *When* do we start the beta? ". ;-) I would 
>>> like to have a specific level of quality that we give to our users. 
>>> Otherwise we will get spammed by bug reports which nobody wants to handle.
>>> 
>>> Marcus
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Mechtilde Stehmann
> ## Apache OpenOffice.org
> ## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
> ## Debian Developer
> ## Loook, calender-exchange-provider, libreoffice-canzeley-client
> ## PGP encryption welcome
> ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899  39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type

2017-12-01 Thread FR web forum 
Already discussed in 2013:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openoffice-dev/201308.mbox/%3c5200fd92.3000...@gmail.com%3e


- Mail original -
De: "Mechtilde" 
À: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Envoyé: Vendredi 1 Décembre 2017 07:45:58
Objet: Re: Fwd: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type

Hello Peter,

the extension is under which license?

After this information we can discuss how to work further on it

Kind regards


Am 01.12.2017 um 06:16 schrieb Peter kovacs:
> Hi all ,
> what we do with this report?
> There is an extension that handled this but there is still the complain to 
> add this to the basic install.
> So do we want o implement another regression type?
> Or instead add the extention to our build?
> Or leave it as is and close the issue?
> 
> All the Best
> Peter
> 
> 
>  Ursprüngliche Nachricht 
> Von: bugzi...@apache.org
> Gesendet: 30. November 2017 23:15:53 MEZ
> An: iss...@openoffice.apache.org
> Betreff: [Issue 20819] add polynomial regression type
> 
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=20819
> 
> --- Comment #78 from Robert Pollak  ---
> Let me mention that LibreOffice has got polynomial regression since 2014, see
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/4.2#Chart.
> 

-- 
Mechtilde Stehmann
## Apache OpenOffice.org
## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
## Debian Developer
## Loook, calender-exchange-provider, libreoffice-canzeley-client
## PGP encryption welcome
## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899  39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org