Re: [discuss] drop support for Java 5 and Java 6 for Windows
On 15 November 2013 18:59, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:53 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, On 15.11.2013 08:38, janI wrote: On 15 November 2013 08:25, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, On 15.11.2013 00:54, Kay Schenk wrote: On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:26 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: On 14 November 2013 03:32, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 5:11 AM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: On 12/09/2013 Kay Schenk wrote: Did we reach a consensus on this one? Wait until 4.1 to officially change java build environment to 7? Buildbots are still at 6, although I know some of us are using 7 for building with no problems. We didn't reach consensus, the reason being (rather than disagreement) that it's unclear: - what the proposal is about exactly - what's broken in the current setup - what's the impact on people who wish to build OpenOffice - what's the impact on people who wish to use OpenOffice Now, after yet another discussion where we explain Java to each other, we can take for granted that we all know about it and move on and see what the proposal is about in concrete, so that is can be evaluated properly and maybe implemented in time for 4.1. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org OK, I'm back on this old thread. The thing is the security considerations do not just apply to Windows. I suggest we switch to java 7 as default and change the settings for javacompiler in configure.inappropriately to deal with this. Although by default, I build with java 7, I will make this change locally and see what happens. +1, so we use java 7 for development, but the final installation still runs with both java 6 and java 7. rgds jan I. Well, in theory, yes. In practice -- I guess not. :( I changed my configure.in etc and rebuilt. Then a final stop with this message -- javac: source release 1.7 requires target release 1.7 in module jvmfwk The man page for javac (openJDK 7)has this info talks about default values for targets depending on source...here are the last bits of that o If -source is 1.5, the value of -target is 1.7 o If -source is 1.6, the value of -target is 1.7 o For all other values of -source, the value of -target is the value of -source. but no specific information saying iyou can NOT specify a target value that is below your source value. I imagine this is universal and not just specific to openJDK but I don't know for sure. Any other ideas? On my attempt to build on Windows with Java 1.7 (Windows 7 64bit Home Premium VM) I did the following: After having setup the build environment via configure, bootstrap and sourcing the creating 'winenv.set.sh' I set the environment variable JAVAFLAGS to -source 1.5 -target 1.5 by command - export JAVAFLAGS='-source 1.5 -target 1.5' My build was sucessfull and the resulting installation set worked on a different Windows machine with Java 1.6 I have done a similar thing on ubuntu 12.04, manually modified LinuxX86-64Env.Set.sh and it builds correctly. Unfortunately, I did not continued my work on it - e.g. - detecting the Java version during configure - setting JAVAFLAGS automatically depending on the detected Java version It seems the right place to do this is configure.in. But why detect version, why not simple set the flags ? Yes, you are right. When it works in the build environment with all the different Java versions this is the simply solution. Best regards, Oliver. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org Unfortunately for this little trial, I apparently misunderstood the reasoning, and did this -- javac -source 1.7 -target 1.5 which javac got upset with, and thus my error. On the other hand, I did get a lot of warnings (I use verbose build option) -- not permanently kept -- that were no doubt about deprecated or changed methods in our current code. These may be useful to us, I don't know. How about making a BZ with the deprecated or changed methods, that could be a nice task a java developer. Maybe we don't need the -source, just -target? On ubuntu, it assumed 1.7 if I did not specify -source, and that gave me a lot of warnings (could be the same you saw). Adding -source 1.5 tell java that the source is 1.5. I also
Re: buildbots -- Linux and MacOSX
On 15 November 2013 20:52, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: Andrew Rist wrote: * We've received assurances that the Mac buildbot is coming. ... We are waiting for real hardware in the form of a Mac Pro which will enable us to have multiple virtualized mac bots, giving us our own environment that can be set up for AOO. The machine should be ordered by the end of the year - bot should come up early next year - ish... Thanks for the update. It's great to know that the Mac buildbot is coming, and many thanks should go to Infra for finding the time to deal with this. Looking forward to see it available. * We are also waiting on a CentOS bot to create our standard Linux build. This has been requested and is in the works, and Jan has agreed to bring this up in discussions with infra. I am hoping we can have this for the 4.1 release timeframe. If I remember the old conversations correctly, here we already had the hardware, and a very powerful one, and the next step was to provide a CentOS 5 virtual machine. Is that correct? Building a VM is not rocket science, and I think several of us would be able to help with this if this can help move forward. Discussions have been whether or not it should be a vm (that was my original suggestion) with ubuntu as base or if tethys should run centOS directly (that was a general AOO suggestion). This discussion drifted out in nothing, mostly because nobody made a decision and started to work the issue 6217 is also not really clear in this respect. It is for sure not rocket science to start a vm. The science part comes when starting to get the standard infra utilities and e.g. ldap to work. But all in all its just work, that needs to be done. I have it on the agenda for next weeks infra meeting, and I suspect we (infra) will decide how to do it and who in infra (you get 2 guesses) will take the lead. But of course if anybody else wants to do it, then I am sure that it can be arranged (just wondering, why it did not happen earlier). rgds jan I. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Media Wiki Proxy Error
On 13 November 2013 09:07, Graham Lauder y...@apache.org wrote: On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 7:15 PM, Shenfeng Liu liush...@gmail.com wrote: 2013/11/13 Graham Lauder y...@apache.org I'm having issues editing the Media wiki, I keep getting a 502 error. Everything works up 'til the submit process. Error as follows: Proxy Error The proxy server received an invalid response from an upstream server. The proxy server could not handle the request POST /w/index.php. Reason: Error reading from remote server I met the same issue when editing cwiki today. Tried several times, and the last try worked... - Shenfeng (Simon) Strangely, it was actually working, I would do save page, the error would come up, but when I went back to the page in browser history and refreshed the page the save had worked. The error is still coming up which is bloody annoying but I'm getting stuff done OK, just taking longer than it should. I just had the same effect on wiki.o.o the page get saved ok, but when returning http://wiki.o.o is called which leads to a proxy error. It is part of the cleanup that (as far as I know) is outstanding on wiki/forum after the change to https: I dont think there is a relation to cwiki, that runs in a different setup. rgds jan I. Cheers GL Does this need an infra@ post or a bugzilla issue? Cheers GL
Re: draft blog post: Apache OpenOffice 4.1 to Bring Enhanced Accessibility Support
On 13 November 2013 20:28, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: This will be something to post after Steve merges the code intro the trunk, which I understand will be soon: https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=apache_openoffice_4_1_to Does anyone have anything else to add? A quote from an assistive technology vendor or accessibility expert would be good. Having learned from the experience with the sidebar, I think it would be correct to add that we (of course) make these new features available to other office packages. I for one still get a bit upset, thinking how the sidebar was announced in other packages, before we released it. but that just my way of thinking. rgds jan I. -Rob - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discuss] drop support for Java 5 and Java 6 for Windows
On 14 November 2013 03:32, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 5:11 AM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: On 12/09/2013 Kay Schenk wrote: Did we reach a consensus on this one? Wait until 4.1 to officially change java build environment to 7? Buildbots are still at 6, although I know some of us are using 7 for building with no problems. We didn't reach consensus, the reason being (rather than disagreement) that it's unclear: - what the proposal is about exactly - what's broken in the current setup - what's the impact on people who wish to build OpenOffice - what's the impact on people who wish to use OpenOffice Now, after yet another discussion where we explain Java to each other, we can take for granted that we all know about it and move on and see what the proposal is about in concrete, so that is can be evaluated properly and maybe implemented in time for 4.1. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org OK, I'm back on this old thread. The thing is the security considerations do not just apply to Windows. I suggest we switch to java 7 as default and change the settings for javacompiler in configure.in appropriately to deal with this. Although by default, I build with java 7, I will make this change locally and see what happens. +1, so we use java 7 for development, but the final installation still runs with both java 6 and java 7. rgds jan I. -- - MzK “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax
Re: XML files are binary?
On 12 November 2013 14:59, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: I just checked in some files for creating Windows patches (no, the work is not yet finished) and saw that the .xml files are flagged as binary. Checking their properties revealed that their mime type is correctly set to application/xml. Does anybody know why they are still flagged as binary? By the way, what became of our attempt to replace SVN with GIT? For getting the mime type I first tried svn info filename which shows a lot of information but not the properties. Then I tried svn proplist filename which only shows the names of the properties but not their values. I really needed a third call svn propget svn:mime-type filename to see the value. Can we please change to GIT? Life would be so much easier. I tried to find the jira ticket, because it needs some updating to what we really want (original is was just a RO copy). If someone has the ticket number then please :-) Do we want to replace svn with git, have both in common or have git as a RO mirror ? rgds jan I. Regards, Andre - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: XML files are binary?
On 12 November 2013 15:54, Herbert Duerr h...@apache.org wrote: On 12.11.2013 14:59, Andre Fischer wrote: I just checked in some files for creating Windows patches (no, the work is not yet finished) and saw that the .xml files are flagged as binary. Checking their properties revealed that their mime type is correctly set to application/xml. Does anybody know why they are still flagged as binary? By the way, what became of our attempt to replace SVN with GIT? [...] Can we please change to GIT? Life would be so much easier. Please see the closed JIRA issue [1] and my mail in [2] where I suggested to reopen it when we have consensus on [...] whether we want to have a read-only git-mirror of our svn repository or to whether we want to fully switch to git (read-write). I'm for a read-only git-mirror for a start. [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5590 [2] http://markmail.org/message/5cx4yyb5z5qb6sdz Now I know why I could not find it. There is an infra committer working hard to get all the git stuff done, so now would be a nice time to decide and then reopen it. I would prefer a read/write GIT, so people can work solely in git. Then we can consider over time to drop svn. rgds jan I. Herbert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
[proposal] GIT mirror
Hi. based on the discussion in thread XML files are binary and herberts comments I had a chat with jfarrell (the infra git specialist). We can have a GIT Read/Only mirror very easy (standard) We cannot have a GIT Read/write mirror (restriction from infra) We can switch completely to GIT (which I for one would be against). I recommend to reopen ticket 5590 with a comment asking for a read/only mirror. Jfarrell is right now (this week) working through git issues, so if we can reopen the ticket fast, I can help jfarrell make this happen fast. @herbert, if nobody objects will you reopen the ticket, or should I ? rgds jan I.
Re: [proposal] GIT mirror
On 12 November 2013 17:02, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/12/13 4:48 PM, janI wrote: Hi. based on the discussion in thread XML files are binary and herberts comments I had a chat with jfarrell (the infra git specialist). We can have a GIT Read/Only mirror very easy (standard) We cannot have a GIT Read/write mirror (restriction from infra) We can switch completely to GIT (which I for one would be against). can you share your thoughts against a complete switch with us. I am at least interested to learn more about others opinion. We talk here about trunk our real code repo only. Everything else can continue to be in svn. If we moved the trunk to git what happens to the existing SVN branches? Is there a good way for them to merge into git? Normal procedure is to move trunk/branches/tags, so we have all info. BUT as far as I know it will not have the history. rgds jan i. -Rob Juergen I recommend to reopen ticket 5590 with a comment asking for a read/only mirror. Jfarrell is right now (this week) working through git issues, so if we can reopen the ticket fast, I can help jfarrell make this happen fast. @herbert, if nobody objects will you reopen the ticket, or should I ? rgds jan I. - 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] GIT mirror
On 12 November 2013 16:57, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/12/13 4:48 PM, janI wrote: Hi. based on the discussion in thread XML files are binary and herberts comments I had a chat with jfarrell (the infra git specialist). We can have a GIT Read/Only mirror very easy (standard) We cannot have a GIT Read/write mirror (restriction from infra) We can switch completely to GIT (which I for one would be against). can you share your thoughts against a complete switch with us. I am at least interested to learn more about others opinion. of course. I think there are still plenty of svn users out there, and switching completely away from svn, would be a larger change for them. At the moment (but this might just be me), branches in GIT works real bad with our current build system. I have f.x. 3 branches and trunk, all being build more or less daily. I tried with GIT, where branch switching is supposed to be very simple. The branch switch itself is simple, but I always needed a complete build --all, because the GIT do (of course not) preserve the different unxlngx6.pro dirs. We talk here about trunk our real code repo only. Everything else can continue to be in svn. That would be a problem, how will you do merge back ? The merge facility in both directions is very important. If we switch to git, svn will be a ReadOnly mirror and we cannot do merge etc. in svn. rgds jan I. Juergen I recommend to reopen ticket 5590 with a comment asking for a read/only mirror. Jfarrell is right now (this week) working through git issues, so if we can reopen the ticket fast, I can help jfarrell make this happen fast. @herbert, if nobody objects will you reopen the ticket, or should I ? rgds jan I. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [proposal] GIT mirror
On 12 November 2013 17:18, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/12/13 5:06 PM, Herbert Duerr wrote: On 12.11.2013 16:48, janI wrote: based on the discussion in thread XML files are binary and herberts comments I had a chat with jfarrell (the infra git specialist). We can have a GIT Read/Only mirror very easy (standard) We cannot have a GIT Read/write mirror (restriction from infra) We can switch completely to GIT (which I for one would be against). I recommend to reopen ticket 5590 with a comment asking for a read/only mirror. Jfarrell is right now (this week) working through git issues, so if we can reopen the ticket fast, I can help jfarrell make this happen fast. Thanks for this interesting info. This makes it clear that we should act ASAP. @herbert, if nobody objects will you reopen the ticket, or should I ? I have reopened the JIRA issue and requested a read-only mirror for now. I am not sure why should we proceed with a read-only mirror if we decide to switch completely I think that is a bigger decision. it would also mean that f.x. the pootle workflow would have to be done differently. Having a git readonly mirror for a period of time, allows us to see how it works, change workflows, and see if there are user acceptance. rgds jan I. Juergen Herbert - 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] GIT mirror
On 12 November 2013 17:32, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/12/13 5:24 PM, janI wrote: On 12 November 2013 17:18, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/12/13 5:06 PM, Herbert Duerr wrote: On 12.11.2013 16:48, janI wrote: based on the discussion in thread XML files are binary and herberts comments I had a chat with jfarrell (the infra git specialist). We can have a GIT Read/Only mirror very easy (standard) We cannot have a GIT Read/write mirror (restriction from infra) We can switch completely to GIT (which I for one would be against). I recommend to reopen ticket 5590 with a comment asking for a read/only mirror. Jfarrell is right now (this week) working through git issues, so if we can reopen the ticket fast, I can help jfarrell make this happen fast. Thanks for this interesting info. This makes it clear that we should act ASAP. @herbert, if nobody objects will you reopen the ticket, or should I ? I have reopened the JIRA issue and requested a read-only mirror for now. I am not sure why should we proceed with a read-only mirror if we decide to switch completely I think that is a bigger decision. it would also mean that f.x. the pootle workflow would have to be done differently. Having a git readonly mirror for a period of time, allows us to see how it works, change workflows, and see if there are user acceptance. I believe the majority of active developers work today with git-svn already. It would simplify the daily work :-) I will not being a show-stopper for a complete switch. I found it more secure to do it stepwise. And I am sure with the suggestion from andre, I can manage the switch too :-) Regarding the Pootle workflow I am not sure if I understand it currently. Would it be a big change to git instead svn? And if yes why and would it be really a blocker? pootle does not git only svn, meaning we will not be able to commit directly from pootle. No this is no blocker just inconvenient for the pootle admins, who then still need to work on the vm. rgds jan I. Juergen rgds jan I. Juergen Herbert - 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] GIT mirror
On 12 November 2013 20:12, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: Herbert Duerr wrote: On 12.11.2013 16:48, janI wrote: @herbert, if nobody objects will you reopen the ticket, or should I ? I have reopened the JIRA issue and requested a read-only mirror for now. And what would be the advantage for real contributors in having a read-only GIT mirror? The complaints I've seen so far are mostly in the other direction (i.e., committing or applying patches). I'm not talking about generic advantages of GIT: everybody here can be assumed to have a good working knowledge of both SVN and GIT. What concrete problems does a read-only GIT mirror solve in our case? I'm not at all against it, but I'd just like to make sure that a read-only GIT mirror brings enough concrete advantages, since many GIT niceties (local commits, proper attribution, quick application of patches) are still left out or significantly limited with this approach. At least if we do it, it should be done with plenty of warning to contributors can commit any outstanding work. There is one problem, svn branches are moved to GIT, but merging them back to trunk can/might be a problem. So if I understand it correct it is generally suggested to open a new branch in GIT, and copy the work from the old branch to the new branch. I see the RO GIT as a step, to allow contributors to get their setup prepared, before we do the full switch. By the way, you can find discussions about GIT everywhere at Apache, there's even a Github account https://github.com/apache and lots of suggestions like adopting the newly-released Apache Allura (Incubating) GIT (and more) hosting environment. As far as I know, there have been very significant updates in the GIT support at Apache in the last few weeks and I hope that this is soon summarized in a blog post at http://blogs.apache.org/infra/or reflected in the documentation at http://www.apache.org/dev/git.html . So this is a good moment to start considering GIT again. We should consider the website as well. Does the CMS have hooks that work with git repositories as well? Or would we need to keep the website in SVN? The ones I asked in infra, did not know of such a GIT plugin. rgds jan I. -Rob Regards, Andrea. - 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] GIT mirror
On Nov 13, 2013 12:45 AM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 11/12/2013 10:38 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 11/12/2013 08:12 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Andrea Pescettipesce...@apache.org wrote: Herbert Duerr wrote: On 12.11.2013 16:48, janI wrote: @herbert, if nobody objects will you reopen the ticket, or should I ? I have reopened the JIRA issue and requested a read-only mirror for now. And what would be the advantage for real contributors in having a read-only GIT mirror? The complaints I've seen so far are mostly in the other direction (i.e., committing or applying patches). I'm not talking about generic advantages of GIT: everybody here can be assumed to have a good working knowledge of both SVN and GIT. What concrete problems does a read-only GIT mirror solve in our case? I'm not at all against it, but I'd just like to make sure that a read-only GIT mirror brings enough concrete advantages, since many GIT niceties (local commits, proper attribution, quick application of patches) are still left out or significantly limited with this approach. By the way, you can find discussions about GIT everywhere at Apache, there's even a Github account https://github.com/apache and lots of suggestions like adopting the newly-released Apache Allura (Incubating) GIT (and more) hosting environment. As far as I know, there have been very significant updates in the GIT support at Apache in the last few weeks and I hope that this is soon summarized in a blog post at http://blogs.apache.org/infra/ or reflected in the documentation at http://www.apache.org/dev/git.html. So this is a good moment to start considering GIT again. We should consider the website as well. Does the CMS have hooks that work with git repositories as well? Or would we need to keep the website in SVN? Good point. This has to be clarified as we don't want to keep our website volunteers outside just because the CMS system doesn't support Git. To let everybody of them commit via CLI or GUI tools wouldn't be nice. But if it is an issue then one solution could be to move the product source to git and keep the websites in SVN. We're generally not dealing with multiple complex branches for the website, so the advantages of git here are less. Sure, to split the things when it makes sense is also an option. to be sure I mailed infra@ and got this reply: Simply put, no. All sites *must* remain in SVN. The CMS is actually built around SVN, it’s operations are SVN operations. to the question if cms can use git. rgds jan i Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [WWW]Certificate errors for forums
On 9 November 2013 00:47, Ricardo Berlasso rgb.m...@gmail.com wrote: Some people get certificate errors on the forums https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=50t=65462 I can see this too every now and then, but not on the browser: reading the ES forum rss feeds Akregator sometimes shows, apparently at random times, a certificate error. Your Security certificate is giving errors just thought you should know. The Error I am getting is Mixmatched Address: The security certificate presented by this website was issued for a different website's address. This error should not be random but comes every time a page that contains src= or href= http://xyz is loaded. The error is a serious warning, that the page you are loading contains unsecure content (http://). This is the part I have warned about earlier (and dave f. has taken care of for www). The databases of forum and wiki should be updated (any vm admin can do that), so that all relevant (ref inside forum/wiki) src=http://xyzand href= http://xyz are changed to src=//xyz and href=//xyz. rgds jan I. Regards, Ricardo
Re: [Accessibility] IA2 Integration proposal
On 9 November 2013 22:10, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: On 08/11/2013 Steve Yin wrote: The main development work for IA2 feature is finished on the branch ia2. Although there are some bugs in the current revision, I propose to merge the branch to the trunk for involving more volunteers. Thank you Steve, very good news! This is a major milestone on the road to 4.1 and a much-awaited achievement for OpenOffice. I agree with your proposal to merge it into trunk as soon as possible. yes really good news. When you integrate it, it would help me a lot if you point me to the makefiles that contain translations, when I merge your changes into branch l10n, I need to update the makefiles with a LANGUAGE_FILES= variable. rgds jan I. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: the Seamonkey has left the building
On 8 November 2013 14:09, Herbert Duerr h...@apache.org wrote: On 08.11.2013 13:39, Armin Le Grand wrote: On 08.11.2013 13:18, Herbert Duerr wrote: [...] If you are working on Windows then you'll notice that the --with-mozilla-build option is still there as NSS being part of the Mozilla project needs the Mozilla build environment. If you object to install the Mozilla build environment then you couldn't build the moz+nss modules on Windows then and cannot build nss on Windows now. Please use the --disable-nss-module or the --disable-category-B switches if providing the Mozilla build environment for NSS is out of the question. Is there a way to get around this...? Maybe nss can be 'replaced' somehow...? There are several libraries that could be alternatives, please see [1] for an overview. Evaluating the viability of them for replacing the individual aspects of NSS that are used in AOO could be an interesting task for volunteers. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_TLS_implementations Regarding the requirement of having the mozilla build environment for building NSS on Windows: I don't think NSS needs much of that tooling. They require this MingW based environment like we depend on our Cygwin based environment. NSS could certainly be rewritten to use cygwin too. But is it worth the trouble? Downloading MozBuildSetup [2] and running it is not much of an effort and it has the great benefit that we can then consume the source releases of NSS almost directly. The alternative of rewriting NSS for our cygwin environment would be much more intrusive than what is recommended for a category-B licensed library. Especially considering we have ongoing efforts to remove cygwin, and use visual studio directly. rgds jan I. [2] http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/mozilla/libraries/win32 Herbert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
capstone project, requirement document.
Hi. Just an update on the capstone 2013 project. The students have on plan delivered a requirement spec (see edited version below). Steven H (Xalan) and I have spent quite a lot of time, getting the students on the right track. Next step, is a technology research, and then we start converting, I am in parallel with the students working on the makefile side (see other thread about removing build.pl). The students delivers the final (hopeful successful) result end of may 2014. Most work will be done in a local repo (NOT to hide anything, but to avoid access problems), and the capstone branch will for now mainly be used to merge changes from trunk and build.pl experiments. Interested people can of course get a preview as we go along. requirement doc (edited !, removed personal information) CS 461 / 462 / 463 Client Requirements Document Project Name Windows Build System for Apache Open Office Team Name: Walnut Crusade Team Members: Mentor: Jan Iversen - j...@apache.org, 0034-622-87-6619 Apache Software Foundation Additional Assistance: Steve Hathaway – shatha...@apache.org, Apache Software Foundation Introduction to the problem: Building the Open Office software through Visual Studio as a Windows developer is difficult and has to be done through CygWin. Our goal is to create a method of properly compiling all modules using Microsoft Visual Studio on Windows. Project Description: Make a system that allows for the system to be easily built/debugged from within Microsoft Visual Studio Requirements: - Create a method of building the modules within the Open Office source using Microsoft Visual Studio; the generated modules should integrate with the current build system - Every Apache Open Office module should be represented by a Visual Studio Project file, and - Solution should require a minimum of setup and work on Windows 7 64-bit. The solution is not required to work with other configurations, but our modifications to the solution should not prevent it from being ported in the future Version Numbers: Design: - The end result of this project should be an Apache Open Office source tree with the build system for modules replaced with Visual Studio project files: the basic functionality of the system should remain the same. The completed system should build with a single command within Visual Studio. - Most conversion of modules will be done manually, copying over the functionality of a makefile to a Visual Studio project. Automated scripts may be used if applicable. Specific tasks to be undertaken: - Get a working setup to build the current version of Apache Open Office under Windows using CYGWin. - Conduct research on vcxproj file format, makefile format, similarities differences, Visual Studio environment variables, build rules, and so on: between the members of our group we should have an understanding of all of these elements - Select a module with a relatively low amount of dependencies and convert its makefile into an equivalent vcxproj file, then build this through Visual Studio. Once built, insert this into the current AOO build system and verify that it builds properly. - Research into methods of automating parts of the conversion process, and create a set of scripts to expedite the conversion process if possible. - Continue to convert modules to use Visual Studio projects instead of makefiles. - Compose a Visual Studio solution file encapsulating all converted modules. - Write up documentation on how the new build system operates Risk Assessment: Testing: - For every module converted, Open Office should build and run properly after making the change. The system should be tested after any module is converted. - Several modules will require additional testing of the compiled .exe; this testing will be performed by the client Preliminary Timetable: Roles of the different team members: Integration Plan: - Make sure current build system works when using modules created with Visual Studio projects - Make sure converted modules do not conflict with each other after being integrated together References: 1. Current build system description: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step 2. Apache Open Office website: http://www.openoffice.org/ 3. First attempt at remaking the build system: 1. Zen of gbuild: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Build_Environment_Effort/Zen_of_gbuild 2. Gbuild Bootstrapping: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Build_Environment_Effort/Gbuild_Bootstrapping 3. Module Migration: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Build_Environment_Effort/Module_Migration 4. Time Converter: http://www.worldtimebuddy.com/?pl=1lid=5720727,100h=5720727 5. Wiki for project: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Build_System_Analysis:capstone2013_windows_build 6. Build System Analysis:
Re: [ANNOUNCE] forum.openoffice.org
On Nov 6, 2013 3:46 PM, FR web forum ooofo...@free.fr wrote: proxy is configured transarent, the admins jut need to change the php2bb config, to make use of the header info. Thanks jan We are on PhpBB 3 I don't find this parameter in ACP. Could you be more explicit? not more than I expect you have to find it in the php files like config.php. I can just see what the php uses, and that is currently not the header info. I think imacat is the one that knows. about the php config. rgds jan i - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCE] forum.openoffice.org
On 6 November 2013 17:35, Daiwe axp...@gmail.com wrote: Try replacing $_SERVER['REMOTE_ADDR'] in session_begin in session.php with $_SERVER['HTTP_X_FORWARDED_FOR'] Thx a lot for your proposal, which I can see is correct (this is exactly what I did for wiki, when I was admin). I am not appl admin and I dont know if the current admins like to change in the code itself. I have sent my reply with copy to the dev@ list so the admins can see your proposal, they might contact you directly. thanks for taking time to write me. rgds jan I.
Re: [ANNOUNCE] forum.openoffice.org
On Nov 5, 2013 9:38 PM, FR web forum ooofo...@free.fr wrote: But still, we need the real IP. It's useful in case of spam. +1 Sometime, we have a spambot with multiple accounts. Disable by IP is the only one thing to stop it. The solution is to configure server as transparent proxy. proxy is configured transarent, the admins jut need to change the php2bb config, to make use of the header info. rgds jan i - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Microsoft warning that potentially affect us ?
Hi. I just read this warning from microsoft (after a hint on infra): http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/531046/microsoft_warns_office_zero-day_active_hacker_exploits/?utm_medium=rssutm_source=sectionfeed aoo imports office 2007 documents, so could it be a problem for us too ? rgds jan I.
Re: ratscan
Hi I agree to using ratscan on trunk is a good idea, and all the other comments. But my original question is still not answered, do we use the build system to do ratscan, or is the ratscan target an old relict ? rgds jan I.
Re: ratscan
On Nov 4, 2013 3:31 PM, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 04.11.2013 10:36, janI wrote: Hi I agree to using ratscan on trunk is a good idea, and all the other comments. But my original question is still not answered, do we use the build system to do ratscan, or is the ratscan target an old relict ? I think that I have added the ext_libraries/ratscan/ module. It is built and started when the --with-rat-scan option is given to configure. But I don't know if that is used on our build servers. If you see a --with-rat-scan option in their configuration files then it is, otherwise it is not. thx for a clear answer. yes it is added to ext_librararies, and currently not used, so I will remove it in my branch (r.i.p. build.pl efford) rgds jan i -Andre rgds jan I. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCE] forum.openoffice.org
On Nov 4, 2013 4:10 PM, FR web forum ooofo...@free.fr wrote: All http://forum.openoffice.org request are permanently redirected to https://forum.openoffice.org PhpBB store the ip address for each post We have a problem with https All posts are the same ip 140.211.11.74 (erebus-ssl.apache.org) you should use the ip in the header and not tcpip level. traffic goes through a proxy. Same thing will happen if we use the trafficserver to cache pages. rgds jan i - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: ratscan
On Nov 4, 2013 4:41 PM, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/4/13 3:46 PM, janI wrote: On Nov 4, 2013 3:31 PM, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 04.11.2013 10:36, janI wrote: Hi I agree to using ratscan on trunk is a good idea, and all the other comments. But my original question is still not answered, do we use the build system to do ratscan, or is the ratscan target an old relict ? I think that I have added the ext_libraries/ratscan/ module. It is built and started when the --with-rat-scan option is given to configure. But I don't know if that is used on our build servers. If you see a --with-rat-scan option in their configuration files then it is, otherwise it is not. thx for a clear answer. yes it is added to ext_librararies, and currently not used, so I will remove it in my branch (r.i.p. build.pl efford) what do you mean it is not used? Do you know all configure options from people? I think the main idea was to make it as easy as possible for people to run their own local ratscan. I see no reason why we should remove it. Today anybody can run it with this configure option, how doe sit wok without this in a local environment (no build bot involved)? no I dont, and with your statement we can forget about changing anything! there will alwayes be someone using whatever we remove. My idea, which got good response was to only implement build options we use to build our releases and potentially a few extra used by active aoo developers. ratscan is really a good example of something that do not belong in a build system, we also do not include svn, which seems more relevant in a build system If I am wrong, and we shall support all options in the future, there are no idea in trying to remove build.pl. rgds jan i Juergen rgds jan i -Andre rgds jan I. - 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: Log in glitch on en forum
On 4 November 2013 21:22, Hagar Delest hagar.del...@laposte.net wrote: Le 04/11/2013 10:53, Ricardo Berlasso a écrit : (top posting) The problem was indeed the maximum number of connections allowed from the same ip: it was setted well bellow the usual number of users on EN forums. It's working now. let's see what happens on the next hours. All users have the same IP. So there is a problem (coming from a proxy it seems, on ASF side?). Even if the short term fix applied by Ricardo works for the moment, we need to set the system back to normal. Yes https traffic goes via a proxy to handle the certificates. This is quite normal, on wiki.o.o all requests go through the traffic server (to cache pages and thereby provide better response time) so the tcp/ip address does not change. The configuration must use the ip address from the http header (original address) instead of the tcp/ip addr (any proxy addr). Actually previously there has also been plenty of users sitting behind proxy servers (typically companies), so the situation is not new, just now for all. rgds jan I. Hagar - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
[ANNOUNCE] forum.openoffice.org
Hi I am happy to announce that https://forum.openoffice.org is now open. All http://forum.openoffice.org request are permanently redirected to https://forum.openoffice.org The site has been briefly tested, and the http/https mix problem exist on forum, just like on wiki. Thanks to all that helped make this happen. on behalf of the infrastructure team jan I. Ps. I have close jira issue 6608.
Re: ratscan
On 3 November 2013 19:23, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Nov 03, 2013 at 01:47:54AM +0100, janI wrote: The project must do ratscans actively. PMC members need the ratscan output in order to review IP License compliance. When you +1 a release this is something that PMC members must check. This is more important to get correct than the code quality. This is an interesting statement, I have never been presented with a ratscan output even though I was PMC member when we voted for both 4.0 and 4.0.1. I highly agree that ratscan is important, but I cannot find the output in svn, would it not be a natural place to have it together with the release ? It looks like you didn't do your homework before voting, Jürgen usually posts the link to the ratscan output in the [VOTE] thread, for example: http://markmail.org/message/dtyu2zisyvismaqg http://markmail.org/message/cquhuieawf4jbx6j it sure looks like it, thx for correcting me. Besides, build-bot openoffice-linux64-rat runs the target weekly: http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/ that runs on trunk, and not on the branches. rgds jan I. Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina
Re: call for help to test AOO www and AOO wiki (certificates for *.o.o)
Hmm it seems markmail does not allow me to reply inline, sorry for that. extensions.o.o and templates.o.o are as far as I know not hosted on ASF infrastructure, and therefore I (and infra) cannot provide https: access Please talk with the host providers of extensions and templates, if they are prepared to enable https: let take a discussion in infra, how to make this possible (problem is that the certificate belongs to ASF not .e.g sourceforge). rgds jan I.
Re: https://wiki.openoffice.org update.
Sorry it seems that markmail does not provide inline responses. I will not prescribe the admins how to change the setup, I tested on my db copy, with a couple of update where ... statements, basically replacing http:// with /. rgds jan I.
Re: https://wiki.openoffice.org update.
On 2 November 2013 17:17, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: Jan, On Nov 2, 2013, at 8:58 AM, janI wrote: Sorry it seems that markmail does not provide inline responses. I will not prescribe the admins how to change the setup, I tested on my db copy, with a couple of update where ... statements, basically replacing http:// with /. The change needs to include the domain name: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/; is changed to / http://wiki.openoffice.org/; is changed to / Working through the urlrewrite script I have a bug with http://www.openoffice.org/ that inserted an extra / - it needs a fix before I commit changes. Similar for the forums. ETA on Forum changes? No ETA at the moment, this change is far more complicated because forum was not going through a proxy previously. We are seeing some proxy challenges, which need to more carefully examined before just changing. My hope (but NO promise) is a test setup (proxy can be used if local host defines forum.openoffice.org) start next week, and then a couple of days later full switch. however this should not be a showstopper for changing, it quite ok, to change the dbs before enforcing https:// rgds jan I. Regards, Dave rgds jan I. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
ratscan
Hi. As part of making a new central Makefile I found the target ratscan. Do we actively use this target or is it a leftover from the move to ASF ? rgds jan I.
Re: ratscan
On 2 November 2013 23:03, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: Hi Jan, Thanks for asking about Apache Rat and ratscan. On Nov 2, 2013, at 1:54 PM, janI wrote: Hi. As part of making a new central Makefile I found the target ratscan. Do we actively use this target or is it a leftover from the move to ASF ? The project must do ratscans actively. PMC members need the ratscan output in order to review IP License compliance. When you +1 a release this is something that PMC members must check. This is more important to get correct than the code quality. This is an interesting statement, I have never been presented with a ratscan output even though I was PMC member when we voted for both 4.0 and 4.0.1. I highly agree that ratscan is important, but I cannot find the output in svn, would it not be a natural place to have it together with the release ? IMO - If you are thinking about auto-build with digital signing then the ratscan must pass before signed artifacts are generated. It is not required to make a nightly build. For this thread we are only discussing the parts of our svn tree that we release. [1] Best Regards, Dave [1] There is an inactive flame (and let's leave it that way please) about the parts of the Symphony contribution that are yet to be moved into active development. There seems to be a ratscan run against trunk nightly -- see the link on: http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/ I don't know who set this up or any details though. Could be the target Jan is referring to is used in this. thanks for the reference, as far as I can see this run does not use the makefiles, but I will check up on this. I have verified its not run in our normal nightly run, which basically do a build --all rgds jan I. rgds jan I. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- - MzK “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax
https://wiki.openoffice.org update.
Hi I am pleased to announce that now wiki.openoffice.org runs in a secure https:// environment. http://wiki.openoffice.org and http://wiki.services.openoffice.org are both redirected (permanent) to https://wiki.openoffice.org The downtime was less than 10sec. We have not made changes on the vm or in the db, so any href= or src= that contains http:// will give a user warning. on behalf of the infrastructure team jan I. Ps. We are still working on forum.o.o
AOO 4.1 FVT Starts! Call for volunteers on Writer!
Sorry I am a bit confused. I have been looking for a Function spec. for 4.1 but not found one, did I miss something ? Also I have not found a decision (but many mails assuming) that our next release will be 4.1 and not e.g. 4.0.2 (f.x. added languages). Trunk is ready to build, but is that really 4.1 or just 4.0.1++ ? F.x. I still hope we can integrate branch l10n40 into 4.1,, which for sure will require a lot of additional testing. If I am right, I do not understand how we can start FVT, before defining the functions that goes into the release. I am a strong believer in test, but lets call it what it is (sorry if I am wrong), a test of trunk. rgds jan I.
[INFO] AOO wiki and forum.
Hi. Just a polite information. --- wiki.o.o --- will be changed to https:// only after friday 1 november 16:00. http:// will automatically redirect to https:// Test shows that everything will work, but users get warnings due to mixed https:// http:// pages. As described earlier this is something that can easily be changed at database level by the admins. The service interruption should be 1 minute. --- forum.o.o --- will be changed to https:// after friday 1 november 16:00 http:// will automatically redirect to https:// In case of unexpected problems (see test above), https:// and http:// will be running in parallel, and the redirect will be made next weekend (8 november). The service interruption should be 10 minutes a couple of times for each forum. We will keep status.a.o updated On behalf of infra jan I.
[INFO] AOO Wiki and forum
Hi Just a polite info, about the infra work starting friday 1 november 16:00. --- wiki.a.o --- will be changed to https:// only. http:// will be redirected automatically to https:// Test shows that everything works, but users get warnings about mixed https:// http:// pages. The mixing is due to use of src=http:// and href=http:// in the anchor and image tags. As described earlier an admin can easy make the needed changes at database level. Service interruption is expected to be 1 minute. --- forum.a.o. --- will be changed to https:// only. http:// will be redirected automatically to https:// In case of unexpected problems (see test above), The http:// redirect will not be done allowing http:// and https:// to work in parallel. Service interruption is expected to be 10 minute a couple of times for each forum. status.a.o will be updated when work begins. On behalf of the infrastructure team jan I.
Re: call for help to test AOO www and AOO wiki (certificates for *.o.o)
On 27 October 2013 02:58, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 09:30:06PM -0400, Rob Weir wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 10:54:59PM +0200, janI wrote: Hi. www.openoffice.org now accept both http: and https: as announced earlier. We have however seen that e.g. product.css contain image tag with http://xxx. All references must be relative (without http: and https:). I hope the web admins can do make the needed changes. There are 26,349 matches of http://www.openoffice.org/; in ooo-site. We *are not* going to change to a system that requires that links to www.openoffice.org are all https. I hope that is not what is being suggested. Remember, we have 10's of thousands of *external* links to our website that we do control and cannot change. Please someone, tell me that this is not what is being suggested here. No its not, as I wrote in the part you quote, www.openoffice.org will continue to have https: but also https: as pr request from the project. But if I might remind you sent a mail to infra, asking why https: was not implemented for www.openoffice.org, which I and pctony responded to. And if you look at INFRA-6608, you will see a comment from andrea 3 August: And we will want to use it, even though there is no authentication there, for http(s)://www.openoffice.org (this is mainly because we receive a steady, even if low, amount of complaints from users who cannot browse our main site on HTTPS). We infra have done exactly as the project asked us to do according to INFRA-6608, and that is not correct ?? I actually never understood why https: was wanted on www.openoffice.org, but it was not a problem to do it, so it was done. today is a day where I am less proud of being AOO-PMC. We (AOO) have been after infra to get a certificate and get it implemented. Yesterday mark took a big chunk of time and with some help from me, got it implemented. I think infra should have a thank you, instead ! I have of course a double heart in this situation, but I am sure this is not a good way, to work together. rgds jan I. were you have href=http://www.openoffice.org/some_resource;, it should be href=/some_resource (nothing crazy, but a good practice). Grepping href=[']http://www.openoffice.org/ gives 25,026 matches. Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina
Re: call for help to test AOO www and AOO wiki (certificates for *.o.o)
On 27 October 2013 11:53, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: Thanks for taking care of this. People are asking this on Wiki and forum (and even WWW) for long. And I know a wild card certificate is very costly. Thanks for your kind words. In all this discussion about www, please do NOT forget to test https://wiki.openoffice.org next weekend http://wiki.openoffice.org will be changed to a redirect to https://wiki.openoffice.org and thereby all traffic will be https: At the same time: https://forum.openoffice.org will be made available for test, and a week later http://forum.openoffice.org will be changed to a redirect to https://forum.openoffice.org and thereby all traffic will be https: I have already now seen references to http:// this need to be changed, otherwise users will get a warning. rgds jan I. On 2013/10/27 16:05, janI said: On 27 October 2013 02:58, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 09:30:06PM -0400, Rob Weir wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 10:54:59PM +0200, janI wrote: Hi. www.openoffice.org now accept both http: and https: as announced earlier. We have however seen that e.g. product.css contain image tag with http://xxx. All references must be relative (without http: and https:). I hope the web admins can do make the needed changes. There are 26,349 matches of http://www.openoffice.org/; in ooo-site. We *are not* going to change to a system that requires that links to www.openoffice.org are all https. I hope that is not what is being suggested. Remember, we have 10's of thousands of *external* links to our website that we do control and cannot change. Please someone, tell me that this is not what is being suggested here. No its not, as I wrote in the part you quote, www.openoffice.org will continue to have https: but also https: as pr request from the project. But if I might remind you sent a mail to infra, asking why https: was not implemented for www.openoffice.org, which I and pctony responded to. And if you look at INFRA-6608, you will see a comment from andrea 3 August: And we will want to use it, even though there is no authentication there, for http(s)://www.openoffice.org (this is mainly because we receive a steady, even if low, amount of complaints from users who cannot browse our main site on HTTPS). We infra have done exactly as the project asked us to do according to INFRA-6608, and that is not correct ?? I actually never understood why https: was wanted on www.openoffice.org, but it was not a problem to do it, so it was done. today is a day where I am less proud of being AOO-PMC. We (AOO) have been after infra to get a certificate and get it implemented. Yesterday mark took a big chunk of time and with some help from me, got it implemented. I think infra should have a thank you, instead ! I have of course a double heart in this situation, but I am sure this is not a good way, to work together. rgds jan I. were you have href=http://www.openoffice.org/some_resource;, it should be href=/some_resource (nothing crazy, but a good practice). Grepping href=[']http://www.openoffice.org/ gives 25,026 matches. Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina -- Best regards, imacat ^_*' ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc Woman's Voice News: http://www.wov.idv.tw/ Tavern IMACAT's http://www.imacat.idv.tw/ Woman in FOSS in Taiwan http://wofoss.blogspot.com/ OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/ EducOO/OOo4Kids Taiwan http://www.educoo.tw/ Greenfoot Taiwan http://greenfoot.westart.tw/
Re: call for help to test AOO www and AOO wiki (certificates for *.o.o)
On 27 October 2013 13:34, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 4:05 AM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: On 27 October 2013 02:58, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 09:30:06PM -0400, Rob Weir wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 10:54:59PM +0200, janI wrote: Hi. www.openoffice.org now accept both http: and https: as announced earlier. We have however seen that e.g. product.css contain image tag with http://xxx. All references must be relative (without http: and https:). I hope the web admins can do make the needed changes. There are 26,349 matches of http://www.openoffice.org/; in ooo-site. We *are not* going to change to a system that requires that links to www.openoffice.org are all https. I hope that is not what is being suggested. Remember, we have 10's of thousands of *external* links to our website that we do control and cannot change. Please someone, tell me that this is not what is being suggested here. No its not, as I wrote in the part you quote, www.openoffice.org will continue to have https: but also https: as pr request from the project. But if I might remind you sent a mail to infra, asking why https: was not implemented for www.openoffice.org, which I and pctony responded to. And if you look at INFRA-6608, you will see a comment from andrea 3 August: And we will want to use it, even though there is no authentication there, for http(s)://www.openoffice.org (this is mainly because we receive a steady, even if low, amount of complaints from users who cannot browse our main site on HTTPS). We infra have done exactly as the project asked us to do according to INFRA-6608, and that is not correct ?? There is nothing wrong, IMHO, with supporting https for www.openoffice.org. There is nothing wrong, IMHO, with *not* supporting https for www.openoffice.org as well. The problem has been the confusion caused to users when they get an error about an invalid certificate when using https with www.openoffice, due to the apache.org certificate previously associated with it. The mismatch was the issue. But it should be sufficient to support https on request for the www subdomain. We don't have any security reason to have it be the default for the static website, or at least none that I know of. So that is the question: support https versus automatically redirecting http to https. May I politely correct, NO one has talked about redirection of www.openoffice.org. If you read my (and earlier) mails, I have written support http: and https: You are able to view www.openoffice.org as: http://www.openoffice.org or https://www.openoffice.org that is the users choice. Redirection is only mentioned for wiki.o.o and forum.o.o, where it is needed for security reasons. You are able to call http://wiki.openoffice.org, but will be redirected to https://wiki.openoffice.org and all further communication will be https: My concern, as stated, was regarding the stability of external URLs using http and whether they would continue to resolve. I wanted to have some discussion before we started to make bulk edit changes to thousands of web and wiki pages. I don't think this request was unreasonable. The request is not at all unreasonable, but 2 things: - I read about 10 mails with numbers and will not do, before infra was given a thank for spending a saturday solving a AOO problem. - The bulk edit changes should have discussed and made a while ago, when or before the ticket was issued, and at least before AOO send mails to infra asking why it isnt implemented. It is a bit late (but not causing real problems) to do it afterward. This lack of work is the reason, I try so hard to get https://wiki tested, because I know we have exact the same problem, with the difference http://wiki will not be available. I have spent my morning seeing how the bulk changes can be done, and it can be done automatic: - for www, do svn co, and use e.g. sed to edit all pages with a regex. Templates is something I dont know, so that might change the work a bit. - for wiki, any vm-admin can open mysql, and do a update statement on the text tables. - for forum any vm-admin can open mysql, and do update statement on the text tables, there might be a config issue with the avatars. Infra secures that www/wiki/forum works technically and e.g. wiki configuration was changed to allow https: forum configuration is prepared. Infra does not and cannot modify the content of the services. I actually never understood why https: was wanted on www.openoffice.org, but it was not a problem to do it, so it was done. Hopefully what I wrote above clarifies. today is a day where I am less proud of being AOO-PMC. We (AOO) have been after infra
Re: call for help to test AOO www and AOO wiki (certificates for *.o.o)
On 27 October 2013 16:47, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 9:58 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
arie...@apache.org wrote:
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 09:30:06PM -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
arie...@apache.org wrote:
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 10:54:59PM +0200, janI wrote:
Hi.
www.openoffice.org now accept both http: and https: as announced
earlier.
We have however seen that e.g. product.css contain image tag with
http://xxx. All references must be relative (without http: and
https:). I hope the web admins can do make the needed changes.
There are 26,349 matches of http://www.openoffice.org/; in
ooo-site.
We *are not* going to change to a system that requires that links to
www.openoffice.org are all https. I hope that is not what is being
suggested. Remember, we have 10's of thousands of *external* links to
our website that we do control and cannot change.
Please someone, tell me that this is not what is being suggested here.
were you have href=http://www.openoffice.org/some_resource;, it should
be href=/some_resource (nothing crazy, but a good practice).
Also, in images, src=http://www.openoffice.org/some_resource;
yes
Or in CSS:
url(http://www.openoffice.org/some.css;);
yes
But there are some that probably should not be changed. For example:
meta itemprop=image
content=http://www.openoffice.org/images/aoo-logo-100x100.png; /
correct, which is why you need to search {href|src|url(}\=\
http://www.openoffice.org
That is intended to resolve externally, on Google+, so I think itt
should be the full URL.
yes it should not be changed.
There are also the legacy subdomains to think about. We have URL's
on the website like:
href=http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html;
That should become:
href=/qa/issue_handling/project_issues.html
yes.
Please remember we have *.openoffice.org so it is valid for
qa.openoffice.org
In this case you search could be {href|src|url(}\=\http://qa.openoffice.org
But not all subdomains act that way. For example
http://extensions.openoffice.org should *not* be rewritten.
No that is located on sourceforge out of our control.
Grepping href=[']http://www.openoffice.org/ gives 25,026 matches.
Maybe it makes sense to do the easy one first, the www subdomain
ones.. Most of them are simple href/source/url patterns.
a combination of regex, sed and find makes the change in a couple of
minutes, what remains then is commit/publish and test.
rgds
jan I.
Regards,
-Rob
Regards
--
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Certificates for our .o.o services
Hi. Just information for those that do not follow infra discussions. Infra is preparing to activate our openoffice certificate. I will be be doing the work under the guidance of mark who knows what needs to be done. It will be activated for all .o.o services, service by service. A couple of the changes will require change of habit for our users, which I why I give an early warning. wiki.o.o and forum.o.o will change to https: meaning after the change it will not be possible to do a login on http:. There will be an automatic redirect similar to http://translate.apache.org - https://translate.apache.org I will keep you informed and give a fair warning before the services are interrupted. rgds jan I.
Re: help needed with bundled help
I was just thinking, because I just merged l10n40 from trunk and got very tired. I think your idea of making it easy for translators and also documenters is real good. But you have spare cycles to spare for this, why not approach it differently and decouple the help system. Somewhere in the code (I dont know where, but you may know), the help system is called with an id. If we branch at that point to call a standard help system instead it would be decoupled. If you could do the decoupling, I can for sure help transform the current help into whatever format is required for a new help system. At the moment I burn cycles comprehending what happens, I dare not start thinking why, I am pretty sure that with the same resource usage we could make a help system based on todays help standard. just my idea a saturday afternoon, where I see someone change the readmelicense.xrm and my parser broke. rgds jan I. On 25 October 2013 21:42, janI j...@apache.org wrote: On 25 October 2013 18:33, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:36 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: On 25 October 2013 01:06, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: [top posting] never mind on this question. I found the answer -- I didn't do a last step. Sorry for the noise. the makefiles in helpcontent2, are like good italian spaghetti, especially the util directories, where parts of what was done in source is overwritten. ??? I need to take a closer look at what you're saying here...this is exactly where I stopped looking yesterday. tell me if I can help. In branch l10n40 you can see some of the changed I had to do to make it work. My biggest problem was the .tree files, and the fact that whereas most input files are in source some of them (index etc) is in util for SOME not all of the parts. Let me know if I can help. rgds jan I. I have integrated genLang here, but its on my list to strip the makefiles down to what we use (today). rgds jan I. Well, as it turns out, my problem is not solved. The jars I'm looking for supposedly get generated in the makefile in helpcontent2/util, but...still no jars. As per the old instructions, I got into helpcontent2 and just did a build. I'm trying to figure out what's required to just deal with the help files -- editing/seeing results -- apart from a complete build of the product. What I'm thinking is we might be able to kludge some simple config for users interested in just tech writing for this area. more later...after more trials On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: I'm trying to find my way around the bundled help with AOO -- how to put stuff in, how to build etc to see changes. So, I made some changes and followed instructions for building in: http://www.openoffice.org/documentation/online_help/OOo2HelpAuthoring.pdf pp. 21, 22 This was building ONLY helpcontent2. Some things happened -- new zip files were created but not the .jar files FROM the zip files found in openoffice4-location/help Can anyone tell me what needs to be built next to make this happen? I've done a bunch of searches on some of the makefiles etc but can't readily find this. Thanks for any help on Help. :} -- - MzK “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax -- - MzK “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax -- - MzK “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax
Re: Certificates for our .o.o services
On 26 October 2013 15:29, janI j...@apache.org wrote: Hi. Just information for those that do not follow infra discussions. Infra is preparing to activate our openoffice certificate. I will be be doing the work under the guidance of mark who knows what needs to be done. It will be activated for all .o.o services, service by service. A couple of the changes will require change of habit for our users, which I why I give an early warning. wiki.o.o and forum.o.o will change to https: meaning after the change it will not be possible to do a login on http:. There will be an automatic redirect similar to http://translate.apache.org - https://translate.apache.org I will keep you informed and give a fair warning before the services are interrupted. Sometimes things go fast. I am happy to announce that https://www.openoffice.org now works, thanks to fast work from mark. There is one issue, which we have to live with. If requesting https://www.openoffice.org, clicking on a link to either blogs or cwiki and then clicking on a link that goes back, it will be http://www... this needs to be corrected (if wanted) in cwiki/blogs. We have chosen not to redirect all traffic to https: for this service. Test work is continuing on wiki and forum. on behalf of infra jan I. rgds jan I.
Re: help needed with bundled help
On 26 October 2013 19:41, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 8:40 AM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: I was just thinking, because I just merged l10n40 from trunk and got very tired. I think your idea of making it easy for translators and also documenters is real good. But you have spare cycles to spare for this, why not approach it differently and decouple the help system. Somewhere in the code (I dont know where, but you may know), the help system is called with an id. If we branch at that point to call a standard help system instead it would be decoupled. If you could do the decoupling, I can for sure help transform the current help into whatever format is required for a new help system. At the moment I burn cycles comprehending what happens, I dare not start thinking why, I am pretty sure that with the same resource usage we could make a help system based on todays help standard. I think this has been suggested in the past as well, and maybe what I'm trying to do will be a first step to this. At this point, I don't know where/how the Help system get launched. It would make sense to put the help stuff in its own svn area like we do with extras for example, and then go from there at least. A ways down the road I think. It would make the whole translation process (new one) more difficult if help was in its own area, because right now all references are within main, and its simple to expect all modules in main to be at same level, I dont consider it simple to secure that 2 (or more) different svn areas are at the same level. If they happen to be at different level and someone generates templates it will go wrong, because keys will not match and wrong messages will be extracted. Why do you think it would help with its own area, whether you write main/helpcontent2 or helpcontent2 does not make a difference or ? Thanks for your support and willingness to help. No problem, its just returning the help I needed :-) rgds jan I. just my idea a saturday afternoon, where I see someone change the readmelicense.xrm and my parser broke. rgds jan I. On 25 October 2013 21:42, janI j...@apache.org wrote: On 25 October 2013 18:33, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:36 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: On 25 October 2013 01:06, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: [top posting] never mind on this question. I found the answer -- I didn't do a last step. Sorry for the noise. the makefiles in helpcontent2, are like good italian spaghetti, especially the util directories, where parts of what was done in source is overwritten. ??? I need to take a closer look at what you're saying here...this is exactly where I stopped looking yesterday. tell me if I can help. In branch l10n40 you can see some of the changed I had to do to make it work. My biggest problem was the .tree files, and the fact that whereas most input files are in source some of them (index etc) is in util for SOME not all of the parts. Let me know if I can help. rgds jan I. I have integrated genLang here, but its on my list to strip the makefiles down to what we use (today). rgds jan I. Well, as it turns out, my problem is not solved. The jars I'm looking for supposedly get generated in the makefile in helpcontent2/util, but...still no jars. As per the old instructions, I got into helpcontent2 and just did a build. I'm trying to figure out what's required to just deal with the help files -- editing/seeing results -- apart from a complete build of the product. What I'm thinking is we might be able to kludge some simple config for users interested in just tech writing for this area. more later...after more trials On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: I'm trying to find my way around the bundled help with AOO -- how to put stuff in, how to build etc to see changes. So, I made some changes and followed instructions for building in: http://www.openoffice.org/documentation/online_help/OOo2HelpAuthoring.pdf pp. 21, 22 This was building ONLY helpcontent2. Some things happened -- new zip files were created but not the .jar files FROM the zip files found in openoffice4-location/help Can anyone tell me what needs to be built next to make this happen? I've done a bunch of searches on some of the makefiles etc but can't readily find this. Thanks for any help on Help
call for help to test AOO www and AOO wiki (certificates for *.o.o)
Hi. www.openoffice.org now accept both http: and https: as announced earlier. We have however seen that e.g. product.css contain image tag with http://xxx. All references must be relative (without http: and https:). I hope the web admins can do make the needed changes. https://wiki.openoffice.org is also created and ready for test, BUT it is not enforced. We have seen the same issues here. Mixing http/https. Please test https://wiki.openoffice.org and report the problems. Some of the tags will be within the pages, and need to be changed in the wiki itself, others like .css must be changed by a sysadmin. @admins, FYI I have changed Localsettings.php to allow https, and it is committed with R884253, no other changes were made to mwiki. You will find code in there, look at the commit comment for an explanation. The intention is to enforce https: on wiki next weekend, unless someone object a lot. We are planning a similar test with forum, but that will not be initiated before next weekend. A big thank to mark for helping making this happen so fast. on behalf of infra jan I
Re: call for help to test AOO www and AOO wiki (certificates for *.o.o)
On 26 October 2013 23:05, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 10:54:59PM +0200, janI wrote: Hi. www.openoffice.org now accept both http: and https: as announced earlier. We have however seen that e.g. product.css contain image tag with http://xxx. All references must be relative (without http: and https:). I hope the web admins can do make the needed changes. There are 26,349 matches of http://www.openoffice.org/; in ooo-site. I am glad you did not count http://; :-) Please remember that a large part is in the templates, so change once and rebuild site. But its still a nice search and replace job. May I politely point out that the only reason for this change, is infra-6608 where it was directly added to the list of sites that should have https: rgds jan I. Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina
Re: call for help to test AOO www and AOO wiki (certificates for *.o.o)
On 26 October 2013 23:45, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 11:26:21PM +0200, janI wrote: There are 26,349 matches of http://www.openoffice.org/; in ooo-site. I am glad you did not count http://; :-) Please remember that a large part is in the templates, so change once and rebuild site. No, it's a grep in the site source, ooo-site/content, it's not generated html files. A wider search should include links to localized sites, like es.openoffice.org, so that something like http://[a-zA-Z0-9]*.openoffice.org/ gives 74,979 matches (but they include for sure sites like http://templates.openoffice.org that cannot be replaced by /. What I meant was that if you search in svn ooo-site/trunk/content, then it is full html see e.g. https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/contributing/index.html at least I cannot see the difference. I have also been told earlier that the full html is stored in svn, and the cms software knows what is template and what not. Where should the generated html be in your opinion ? the site-vm seems to take it directly from svn. But lets not discuss numbers, I am no expert in this and just want to understand. rgds jan I. Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina
Re: Extensions
On 25 October 2013 01:59, Vladislav Stevanovic stevanovicvladis...@gmail.com wrote: 2) In future we must made restriction for those extensions on our site I don't get what you would restrict. Do you mean that you would hide all extensions that are not compatible with 4.0? I think they can stay... Maybe it is possible to add a warning to the extensions that do not have releases explicitly compatible with 4.0? Warnings, at least, would be good idea. Also, Filter option on site Extension need to has option for what version of AOO you want to find extension. A filter option is a real good idea. rgds jan I. Regards, Wlada 2013/10/25 Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org Vladislav Stevanovic wrote: We had in Serbia simmilar problem with one of the most-frequently-used extension in Serbian. Thanks for Jörg Schmidt he made version for AOO 4.0, but we have still some problems here, because old version of this extension is still visible on AOO Extension site! It is silent message for all: this is not working on AOO, but here is on our site. Indeed, we must do something about this. PDF Import is another excellent example: people do not read that the 4.0-compatible version is available as a different extension and keep complaining and believing that a 4.0-compatible version does not exist... this creates confusion, misunderstandings and a huge waste of time for support. 1) Administrators must have create the rule: extensions on AOO site Extension must declared as appropriate or non-appropriate for AOO4.0. This is already there. There's compatibility information for all releases. And we even have a wiki page http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Extensions/Extensions_** and_Apache_OpenOffice_4.0 http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Extensions/Extensions_and_Apache_OpenOffice_4.0 with examples and information. 2) In future we must made restriction for those extensions on our site I don't get what you would restrict. Do you mean that you would hide all extensions that are not compatible with 4.0? I think they can stay... Maybe it is possible to add a warning to the extensions that do not have releases explicitly compatible with 4.0? 3) There is some the most frequently used extensions. What we can do to ensure that this extension works in AOO 4.0? Can we invited authors of this extensions to made version for AOO4.0? Can we create some fork, if it is totaly legal (for example, for extensions where authors of extensions do not want to make corrections for AOO 4.0 and when licence permit forks? This is complex and I don't know what is best to do. For sure PDF Import, the most popular extension, the source code for which is in the OpenOffice sources, is unmaintained and forked (meaning: Ariel provided a working replacement that is compatible with 4.0), but the replacement is shadowed by the original extension. Same for the MySQL Connector. For those two extensions I would suggest to plug in Ariel's replacements as updates to the original extension, to give them proper visibility. But these two extensions are very special cases. In general, forking will be a mess since it will duplicate extensions and the original one will still be more visible and outdated. Transfer of ownership (meaning: the author has no interest or time to update the extension, but at least he is available to transfer the ownership of the extension on the Extensions site to another user who is volunteering to create a 4.0-compatible version) would work best. Regards, Andrea. --**--**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: help needed with bundled help
On 25 October 2013 01:06, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: [top posting] never mind on this question. I found the answer -- I didn't do a last step. Sorry for the noise. the makefiles in helpcontent2, are like good italian spaghetti, especially the util directories, where parts of what was done in source is overwritten. I have integrated genLang here, but its on my list to strip the makefiles down to what we use (today). rgds jan I. On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: I'm trying to find my way around the bundled help with AOO -- how to put stuff in, how to build etc to see changes. So, I made some changes and followed instructions for building in: http://www.openoffice.org/documentation/online_help/OOo2HelpAuthoring.pdf pp. 21, 22 This was building ONLY helpcontent2. Some things happened -- new zip files were created but not the .jar files FROM the zip files found in openoffice4-location/help Can anyone tell me what needs to be built next to make this happen? I've done a bunch of searches on some of the makefiles etc but can't readily find this. Thanks for any help on Help. :} -- - MzK “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax -- - MzK “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax
Re: help needed with bundled help
On 25 October 2013 18:33, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:36 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: On 25 October 2013 01:06, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: [top posting] never mind on this question. I found the answer -- I didn't do a last step. Sorry for the noise. the makefiles in helpcontent2, are like good italian spaghetti, especially the util directories, where parts of what was done in source is overwritten. ??? I need to take a closer look at what you're saying here...this is exactly where I stopped looking yesterday. tell me if I can help. In branch l10n40 you can see some of the changed I had to do to make it work. My biggest problem was the .tree files, and the fact that whereas most input files are in source some of them (index etc) is in util for SOME not all of the parts. Let me know if I can help. rgds jan I. I have integrated genLang here, but its on my list to strip the makefiles down to what we use (today). rgds jan I. Well, as it turns out, my problem is not solved. The jars I'm looking for supposedly get generated in the makefile in helpcontent2/util, but...still no jars. As per the old instructions, I got into helpcontent2 and just did a build. I'm trying to figure out what's required to just deal with the help files -- editing/seeing results -- apart from a complete build of the product. What I'm thinking is we might be able to kludge some simple config for users interested in just tech writing for this area. more later...after more trials On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: I'm trying to find my way around the bundled help with AOO -- how to put stuff in, how to build etc to see changes. So, I made some changes and followed instructions for building in: http://www.openoffice.org/documentation/online_help/OOo2HelpAuthoring.pdf pp. 21, 22 This was building ONLY helpcontent2. Some things happened -- new zip files were created but not the .jar files FROM the zip files found in openoffice4-location/help Can anyone tell me what needs to be built next to make this happen? I've done a bunch of searches on some of the makefiles etc but can't readily find this. Thanks for any help on Help. :} -- - MzK “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax -- - MzK “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax -- - MzK “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax
Re: [announcement] Downtime on forum.o.o
Hi I am pleased to announce that all forum dbs are now moved to the central sql server. The move took about 40 minutes. We hope you will all experience a better performance, however the php2bb could really do with a optimization (especially with sqlconnections). on behalf of infra jan I. On 22 October 2013 20:53, janI j...@apache.org wrote: Hi. On 22 October 2013 16:09, janI j...@apache.org wrote: Hi. The database(s) behind forum.o.o need to be changed and moved to a new fast central sql server. In order to test the changes without disturbing anyone, I have created a forum test where all needed changes will be done during the coming days. Thursday 22/10 at 1500 UTC, we will begin moving the each single forum database into the EN database (with separate tables for each forum), and convert FULLTEXT tables back to myIsam. Typo sorry for the confusion, I mean Thursday 24/10. We do want to give plenty of warning this time :-) thx marcus for catching it. rgds jan I. This process means 10-30 minutes downtime for each forum. At 1800 UTC, we will stop all forums for about 2hours while moving the db to the central sql. We will try to keep the downtime as small as possible. It is appreciated, if admins test their forums after 2000 UTC. I will be available on #asfinfra and on mail, to help with any problems. Please advice forum users. Taking the experience from translate.a.o and wiki.o.o a better performance and higher stability can be expected. on behalf of infra jan I.
Re: AOO Security Features without Mozilla
On 23 October 2013 13:57, Herbert Duerr h...@apache.org wrote: Hi Pedro, Really nice to see nss being split soon. I hope we can use an external nss too as the one we include internally is somewhat outdated and potentially insecure. Absolutely. For the same reason the internal NSS should be updated. Would you be interested in doing it? You did a great job of updating some other AOO-external libs. When / if we do this update, should we not do like other packages do, have the lib as a preinstallation requirement, and not something we download ? I have had pretty the same thought for all external libs (ext_libraries) and to a part also (ext_sources). But maybe I am completely wrong. rgds jan I. While on the subject of replacing mozilla addressbook, just thought I'd remind about the analysis done by Andre while we were working on IP clearance [1]. Back then I also found the Mulberry vCard library [2] that is under an Apache License. Interfacing it with AOO is a completely different matter though :-(. Thanks for the link to mulberry. But as can seen in the scripts [2][3] linked to in my original mail, accessing the interesting address sources is by far the least problem. Delivering this info properly into AOO is much more work. [2] https://bug241438.bugzilla.**mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=** 175024action=viewhttps://bug241438.bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=175024action=view [3] http://stackoverflow.com/**questions/11538550/retrieving-** outlook-contacts-via-pythonhttp://stackoverflow.com/questions/11538550/retrieving-outlook-contacts-via-python Herbert --**--**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Service Maintenance for pootle and AOO wiki
On 22 October 2013 03:02, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: 於 2013年10月22日 02:37, janI 提到: On 21 October 2013 18:39, Tony Stevenson pct...@apache.org wrote: Andrea Pescetti wrote on Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 06:27:50PM +0200: Tony Stevenson wrote: Andrea Pescetti wrote on Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 04:52:14PM +0200: Please tell us when the migration is complete so that we can remove the warning. The service is back. IMO it also quicker. Immediate difference is that Wiki VM is only consuming 500 MB of RAM now, before it was using 2.8GB. OK, thank you! It seems that in the end interruption of service was minimal. I've removed the note from the home page. Of course, for the next maintenance operations, including the forum, please give us some more time to inform users. Of course we will, in fact we gave you the best we could today given the circumstances we found ourselved in. The forum move will need to have as many tables as possible converted from ISAM to inno. This is critical, as we only run MySQL 5.5 and will not be install 5.6 anytime soon, as a result all fields that require full text search enabling need to keep that table in ISAM. JanIV did this already for other DBs and he should be consulted on how to do this. It is likely this will be a many hour operation and is a pre-requisite. I dont wan't to force a date on the community to have this done by, but we need to action this ASAP. To prevent further issues to other VMs on the same host as forums. Can I please ask that if we do not hear any offers of support to help us convert these tables by Weds this week that Infra will set a date (with n days notice) and do the work ourselves. Imacat (admin) has responded to my question if help is wanted, answer was that it would be be fine if infra does it (like me) and offered to help. If we think along these lines, my plan would be the following: You can ignore me if my help is not needed. But, still, I would never ignore a helping hand, and especially not a qualifed one as yours. 1) Thursday evening (16-22 UTC), I wil combine the single forum databases into the EN database. This will mean short breaks on the single forum, about 10min each (to copy the tables). If time permits, I will convert the FULLTEXT back to MyIsam. That's 0-6 UTC+8 here. I have works on Friday. I can stay up to at most 19 UTC (3 UTC+8), but not after that. ok, lets do this in another way, please select 2 forums (that have the lowest usage) from the db list below: | en | | es | | fr | | hu | | it | | ja | | nl | | pl | | vi | | zh | ++ Then I will move tables in these 2 and convert the FULLTEXT tables, as soon as I hear from you, and then you can test. Please give me a UTC time, where you can test (today/tomorrow), then I do the changes just before that time. If it works with these 2 forums, I feel more secure with the rest, and maybe Ricardo can do a check on them since he is in the same TZ. And what do you mean by combining short forum databases into the EN databases? So we will only have EN database in the future? Yes, and it will problaly be called forumsaoodb. Remark, this is not a problem because all tables (in use) have the naming standard: phpbb_forum_table if you look e.g. in IT, you will see | phpbb_it_sessions_keys| | phpbb_it_sitelist | | phpbb_it_smilies | There are 2 databases I dont understand at the moment: | ps_helper | | test | any ideas ? 2) Friday morning (8-11 UTC) I will convert tables. This happens online, and only means slow system while I do it. That is 16-19 UTC+8. Normally I would be stuck in the traffic going home at this time on Fridays, but I could stay in the office if necessary. see above. 3) Friday afternoon (15 UTC, depending on pctony), we can take the forums down for approx 2hours to move the databases. That would be perfect for me. it would for me too, but pctony has to go to hospital with his kid, so we try to see if we can do it thursday (24/10). I would really apriciate your help with the first 2 forums, to make a more thorough test. And then hope that ricardo could do a smoke test on the others. This is of course a service that infra provides so if you want it postponed, we will have to find a way. And also, please add the date (10/24, 10/25). It's confusing to guess if Friday is 10/25 or 11/1. (And normally I would bet on 11/1 as 10/25 is very close.) Sorry about that, good idea. rgds jan I. In order to finalize the database changes Thursday and move friday, we need someone with access to all forums to help with the test. Could this be an acceptable plan ? The time
Test of VI forum
Hi Phan. We (infra) are going the move the forum database to a central server, in order to that we need some preparation work done. Currently the VI forum is the one with the lowest load (ref. imacat), so we would like to test the changes on the VI forum, before changing all forums. The changes itself are done, with only a very short 1-2 minutes interruption. We would like you (if possible) to warn the forum users ahead of the changes, and test the forum imidiatly after the changes. When would be the earliest point in time, where you could help with test (takes max. 1 hour) ? please remember I am UTC+2, but I can start early or go to bed late. rgds jan I.
Re: [proposal] Patches on Windows
On 22 October 2013 11:48, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: Hello everybody, At the moment we provide full installation sets for every release and for all platforms and languages. An installation set has a typical size of roughly 150MB. The size of the actual changes is typically much smaller. Using patches instead of full installation sets would considerably reduce the amount of data that has to be downloaded by users. For new users without existing installation of OpenOffice we probably still need the full installation sets. Would this also be an opertunity, to look at how we release languages ? I have tested making an installation set that contain all released languages, it has a rough size of 200Mb, which is a lot friendlier than # langauges * 150Mb, and gives international users (like me) the option to switch UI. All I miss is to pursuade the installer to choose the right default UI language. Note that such patches can only be made for minor or micro releases. Major releases would still be full installation sets. I have worked in the past months on finding out how our build system has to be modified in order to create patch sets on Windows. This has resulted in a set of conditions [1] that have to be fulfilled by the installation sets. One example of a condition that we currently don't fulfill is that files must not be deleted in minor or micro releases. Up to now I have taken two full installation sets and then tweaked the newer one until I was able to a) successfully create an .msp patch file and b) successfully apply it to an OpenOffice that was installed by the older install set. I would now like to change the build system, especially the solenv/bin/ make_installer.pl script and its modules, so that the installation sets it creates can be used without further changes to create patch sets. I would also like to add the patch creation itself. +1, I have added a single comment on the wiki page about zero length files. please consider making the patch mechanism in its own module. For this I propose and seek lazy consensus for the following changes: 1. When a new release is made, create data files that are added to our version control system (semi automatically) that allow us on the next release to check and/or enforce the conditions. 2. Before the next release is made, read the data files of the previous release and check and/or enforce the conditions. 3. When a new minor or micro release is made, first create the full installation sets, then create patches. Besides the data files mentioned above, this also requires access to the installation sets of the previous release. 4. Cleanup of the logging mechanism used by make_installer.pl and its modules, so that I can better debug the existing and the new code. Most of the proposed changes have a low impact on the current creation of installation sets. They basically only add new features (collecting information about a release, adding it to the VCS, reading the information on next release, checking conditions, creating patches). However, some conditions can be enforced automatically (like using the same uuids for components in one release and the next) and that can introduce regressions, ie break installation sets. But I think the danger of that is not bigger than with many other new features or bug fixes. I don't expect conflicts with build system changes made or proposed by Jan. Go for it, if you do in trunk, I can merge it into my branches. I also very little conflict with my build system work, like maybe 1-2 changed makefiles. But thats no serious conflicts, and more me being aware of the changes. More details about the creation of installation sets and patches can be found in the Wiki [2]. I really like the idea, that brings us one step closer to a more installation. thx for taking this initative. rgds jan I. Regards, Andre [1] http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Building_installation_** packages#Conditions_for_**creating_patcheshttp://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Building_installation_packages#Conditions_for_creating_patches [2] http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Building_installation_**packageshttp://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Building_installation_packages --**--**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Service Maintenance for pootle and AOO wiki
On 22 October 2013 12:47, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: On 2013/10/22 16:10, imacat said: On 2013/10/22 15:42, janI said: On 22 October 2013 03:02, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: On 2013/10/22 02:37, janI said: On 21 October 2013 18:39, Tony Stevenson pct...@apache.org wrote: Andrea Pescetti wrote on Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 06:27:50PM +0200: Tony Stevenson wrote: Andrea Pescetti wrote on Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 04:52:14PM +0200: Imacat (admin) has responded to my question if help is wanted, answer was that it would be be fine if infra does it (like me) and offered to help. If we think along these lines, my plan would be the following: You can ignore me if my help is not needed. But, still, I would never ignore a helping hand, and especially not a qualifed one as yours. Ah... That is totally unnecessary. ^^; 1) Thursday evening (16-22 UTC), I wil combine the single forum databases into the EN database. This will mean short breaks on the single forum, about 10min each (to copy the tables). If time permits, I will convert the FULLTEXT back to MyIsam. That's 0-6 UTC+8 here. I have works on Friday. I can stay up to at most 19 UTC (3 UTC+8), but not after that. ok, lets do this in another way, please select 2 forums (that have the lowest usage) from the db list below: | en | | es | | fr | | hu | | it | | ja | | nl | | pl | | vi | | zh | ++ Then I will move tables in these 2 and convert the FULLTEXT tables, as soon as I hear from you, and then you can test. Please give me a UTC time, where you can test (today/tomorrow), then I do the changes just before that time. Ah... it's embarrassing that, I will travel to another city later to deliver an OpenOffice macro class for two days, and will return before Thursday evening (16-22 UTC). ^^; That's the earliest time I'm available this week. And, currently, VI has the lowest traffic. But we have to notify Phan first. But I suppose this is the time back up or cover is for. :p You may ask RGB or Phan for help on this. thx, I have already asked Phan, with ref. to RGB as well. I am btw making a test forum, http://forum.openoffice.org/test/forum so I can test the table changes without disturbing anyone. I have copied the EN db for that purpose. rgds jan I. If it works with these 2 forums, I feel more secure with the rest, and maybe Ricardo can do a check on them since he is in the same TZ. And what do you mean by combining short forum databases into the EN databases? So we will only have EN database in the future? Yes, and it will problaly be called forumsaoodb. Remark, this is not a problem because all tables (in use) have the naming standard: phpbb_forum_table if you look e.g. in IT, you will see | phpbb_it_sessions_keys| | phpbb_it_sitelist | | phpbb_it_smilies | There are 2 databases I dont understand at the moment: | ps_helper | | test | any ideas ? The ps_helper database: https://www.google.com.tw/#q=ps_helper+mysql The test database can be safely ignored. It's a standard MySQL database for testing purpose. When installing Perl DBD::mysql library, we need a database to test if DBD::mysql is working. There should always a database named test (although some DB admins prefer to remove it), but you do not need to bother with its contents. 2) Friday morning (8-11 UTC) I will convert tables. This happens online, and only means slow system while I do it. That is 16-19 UTC+8. Normally I would be stuck in the traffic going home at this time on Fridays, but I could stay in the office if necessary. see above. 3) Friday afternoon (15 UTC, depending on pctony), we can take the forums down for approx 2hours to move the databases. That would be perfect for me. it would for me too, but pctony has to go to hospital with his kid, so we try to see if we can do it thursday (24/10). I would really apriciate your help with the first 2 forums, to make a more thorough test. And then hope that ricardo could do a smoke test on the others. This is of course a service that infra provides so if you want it postponed, we will have to find a way. And also, please add the date (10/24, 10/25). It's confusing to guess if Friday is 10/25 or 11/1. (And normally I would bet on 11/1 as 10/25 is very close.) Sorry about that, good idea. rgds jan I. In order to finalize the database changes Thursday and move friday, we need someone with access to all forums to help with the test. Could
Re: [proposal] Patches on Windows
On 22 October 2013 13:10, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 22.10.2013 12:20, janI wrote: On 22 October 2013 11:48, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: Hello everybody, At the moment we provide full installation sets for every release and for all platforms and languages. An installation set has a typical size of roughly 150MB. The size of the actual changes is typically much smaller. Using patches instead of full installation sets would considerably reduce the amount of data that has to be downloaded by users. For new users without existing installation of OpenOffice we probably still need the full installation sets. Would this also be an opertunity, to look at how we release languages ? I have tested making an installation set that contain all released languages, it has a rough size of 200Mb, which is a lot friendlier than # langauges * 150Mb, and gives international users (like me) the option to switch UI. Friendlier to our servers, but not to our users. But this problem is orthogonal to creating patches. And we have to distinguish what language support we are talking about: - UI language of the installer We still need the installer in every language, and that the bit that I have not done. I envised a fork in the installer so it loads the OS language of the host. - UI language of OpenOffice that is what I have done with --with-lang - Languages supported by spell checker et al. that is simple files added to the distribution, and the main reason for the extra 50Mb. Why do you see this as a disadvantage to our users. Many users have multiple languages for spell checkers etc installed, and some (especially people working internationally) also have multiple UI languages. rgds jan I. All I miss is to pursuade the installer to choose the right default UI language. Note that such patches can only be made for minor or micro releases. Major releases would still be full installation sets. I have worked in the past months on finding out how our build system has to be modified in order to create patch sets on Windows. This has resulted in a set of conditions [1] that have to be fulfilled by the installation sets. One example of a condition that we currently don't fulfill is that files must not be deleted in minor or micro releases. Up to now I have taken two full installation sets and then tweaked the newer one until I was able to a) successfully create an .msp patch file and b) successfully apply it to an OpenOffice that was installed by the older install set. I would now like to change the build system, especially the solenv/bin/ make_installer.pl script and its modules, so that the installation sets it creates can be used without further changes to create patch sets. I would also like to add the patch creation itself. +1, I have added a single comment on the wiki page about zero length files. please consider making the patch mechanism in its own module. For this I propose and seek lazy consensus for the following changes: 1. When a new release is made, create data files that are added to our version control system (semi automatically) that allow us on the next release to check and/or enforce the conditions. 2. Before the next release is made, read the data files of the previous release and check and/or enforce the conditions. 3. When a new minor or micro release is made, first create the full installation sets, then create patches. Besides the data files mentioned above, this also requires access to the installation sets of the previous release. 4. Cleanup of the logging mechanism used by make_installer.pl and its modules, so that I can better debug the existing and the new code. Most of the proposed changes have a low impact on the current creation of installation sets. They basically only add new features (collecting information about a release, adding it to the VCS, reading the information on next release, checking conditions, creating patches). However, some conditions can be enforced automatically (like using the same uuids for components in one release and the next) and that can introduce regressions, ie break installation sets. But I think the danger of that is not bigger than with many other new features or bug fixes. I don't expect conflicts with build system changes made or proposed by Jan. Go for it, if you do in trunk, I can merge it into my branches. I also very little conflict with my build system work, like maybe 1-2 changed makefiles. But thats no serious conflicts, and more me being aware of the changes. Thanks. When I eventually check in the changes I will report the details. More details about the creation of installation sets and patches can be found in the Wiki [2]. I really like the idea, that brings us one step closer to a more installation. Thanks. After I looked at the make_installer.pl script I toyed with the idea
Re: [proposal] Patches on Windows
On 22 October 2013 13:31, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 22.10.2013 13:08, Rob Weir wrote: On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 6:20 AM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: On 22 October 2013 11:48, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: Hello everybody, At the moment we provide full installation sets for every release and for all platforms and languages. An installation set has a typical size of roughly 150MB. The size of the actual changes is typically much smaller. Using patches instead of full installation sets would considerably reduce the amount of data that has to be downloaded by users. For new users without existing installation of OpenOffice we probably still need the full installation sets. Would this also be an opertunity, to look at how we release languages ? That would certainly have an even greater benefit when combined. If we don't refactor how we distribute languages we'd need many patch files, one for each language/platform combination. I have tested making an installation set that contain all released languages, it has a rough size of 200Mb, which is a lot friendlier than # langauges * 150Mb, and gives international users (like me) the option to switch UI. All I miss is to pursuade the installer to choose the right default UI language. Note that such patches can only be made for minor or micro releases. Major releases would still be full installation sets. I have worked in the past months on finding out how our build system has to be modified in order to create patch sets on Windows. This has resulted in a set of conditions [1] that have to be fulfilled by the installation sets. One example of a condition that we currently don't fulfill is that files must not be deleted in minor or micro releases. Up to now I have taken two full installation sets and then tweaked the newer one until I was able to a) successfully create an .msp patch file and b) successfully apply it to an OpenOffice that was installed by the older install set. I would now like to change the build system, especially the solenv/bin/ make_installer.pl script and its modules, so that the installation sets it creates can be used without further changes to create patch sets. I would also like to add the patch creation itself. +1, I have added a single comment on the wiki page about zero length files. please consider making the patch mechanism in its own module. For this I propose and seek lazy consensus for the following changes: 1. When a new release is made, create data files that are added to our version control system (semi automatically) that allow us on the next release to check and/or enforce the conditions. 2. Before the next release is made, read the data files of the previous release and check and/or enforce the conditions. 3. When a new minor or micro release is made, first create the full installation sets, then create patches. Besides the data files mentioned above, this also requires access to the installation sets of the previous release. 4. Cleanup of the logging mechanism used by make_installer.pl and its modules, so that I can better debug the existing and the new code. At some point we'd need to think about how users find and get these patches. The current mechanism notifies them about the update and sends them to www.openoffice.org/download or to an NL page. The Javascript logic recommends what download to get. We'd need to distinguish new downloads from patches. The update notifications could link directly to patches when notifying a minor or micro release. After all, they originate from an installed office. Only users that go to our download page have to make a choice between full installation and patch. Also, perhaps complications if someone has installed AOO with lang A + lang pack B. How is this patched? There is a huge number of combinations there. Jan's idea of a combined 200MB install with all languages sounds simpler, though larger. Maybe I should point out that the creation of installation and patch sets on Windows is an amazingly complex task, even for the current single language install. Then, as I have said already in an earlier mail, we have to distinguish between - UI language of the installer - UI language of OpenOffice - supported languages for spell checking etc. I don't know much about language support of installer and patches but I see a problem with spell checking. Spell checking and grammar checking is done by extensions which have to be registered at first start. That can not be done directly by the installer or a patch. They can at best trigger such a registration at first start. And the whole area of first start and extension registration is a really dark area of our code. I would like to first try to get the patch creation to work for single language installs and then we can think about how to handle multiple languages. +1 keep
Re: AOO Security Features without Mozilla
On 22 October 2013 13:30, Herbert Dürr h...@apache.org wrote: About everyone who ever built OpenOffice in the last couple of years wondered why an almost complete (and obsolete/unmaintained/ancient) version of Mozilla Seamonkey was needed when building OpenOffice with its security features enabled such as support for password protected documents. The branch Remove_MOZ shows that it is possible to get rid of that dependency and I suggest we do that as soon as possible. The branch was inappropriately named because it is only about the removing the mozilla dependency of security related stuff. +1 But the old Seamonkey binaries still have another purpose: for now they are needed for providing its own address books that used to be in the Mork format. It also provides access to some address books [1] such as LDAP, Outlook and Outlook Express. [1] http://www.openoffice.org/dba/**specifications/address_book_** architecture.htmlhttp://www.openoffice.org/dba/specifications/address_book_architecture.html Other address sources such as JDBC, ODBC, CSV-Text, MySql and dBase already work without Mozilla. On Mac the native Address Book is already supported directly. Since issue 91209 the mozilla address books were disabled on Mac altogether anyway, so on Mac we could rid AOO of its heavy Seamonkey dependency really soon without removing any features by using NSS instead of bundling a large set of Seamonkey libraries. On the other platforms a very high percentage of our user base wouldn't notice any missing features if the Mozilla address book support was removed there too. I have no problem with that, since it makes our product lighter and simpler. But for this I think we need user opinions. Developing mozilla-less replacements should be possible and this would remove a lot of complexity. As a first idea the replacements could be implemented as extensions using something like [2] for LDAP, [3] for Mork and [4] for WAB if there was an UNO API to facility that support. Comparing the complexity of the scripts below vs the complexities and maintenance headaches the ancient Seamonkey and its XPCOM-UNO bridge is like comparing the weight of mice to elephants... [2] http://www.python-ldap.org/ [3] https://bug241438.bugzilla.**mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=** 175024action=viewhttps://bug241438.bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=175024action=view [4] http://stackoverflow.com/**questions/11538550/retrieving-** outlook-contacts-via-pythonhttp://stackoverflow.com/questions/11538550/retrieving-outlook-contacts-via-python But splitting off the security dependency is much more important. I plan to integrate the changes needed for that soon. They will be enabled either with --enable-nss-module or with the more general option --enable-category-b +1 to the --enable-category-b option For the mozilla address books I plan to add the option --enable-mozab-module to replace the then way too broadly named option --enable-mozilla Just to be sure, you will not add the option, but rename the other option, so we only have --enable-mozab-module ? Until the replacements outlined above have been developed this new option will allow bundling of the old Seamonkey binaries for users that depend on its address book support. please keep the number of new options and changes in configure as low as possible, that helps me :-) Its a good initative, which I highly support, and once you have integrated it into trunk I will update my branches. Actually the rejuvenate branch seems to be a bigger candidate for conflicting changes, but we will take that when its ready. rgds jan I. Herbert --**--**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [proposal] Patches on Windows
On 22 October 2013 13:48, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 22.10.2013 13:32, janI wrote: On 22 October 2013 13:10, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 22.10.2013 12:20, janI wrote: On 22 October 2013 11:48, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: Hello everybody, At the moment we provide full installation sets for every release and for all platforms and languages. An installation set has a typical size of roughly 150MB. The size of the actual changes is typically much smaller. Using patches instead of full installation sets would considerably reduce the amount of data that has to be downloaded by users. For new users without existing installation of OpenOffice we probably still need the full installation sets. Would this also be an opertunity, to look at how we release languages ? I have tested making an installation set that contain all released languages, it has a rough size of 200Mb, which is a lot friendlier than # langauges * 150Mb, and gives international users (like me) the option to switch UI. Friendlier to our servers, but not to our users. But this problem is orthogonal to creating patches. And we have to distinguish what language support we are talking about: - UI language of the installer We still need the installer in every language, and that the bit that I have not done. I envised a fork in the installer so it loads the OS language of the host. There are two parts to this: setup.exe and the included msi. Adding support to the msi might be easier than we think. At least the 'File' table has a 'Language' column. I think the table that contains the UI messages that are displayed during the installation has something similar. If this column acts as a filter then all we have to do is add entries for all languages and let the msi select the right ones automatically. The setup.exe is build by the NSIS installer creator. I don't know if and how it supports multiple languages. - UI language of OpenOffice that is what I have done with --with-lang - Languages supported by spell checker et al. that is simple files added to the distribution, and the main reason for the extra 50Mb. Yes, but how do we decide which of the many spell checkers to install? All of them all the time? Or only a subset, depending on the locale? You are right, we might just want to install the UI part with the local spell checker, then the user can choose to add spell checkers as needed. Why do you see this as a disadvantage to our users. I only see the larger download as disadvantage. I don't know how many people really would want to have even more spell checkers installed on their system and would accept an increase of 1/3 of our already large installation sets. The main reason for using patches instead of full installation sets is their reduced size. Including all available languages might reduce that advantage. You misunderstand me. I am 100% for patches !! with all available languages in the install set, we will only need 1 patch, so in total its an advantage. But as said earlier, I agree with small steps first make the patches work, then consider the rest. rgds jan I. -Andre Many users have multiple languages for spell checkers etc installed, and some (especially people working internationally) also have multiple UI languages. rgds jan I. All I miss is to pursuade the installer to choose the right default UI language. Note that such patches can only be made for minor or micro releases. Major releases would still be full installation sets. I have worked in the past months on finding out how our build system has to be modified in order to create patch sets on Windows. This has resulted in a set of conditions [1] that have to be fulfilled by the installation sets. One example of a condition that we currently don't fulfill is that files must not be deleted in minor or micro releases. Up to now I have taken two full installation sets and then tweaked the newer one until I was able to a) successfully create an .msp patch file and b) successfully apply it to an OpenOffice that was installed by the older install set. I would now like to change the build system, especially the solenv/bin/ make_installer.pl script and its modules, so that the installation sets it creates can be used without further changes to create patch sets. I would also like to add the patch creation itself. +1, I have added a single comment on the wiki page about zero length files. please consider making the patch mechanism in its own module. For this I propose and seek lazy consensus for the following changes: 1. When a new release is made, create data files that are added to our version control system (semi automatically) that allow us on the next release to check and/or enforce the conditions. 2. Before the next release is made, read the data files
[announcement] Downtime on forum.o.o
Hi. The database(s) behind forum.o.o need to be changed and moved to a new fast central sql server. In order to test the changes without disturbing anyone, I have created a forum test where all needed changes will be done during the coming days. Thursday 22/10 at 1500 UTC, we will begin moving the each single forum database into the EN database (with separate tables for each forum), and convert FULLTEXT tables back to myIsam. This process means 10-30 minutes downtime for each forum. At 1800 UTC, we will stop all forums for about 2hours while moving the db to the central sql. We will try to keep the downtime as small as possible. It is appreciated, if admins test their forums after 2000 UTC. I will be available on #asfinfra and on mail, to help with any problems. Please advice forum users. Taking the experience from translate.a.o and wiki.o.o a better performance and higher stability can be expected. on behalf of infra jan I.
Re: AOO Security Features without Mozilla
On 22 October 2013 16:15, Herbert Dürr h...@apache.org wrote: On 22.10.2013 14:22, Herbert Dürr wrote: On 22.10.2013 13:46, janI wrote: On 22 October 2013 13:30, Herbert Dürr h...@apache.org wrote: [...] Since issue 91209 the mozilla address books were disabled on Mac altogether anyway, so on Mac we could rid AOO of its heavy Seamonkey dependency really soon without removing any features by using NSS instead of bundling a large set of Seamonkey libraries. On the other platforms a very high percentage of our user base wouldn't notice any missing features if the Mozilla address book support was removed there too. I have no problem with that, since it makes our product lighter and simpler. But for this I think we need user opinions. Yes, whether we build our next release with the --enable-mozab-module option or without it is open for discussion. Now if there were volunteers that implemented extensions for mapping mork/ldap/wab address books to AOO's SDBC API then the whole mozab module would be superfluous anyway and the discussion would have only one reasonable result. A small status update regarding the state of the existing mozilla address book integration: Non-anonymous LDAP address books was out of order [1] since 2008, the windows address book didn't work since 2006 if it contained any distribution list [2] and was broken on all now supported Microsoft operating systems [3] since at least 2008. [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=85356https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=85356 [2] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=63270https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=63270 [3] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=91079https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=91079 This is an interesting reality check and I'm afraid the project lost users that depended on that functionality long ago. On the other hand these facts enable us to kick this non-functioning and unmaintainable crap out without a serious negative impact. I dont hope we have too many more surprises like that. With these new insights I suggest to remove both the enable-mozilla and its eventual replacement enable-mozab-module before losing much more time on that topic. The sooner the better. +1. rgds jan I. Herbert --**--**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [Bug 122235] Connection fails with 502 Error reading from remote server
On 22 October 2013 16:41, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.comwrote: Hi, On 22.10.2013 10:04, Rainer Bielefeld wrote: Hi, it's really daunting that nobody cares! I care, but only as a user of our Bugzilla instance being frustrated when I need Bugzilla in the morning (European time zone). It seems that we need to involve ASF Infra as I do not believe that this scheduled outage every day is controlled by us. Just checked, there are no outstanding issues with aoo-bz, except its very slow because it has not yet had the db moved. The scheduled outage is unknown, but could be the backup which runs very early morning (europe time). rgds jan I. Ps. once again it was suggested that we move to jira. Best regards, Oliver. --**--**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [proposal] replace build.pl with a central Makefile.
On 21 October 2013 10:50, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 18.10.2013 19:54, janI wrote: On 18 October 2013 16:52, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 18.10.2013 15:58, janI wrote: On 18 October 2013 15:00, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 18.10.2013 14:02, janI wrote: sd On 18 October 2013 13:36, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 18.10.2013 11:32, janI wrote: Hi. due to the discussion in thread Mentor a new build system, I have made a proposal for a central Makefile located in main. Hi Jan, it is great that you are going to improve this part of the build system. But I think that we need more details about how the proposed build system works. Without them I can not really evaluate the proposal. First of all, I agree with juergens remarks that this should be discussed before implemented, hence the wiki page. Secondly this has nothing directly to do with the proposed build system, its a simple replacement of build.pl in the current system. Yes, that is how I understood it. I just did not know how to call the build.pl replacement. I know that build.pl works, but having a Makefile in main, would make us one step closer on being compatible with the distros. To me this job is a simple cleanup, not something we deadly need, but nice to have. Some remarks regarding the missing options: --from module This is one of the more important options and one that I use frequently (also in the form --all:module). Note that if you are in moduleA and call 'make --from moduleB' then all modules are built a) which moduleA depends on b) but not those that moduleB depends on c) Both moduleA and moduleB are built. I have changed the documentation. I use the --all:module myself very often, and have changed the documentation, because it is of course supported. The difference is that you do the call in main, but that is a minor detail that can be easily corrected (have module/Makefile calling main/Makefile. I have also changed documentation on --html due to juergens comments. I am not sure that we understand --from and --since in the same way so I will try to explain what I think they do. Let's imagine that we have a simple project with modules A, B, C, D and E. where B depends on A, C on B, D on C, and E on D. A ' make all' would mean 'make E'. The dependencies would then lead to building modules A, B, C, D, E in this order. If I am in E and call 'make --from C' then only C, D, and E should be built. A 'make --since C' would only build D and E. If I am in D and call 'make --from B' then modules B, C, and D are built. Call 'make --since B' to build only C and D. Note that 'make --from' accepts more than one module name (while 'make --all:module' does not). Note also that in the above case (stand in D, call 'make --from B') module A is not built, regardless of whether there are changes in A or not. Whereas a simple call to make (still standing in D) would build all modules that D depends on, directly or indirectly. Thus the options '--from' and '--since' exist to actively exclude modules from being built. The whole thing becomes a little bit more complicated with multiple options to '--from' (I never use '--since' and also don't know a valid use case so I will ignore it for now) and more complex dependencies then in the simple example above. Let's say that if we stand in instsetoo_native and call 'make --from svx sfx2'. Note that svx depends on sfx2. This would build svx, sfx2 and all modules that depend (directly or indirectly) on svx OR sfx2. got it, now I just have one problem, why would you not build the dependent modules, if they needed to be built, thats a scenario I dont understand. With a central makefile, module/makefile will not be called so we do not waste cpu cycles. With the .done files, we know when a module was last built and all modules that depend it should be rebuilt which the rule module.done : module_depend.done will ensure, so If we have A - B - C - D I go in B, and call make, then when I go in D and make, B,C,D will be made. If we have A - B - D C - D and do the same then only D will be made. So --from is not really saving anything ? a) In your example you first go into B then, in a second step, into D. The '--from' option lets you do the same (well, not really the same, but see below) just from D. b) You go first to B and call make. This makes A, if necessary, then B. The making of A is exactly the thing that you want to prevent with the '--from' option. Go into D and call 'make --from B'. A is not built. Actually I go to main and say make D, that will cause B but not A to be built. I guess that calling 'make D' from main/ would be equivalent to call it from instsetoo_native/. But the --from option also works from inside
Re: [proposal] replace build.pl with a central Makefile.
On 21 October 2013 10:58, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 20.10.2013 12:40, janI wrote: On 19 October 2013 19:20, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 18.10.2013 15:58, janI wrote: On 18 October 2013 15:00, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 18.10.2013 14:02, janI wrote: sd On 18 October 2013 13:36, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 18.10.2013 11:32, janI wrote: Hi. due to the discussion in thread Mentor a new build system, I have made a proposal for a central Makefile located in main. Hi Jan, it is great that you are going to improve this part of the build system. But I think that we need more details about how the proposed build system works. Without them I can not really evaluate the proposal. First of all, I agree with juergens remarks that this should be discussed before implemented, hence the wiki page. Secondly this has nothing directly to do with the proposed build system, its a simple replacement of build.pl in the current system. Yes, that is how I understood it. I just did not know how to call the build.pl replacement. I know that build.pl works, but having a Makefile in main, would make us one step closer on being compatible with the distros. To me this job is a simple cleanup, not something we deadly need, but nice to have. Some remarks regarding the missing options: --from module This is one of the more important options and one that I use frequently (also in the form --all:module). Note that if you are in moduleA and call 'make --from moduleB' then all modules are built a) which moduleA depends on b) but not those that moduleB depends on c) Both moduleA and moduleB are built. I have changed the documentation. I use the --all:module myself very often, and have changed the documentation, because it is of course supported. The difference is that you do the call in main, but that is a minor detail that can be easily corrected (have module/Makefile calling main/Makefile. I have also changed documentation on --html due to juergens comments. I am not sure that we understand --from and --since in the same way so I will try to explain what I think they do. Let's imagine that we have a simple project with modules A, B, C, D and E. where B depends on A, C on B, D on C, and E on D. A ' make all' would mean 'make E'. The dependencies would then lead to building modules A, B, C, D, E in this order. If I am in E and call 'make --from C' then only C, D, and E should be built. A 'make --since C' would only build D and E. If I am in D and call 'make --from B' then modules B, C, and D are built. Call 'make --since B' to build only C and D. Note that 'make --from' accepts more than one module name (while 'make --all:module' does not). Note also that in the above case (stand in D, call 'make --from B') module A is not built, regardless of whether there are changes in A or not. Whereas a simple call to make (still standing in D) would build all modules that D depends on, directly or indirectly. Thus the options '--from' and '--since' exist to actively exclude modules from being built. The whole thing becomes a little bit more complicated with multiple options to '--from' (I never use '--since' and also don't know a valid use case so I will ignore it for now) and more complex dependencies then in the simple example above. Let's say that if we stand in instsetoo_native and call 'make --from svx sfx2'. Note that svx depends on sfx2. This would build svx, sfx2 and all modules that depend (directly or indirectly) on svx OR sfx2. got it, now I just have one problem, why would you not build the dependent modules, if they needed to be built, thats a scenario I dont understand. With a central makefile, module/makefile will not be called so we do not waste cpu cycles. With the .done files, we know when a module was last built and all modules that depend it should be rebuilt which the rule module.done : module_depend.done will ensure, so If we have A - B - C - D I go in B, and call make, then when I go in D and make, B,C,D will be made. If we have A - B - D C - D and do the same then only D will be made. So --from is not really saving anything ? a) In your example you first go into B then, in a second step, into D. The '--from' option lets you do the same (well, not really the same, but see below) just from D. b) You go first to B and call make. This makes A, if necessary, then B. The making of A is exactly the thing that you want to prevent with the '--from' option. Go into D and call 'make --from B'. A is not built. c) After the discussion with you I am not sure if we still need --from because the two reasons I know for its existence my
Re: General ASF question
On 21 October 2013 12:59, Siva s...@talentinfotech.com wrote: Which means we can only contribute to Projects but not Foundation Projects Is that so ? ( I am not able to understand what is internal for apache ) internal are projects, that do not deliver a product in form of releases available to people/organisations outside ASF. E.g. legal affairs give advice to all projects, Infrastructure maintain our server farms. You can contribute to both projects and foundation projects. f.x. I am committer here in AOO and Infra. rgds jan I. On October 21, 2013 at 6:51 AM Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: Siva wrote: On this site http://apache.org/ , I wish to know what are the differences between Projects and Foundation Projects. You mean the page footer, I assume. Projects are software projects, like Apache OpenOffice and the Apache Web (HTTPD) Server. Foundation Projects are internal organization-wide structures (conference organization, legal affairs, apache.org servers infrastructure). ( You may also suggest me where to go for these types of questions ) Answers to frequently asked questions are at http://apache.org/foundation/faq.html Generic community inquiries can be sent to the dev@community list: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev/ Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org ~~ Thank you very much for your time. ~~ Siva P, Acquisition Coordinator, Talent Infotech Inc, 304 Canterbury Way, Severna Park, MD 21146. Phone: 443-722-2543. Fax: 425-696-9020. ~~
Re: Service Maintenance for pootle and AOO wiki
On 21 October 2013 18:39, Tony Stevenson pct...@apache.org wrote: Andrea Pescetti wrote on Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 06:27:50PM +0200: Tony Stevenson wrote: Andrea Pescetti wrote on Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 04:52:14PM +0200: Please tell us when the migration is complete so that we can remove the warning. The service is back. IMO it also quicker. Immediate difference is that Wiki VM is only consuming 500 MB of RAM now, before it was using 2.8GB. OK, thank you! It seems that in the end interruption of service was minimal. I've removed the note from the home page. Of course, for the next maintenance operations, including the forum, please give us some more time to inform users. Of course we will, in fact we gave you the best we could today given the circumstances we found ourselved in. The forum move will need to have as many tables as possible converted from ISAM to inno. This is critical, as we only run MySQL 5.5 and will not be install 5.6 anytime soon, as a result all fields that require full text search enabling need to keep that table in ISAM. JanIV did this already for other DBs and he should be consulted on how to do this. It is likely this will be a many hour operation and is a pre-requisite. I dont wan't to force a date on the community to have this done by, but we need to action this ASAP. To prevent further issues to other VMs on the same host as forums. Can I please ask that if we do not hear any offers of support to help us convert these tables by Weds this week that Infra will set a date (with n days notice) and do the work ourselves. Imacat (admin) has responded to my question if help is wanted, answer was that it would be be fine if infra does it (like me) and offered to help. If we think along these lines, my plan would be the following: 1) Thursday evening (16-22 UTC), I wil combine the single forum databases into the EN database. This will mean short breaks on the single forum, about 10min each (to copy the tables). If time permits, I will convert the FULLTEXT back to MyIsam. 2) Friday morning (8-11 UTC) I will convert tables. This happens online, and only means slow system while I do it. 3) Friday afternoon (15 UTC, depending on pctony), we can take the forums down for approx 2hours to move the databases. In order to finalize the database changes Thursday and move friday, we need someone with access to all forums to help with the test. Could this be an acceptable plan ? The time is needed, but if preferred I can do it friday or saturday evening instead (depending on pctony). rgds jan I. This is now impacting other services and needs to be resolved ASAP, please. FWIW the total downtime was 11 minutes. Which is pretty fast considering all the changes that had to be incorporated. Regards, Andrea. -- Cheers, Tony -- Tony Stevenson t...@pc-tony.com pct...@apache.org http://www.pc-tony.com GPG - 1024D/51047D66 -- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [proposal] replace build.pl with a central Makefile.
On 19 October 2013 19:20, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 18.10.2013 15:58, janI wrote: On 18 October 2013 15:00, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 18.10.2013 14:02, janI wrote: sd On 18 October 2013 13:36, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 18.10.2013 11:32, janI wrote: Hi. due to the discussion in thread Mentor a new build system, I have made a proposal for a central Makefile located in main. Hi Jan, it is great that you are going to improve this part of the build system. But I think that we need more details about how the proposed build system works. Without them I can not really evaluate the proposal. First of all, I agree with juergens remarks that this should be discussed before implemented, hence the wiki page. Secondly this has nothing directly to do with the proposed build system, its a simple replacement of build.pl in the current system. Yes, that is how I understood it. I just did not know how to call the build.pl replacement. I know that build.pl works, but having a Makefile in main, would make us one step closer on being compatible with the distros. To me this job is a simple cleanup, not something we deadly need, but nice to have. Some remarks regarding the missing options: --from module This is one of the more important options and one that I use frequently (also in the form --all:module). Note that if you are in moduleA and call 'make --from moduleB' then all modules are built a) which moduleA depends on b) but not those that moduleB depends on c) Both moduleA and moduleB are built. I have changed the documentation. I use the --all:module myself very often, and have changed the documentation, because it is of course supported. The difference is that you do the call in main, but that is a minor detail that can be easily corrected (have module/Makefile calling main/Makefile. I have also changed documentation on --html due to juergens comments. I am not sure that we understand --from and --since in the same way so I will try to explain what I think they do. Let's imagine that we have a simple project with modules A, B, C, D and E. where B depends on A, C on B, D on C, and E on D. A ' make all' would mean 'make E'. The dependencies would then lead to building modules A, B, C, D, E in this order. If I am in E and call 'make --from C' then only C, D, and E should be built. A 'make --since C' would only build D and E. If I am in D and call 'make --from B' then modules B, C, and D are built. Call 'make --since B' to build only C and D. Note that 'make --from' accepts more than one module name (while 'make --all:module' does not). Note also that in the above case (stand in D, call 'make --from B') module A is not built, regardless of whether there are changes in A or not. Whereas a simple call to make (still standing in D) would build all modules that D depends on, directly or indirectly. Thus the options '--from' and '--since' exist to actively exclude modules from being built. The whole thing becomes a little bit more complicated with multiple options to '--from' (I never use '--since' and also don't know a valid use case so I will ignore it for now) and more complex dependencies then in the simple example above. Let's say that if we stand in instsetoo_native and call 'make --from svx sfx2'. Note that svx depends on sfx2. This would build svx, sfx2 and all modules that depend (directly or indirectly) on svx OR sfx2. got it, now I just have one problem, why would you not build the dependent modules, if they needed to be built, thats a scenario I dont understand. With a central makefile, module/makefile will not be called so we do not waste cpu cycles. With the .done files, we know when a module was last built and all modules that depend it should be rebuilt which the rule module.done : module_depend.done will ensure, so If we have A - B - C - D I go in B, and call make, then when I go in D and make, B,C,D will be made. If we have A - B - D C - D and do the same then only D will be made. So --from is not really saving anything ? a) In your example you first go into B then, in a second step, into D. The '--from' option lets you do the same (well, not really the same, but see below) just from D. b) You go first to B and call make. This makes A, if necessary, then B. The making of A is exactly the thing that you want to prevent with the '--from' option. Go into D and call 'make --from B'. A is not built. c) After the discussion with you I am not sure if we still need --from because the two reasons I know for its existence my not be relevant with the new
wiki.o.o and copyright.
Hi due to a question I got, I read these 2 pages: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AOOW:Copyrights http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Authors_licensing_declaration First page refers to oracle, and second page does not even mention the apache license. Is that really how we want it ? I am not a legal adviser, but it seems wrong to me. rgds jan I.
Re: wiki.o.o and copyright.
On 20 October 2013 19:36, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: Probably out of date, why not commiting the change? Committing what change, there are no changes outstanding ? If you mean rewriting the 2 pages, then its way above my head, I am no license expert. rgds jan I. On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 12:03 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: Hi due to a question I got, I read these 2 pages: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AOOW:Copyrights http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Authors_licensing_declaration First page refers to oracle, and second page does not even mention the apache license. Is that really how we want it ? I am not a legal adviser, but it seems wrong to me. rgds jan I. -- Alexandro Colorado Apache OpenOffice Contributor http://www.openoffice.org 882C 4389 3C27 E8DF 41B9 5C4C 1DB7 9D1C 7F4C 2614
Re: wiki.o.o and copyright.
On 20 October 2013 19:58, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 12:40 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: On 20 October 2013 19:36, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: Probably out of date, why not commiting the change? Committing what change, there are no changes outstanding ? If you mean rewriting the 2 pages, then its way above my head, I am no license expert. We already have a license, is just a matter of copy-pasting. Or linking to the current one, althought I preffer the first one. I dont think we can just remove the other licenses, that might violate work already done, and I also dont know if we in future will allow work under other than our license. So just linking to the license doesnt really solve the issue. Secondly what about the authors on the page, should they stay, and we add all our current authors or should they be removed (again what effect does that have on their work). I think we need somebody who talk legal language to look at it, to make sure existing work is protected and future work made under the right license (whatever that may be). rgds jan I. rgds jan I. On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 12:03 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: Hi due to a question I got, I read these 2 pages: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AOOW:Copyrights http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Authors_licensing_declaration First page refers to oracle, and second page does not even mention the apache license. Is that really how we want it ? I am not a legal adviser, but it seems wrong to me. rgds jan I. -- Alexandro Colorado Apache OpenOffice Contributor http://www.openoffice.org 882C 4389 3C27 E8DF 41B9 5C4C 1DB7 9D1C 7F4C 2614 -- Alexandro Colorado Apache OpenOffice Contributor http://www.openoffice.org 882C 4389 3C27 E8DF 41B9 5C4C 1DB7 9D1C 7F4C 2614
Re: wiki.o.o and copyright.
On 20 October 2013 20:59, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 1:03 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: Hi due to a question I got, I read these 2 pages: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AOOW:Copyrights http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Authors_licensing_declaration First page refers to oracle, and second page does not even mention the apache license. Is that really how we want it ? If you search the list archives for terms like wiki and license you will find lengthy discussions of this topic. The net of it is: we don't include the wiki in our releases. We don't package up or redistribute the wiki. The legacy OpenOffice.org project did not these things either. It was not covered by their CLA and it was not included in Oracle's grant to Apache. Apparently the rights were never centralized. So the first statement is accurate: content is copyright by Oracle or the original authors.However, it makes sense to include, and even encourage the Apache License 2.0 on that 2nd page. thx for the answer, just one question, I thought we linked from AOO executable among others readme and license in wiki (cwiki or mwiki), if so at least these pages should not be Oracle :-) rgds jan I. -Rob I am not a legal adviser, but it seems wrong to me. rgds jan I. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: easy task
On 19 October 2013 20:28, akshika akalanka akshikaakala...@gmail.comwrote: Good idea :-) On Oct 19, 2013 10:53 PM, Vladislav Stevanovic stevanovicvladis...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, Does exist some list of easy tasks that some potential developer for AOO can see? Idea is that this sort of list MUST exist, if we want to see here new developers... We have bugzilla, where you can see all open issues. But apart from that, I think its easier to connect with one of us developers. What language do you want to program in ? at what skill level ? I f.x. work on a new translation workflow, and can use a hand getting it finished and tested. I also work at slowly improving the build system, makefiles etc, and there we need a lot more than just a hand. rgds jan I. Regards, Wlada
[proposal] replace build.pl with a central Makefile.
Hi. due to the discussion in thread Mentor a new build system, I have made a proposal for a central Makefile located in main. It has been roughly tested it, thanks to a clever utility from andre. As discussed build.pl contains a lot of options, which need to be considered in a makefile. My suggestion is on http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Build_System_Analysis:build.pl_versus_makefile Please feel free to edit/comment on the page. I have reduced to options a lot, and some of them might be in use. thanks in advance for your comments.
Re: [proposal] replace build.pl with a central Makefile.
sd On 18 October 2013 13:36, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 18.10.2013 11:32, janI wrote: Hi. due to the discussion in thread Mentor a new build system, I have made a proposal for a central Makefile located in main. Hi Jan, it is great that you are going to improve this part of the build system. But I think that we need more details about how the proposed build system works. Without them I can not really evaluate the proposal. First of all, I agree with juergens remarks that this should be discussed before implemented, hence the wiki page. Secondly this has nothing directly to do with the proposed build system, its a simple replacement of build.pl in the current system. I know that build.pl works, but having a Makefile in main, would make us one step closer on being compatible with the distros. To me this job is a simple cleanup, not something we deadly need, but nice to have. Some remarks regarding the missing options: --from module This is one of the more important options and one that I use frequently (also in the form --all:module). Note that if you are in moduleA and call 'make --from moduleB' then all modules are built a) which moduleA depends on b) but not those that moduleB depends on c) Both moduleA and moduleB are built. I have changed the documentation. I use the --all:module myself very often, and have changed the documentation, because it is of course supported. The difference is that you do the call in main, but that is a minor detail that can be easily corrected (have module/Makefile calling main/Makefile. I have also changed documentation on --html due to juergens comments. --prepare Also one option that is important for our every day work. Use case: You make changes in module and are not sure if these changes are compatible/incompatible. To be on the safe side you discard the output of all depending modules. To save time you keep the output of all other modules. Often used together with '--from' like 'make --prepare --from svx' to prepare a build after making changes in svx. Documentation changed, funny thing is that svx does not clear correctly on my ubuntu build. --since module A variant of '--from'. The only difference is that module itself is not built. If your proposed approach is similar to what my script produces then it is not too difficult to support --from/--since. I made some experiments in this direction but was to lazy to finish them. My approach is very similar, but I failed to see how --since is supported. And question is if its real important. --job --pre_job --post_job These are sometimes handy to run a non-standard command for all modules. I have added them, they are by the way a good example why we need a discussion I have never used them. However maybe the real discussion is do we want to replace build and have a main/Makefile instead? - I have not used the rest of the unsupported options and would not miss them. Others may have other sets of options that are important to them. Some general remarks: - Why keep one makefile per module? Why not put all the inter-module dependencies into one file (like my script does)? Ups, I did not explain that correctly, I propose 1 Makefile main/Makefile with all inter-module and 1 Makefile module/Makefile that today just will call the old makefiles as described in prj/build.lst - Why not use the oportunity to move (a part of) the build environment out of the way to, say, build/ ? You have guessed my next step. - How are dependencies between modules handled (just the manual dependencies from prj/build.lst or also the file dependencies introduced by gmake). See doc. on --from. Its done with module.done files - How is the output of the individual calls to dmake or GNU make handled/made accessible. Ie. if there is a build error, how can I look up the corresponding build output? see doc. script make_log - Are the gmake makefiles included (run in the same process) or is GNU make started for them it its own process? For a start they would be called (own process), but its something where I have no strong opinions. Please (just to be sure), this proposal has nothing to do with the students work, its simply because I saw a positive discussion on removing build.pl, and spent a couple of hours looking at it. If there is a preference not to remove build.pl I will simply forget it. rgds jan I. Regards, Andre It has been roughly tested it, thanks to a clever utility from andre. As discussed build.pl contains a lot of options, which need to be considered in a makefile. My suggestion is on http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Build_System_Analysis:** build.pl_versus_makefilehttp://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Build_System_Analysis:build.pl_versus_makefile Please feel free to edit/comment on the page. I have reduced to options a lot, and some of them might be in use. thanks
Re: [proposal] replace build.pl with a central Makefile.
On 18 October 2013 15:00, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 18.10.2013 14:02, janI wrote: sd On 18 October 2013 13:36, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 18.10.2013 11:32, janI wrote: Hi. due to the discussion in thread Mentor a new build system, I have made a proposal for a central Makefile located in main. Hi Jan, it is great that you are going to improve this part of the build system. But I think that we need more details about how the proposed build system works. Without them I can not really evaluate the proposal. First of all, I agree with juergens remarks that this should be discussed before implemented, hence the wiki page. Secondly this has nothing directly to do with the proposed build system, its a simple replacement of build.pl in the current system. Yes, that is how I understood it. I just did not know how to call the build.pl replacement. I know that build.pl works, but having a Makefile in main, would make us one step closer on being compatible with the distros. To me this job is a simple cleanup, not something we deadly need, but nice to have. Some remarks regarding the missing options: --from module This is one of the more important options and one that I use frequently (also in the form --all:module). Note that if you are in moduleA and call 'make --from moduleB' then all modules are built a) which moduleA depends on b) but not those that moduleB depends on c) Both moduleA and moduleB are built. I have changed the documentation. I use the --all:module myself very often, and have changed the documentation, because it is of course supported. The difference is that you do the call in main, but that is a minor detail that can be easily corrected (have module/Makefile calling main/Makefile. I have also changed documentation on --html due to juergens comments. I am not sure that we understand --from and --since in the same way so I will try to explain what I think they do. Let's imagine that we have a simple project with modules A, B, C, D and E. where B depends on A, C on B, D on C, and E on D. A ' make all' would mean 'make E'. The dependencies would then lead to building modules A, B, C, D, E in this order. If I am in E and call 'make --from C' then only C, D, and E should be built. A 'make --since C' would only build D and E. If I am in D and call 'make --from B' then modules B, C, and D are built. Call 'make --since B' to build only C and D. Note that 'make --from' accepts more than one module name (while 'make --all:module' does not). Note also that in the above case (stand in D, call 'make --from B') module A is not built, regardless of whether there are changes in A or not. Whereas a simple call to make (still standing in D) would build all modules that D depends on, directly or indirectly. Thus the options '--from' and '--since' exist to actively exclude modules from being built. The whole thing becomes a little bit more complicated with multiple options to '--from' (I never use '--since' and also don't know a valid use case so I will ignore it for now) and more complex dependencies then in the simple example above. Let's say that if we stand in instsetoo_native and call 'make --from svx sfx2'. Note that svx depends on sfx2. This would build svx, sfx2 and all modules that depend (directly or indirectly) on svx OR sfx2. got it, now I just have one problem, why would you not build the dependent modules, if they needed to be built, thats a scenario I dont understand. With a central makefile, module/makefile will not be called so we do not waste cpu cycles. With the .done files, we know when a module was last built and all modules that depend it should be rebuilt which the rule module.done : module_depend.done will ensure, so If we have A - B - C - D I go in B, and call make, then when I go in D and make, B,C,D will be made. If we have A - B - D C - D and do the same then only D will be made. So --from is not really saving anything ? While this is easy to do with eg Perl I am not sure how to handle this with just a Makefile. The straightforward approach with handling module.done files does not work. And that is one of the reasons why I don't think that (GNU) makefiles are a good solution for any problem. Most of us are used to program object oriented/imperative. Makefiles require a declarative approach. Maybe the use of Perl is not such a bad idea. Maybe it would be better to reimplement build.pl with a lot fewer options and with better readable code. I agree that makefiles are nowhere near a good solution to many of these problems, but its like windows, I dont like it, but everybody uses it. We could easily write a new build.pl, that also took care of the local makefiles, but our build system would not be in the mainstream, and e.g. the distros would not like to integrate AOO. I have over the last years followed
Re: Problem with building branch l10n40 on MacOS
On 16 October 2013 08:42, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
On 11/10/2013 janI wrote:
I think I have corrected the flex issue, with r1531149, thanks to the
flex generated file I got from juergen.
@andrea, @jsc, when you have time please give it a shoot.
please only build --all --genPo
I confirm that the build is now successful, very good.
I still get a bunch of warnings, all following the pattern
Compiling: l10ntools/source/gL10nMem.cxx
.../main/l10ntools/source/**gL10nMem.cxx: In member function 'void
l10nMem_impl::**convertToInetString(std::**string)':
.../main/l10ntools/source/**gL10nMem.cxx:714:68: warning: comparison
between signed and unsigned integer expressions [-Wsign-compare]
while((pos = sText.find(replacingStr[i], pos)) != std::string::npos) {
^
but I'm mentioning this only because you were addressing all warnings; I
get lots of them in other modules too.
Thanks for your effort so far, can I ask you to do 2 things more:
1) rebuild l10ntools from scratch, and redirect all the warnings to a file,
mail me the file, so I can edit them one-by-one, it seems some of the
standard functions is changed to unsigned int.
2) rm languages/source/templates/*; build --all --genPO and then do a svn
diff in languages/source/templates, you will see 5 files missing (at least
the happened for juergen and me) because the build system does not call the
modules (svn up cures that problem). All other files should be undchanged.
thanks in advance.
rgds
jan I.
Ps. for info, yesterday I finally got helpcontent2 working with genLang
merge, next stop is SWL where I have a problem generating .src files
correctly.
Regards,
Andrea.
--**--**-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Problem with building branch l10n40 on MacOS
On 16 October 2013 10:11, janI j...@apache.org wrote:
On 16 October 2013 08:42, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
On 11/10/2013 janI wrote:
I think I have corrected the flex issue, with r1531149, thanks to the
flex generated file I got from juergen.
@andrea, @jsc, when you have time please give it a shoot.
please only build --all --genPo
I confirm that the build is now successful, very good.
I still get a bunch of warnings, all following the pattern
Compiling: l10ntools/source/gL10nMem.cxx
.../main/l10ntools/source/**gL10nMem.cxx: In member function 'void
l10nMem_impl::**convertToInetString(std::**string)':
.../main/l10ntools/source/**gL10nMem.cxx:714:68: warning: comparison
between signed and unsigned integer expressions [-Wsign-compare]
while((pos = sText.find(replacingStr[i], pos)) != std::string::npos)
{
^
but I'm mentioning this only because you were addressing all warnings; I
get lots of them in other modules too.
Thanks for your effort so far, can I ask you to do 2 things more:
1) rebuild l10ntools from scratch, and redirect all the warnings to a
file, mail me the file, so I can edit them one-by-one, it seems some of the
standard functions is changed to unsigned int.
2) rm languages/source/templates/*; build --all --genPO and then do a svn
diff in languages/source/templates, you will see 5 files missing (at least
the happened for juergen and me) because the build system does not call the
modules (svn up cures that problem). All other files should be undchanged.
thanks in advance.
rgds
jan I.
Ps. for info, yesterday I finally got helpcontent2 working with genLang
merge, next stop is SWL where I have a problem generating .src files
correctly.
spelling mistake, its svx.
rgds
jan I.
Regards,
Andrea.
--**--**-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Forum Privilege Check
On Oct 15, 2013 8:01 AM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: Dear all, As Drew requested to resign from the administrators in all forums, and TerryE's account will be removed from administrators, too, I'm planning to check the privileged accounts on all the 10 forums, and remove inactive administrators that haven't logged in for more than *1 year*. 1 year here is defined as from Oct 1st, 2012 to the last minute of the removal. Administrator privileges is defined as the Administrators and Global Administrators groups. I shall check and later present a list of the administrators to be removed. If anyone know of any of these inactive administrators, you may ask her/him to logged in if they still are willing to help the forum administration. Or, in case if their administrative privileges are removed, they can be added in again. Please discuss under this thread of there is other consideration. hi I removed myself from having admin rigths and other special priviledges on all forums and wiki a month ago. If I forgot something please remove it. rgds jan i -- Best regards, imacat ^_*' ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc Woman's Voice News: http://www.wov.idv.tw/ Tavern IMACAT's http://www.imacat.idv.tw/ Woman in FOSS in Taiwan http://wofoss.blogspot.com/ OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/ EducOO/OOo4Kids Taiwan http://www.educoo.tw/ Greenfoot Taiwan http://greenfoot.westart.tw/
Re: Mentor a new build system.
On 15 October 2013 10:02, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 14.10.2013 23:40, janI wrote: On 14 October 2013 23:34, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 2:02 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: On 14 October 2013 19:44, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 12:38 AM, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 11.10.2013 18:10, janI wrote: Hi. FYI: as I informed a while ago, I made a project proposal for OSU capstone. The project has been selected, so we will have 4 students working the next months to achieve the following: That is great news. Thank you for pushing this forward. http://eecs.oregonstate.edu/capstone/viewproposal2013.php?** **id=16http://eecs.oregonstate.edu/**capstone/viewproposal2013.php?**id=16 http://eecs.oregonstate.edu/**capstone/viewproposal2013.php?**id=16http://eecs.oregonstate.edu/capstone/viewproposal2013.php?id=16 extract from above: motivation: Apache OpenOffice is the biggest open source office package, with 65 milllion downloads of our last version. A number of other open source packages are derived from OpenOffice, and incorporates patches and enhancements from AOO. The AOO source code is very big, 121 languages, 233 modules and 2933 makefiles (including sub-makefiles). As programming platform, we use C++ (bulk part), Java, Python, Perl and some special libraries The build system is old, a combination of perl and dmake, and has grown over the years into a non standard, hard to understand non documented system. At the same time, we want to attract more developers, therefore we want to make a new build system based on modern technology, which are easy to use especially for windows developers. goal: The goal is to: 1) make a build system suitable for use with microsoft visual studio 2) make a build system suitable for use on linux (makefiles) One of those systems should be the primary one and the other one should be automatically generated. I am not happy with that last sentence. When there is one 'primary' flavor of the build system, then that tends to get much more attention than the other flavors. This happened with both build system that we have. They heavily tend to the Unix side and are slow and hard to use on Windows. I think that we should treat our major platforms (Windows, Linux and Mac) equal. I plead absolute ignorance about Visual Studio 2008, but I thought it could use makefile specifications -- though maybe this is not well-integrated from what I've been reading. Makefiles have been integrated since VC 6, but once you start using it you soon find the limits, it would never support a setup like ours. OK...like I said, complete ignorance. I have ONLY used *nix builds in the course of my life. it maybe ignorance, I call it interest, and to me all input are welcome ! In my mind, it would be great to ditch build.pl if we could, and go with a straight makefile setup. We've already worked on this aspect. I think build.pl is the smallest problem in our build problem. As Jan already said, it basically just calls dmake or GNU make for all projects and in the right order. To ditch build.pl alone, is a very straight forward task, a real nice task for a new developer. Remember build only controls the module/prj directories and then call dmake to do the rest. Ditching build.pl (which I have done experimental for helpcontent2 and l10ntools) consist of: 1) take the first line of */prj/build.lst and use that to build a Makefile in with module dependencies. 2) for each module use the remaining lines in */prj/build.lst to build a module/Makefile that calls dmake for the existing makefiles 3) for each mdoule use */prj/deliver.lst to expand module/Makefile with a target and a set of copy instructions. It about a little workweek to edit and test the setup. Some time ago I have written a Perl script that basically what Jan has outlined. It reads the build.lst files and creates one Makefile that calls dmake and GNU make for the projects. The only problem with this aproach, and the reason why I did not finalized this experiment, is that build.pl has a lot of other features and options besides the regular build. Understanding these and replicating them is the hard part. I would not mind having a copy of the script if possible ? I think we need a big discussion to whether a new system should support all options and features of the existing systems. As an example, we remove most (if not all) options in configure by having an option like --generate_platform=xyz where xyz is one of our supported release platforms. The --generate-platform would internally set the same options we use to generate the releases. Going in such a direction will of course limit the build variations, but I am not sure if that is a bad thing
Re: Mentor a new build system.
Sorry for top posting. There seems to be some confusion, about the project. The goal is not to replace the current system (this is only a potential long time goal). The goal is to make a parallel build system suited for windows developers, and then in a second phase generate makefiles for linux. In the beginning of this thread I posted information, which is repeated below: == Project SVN Branch: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/capstone2013 Motivation AOO’s current build system is old, non-standard, hard to understand, and undocumented. To attract new developers, Apache Software Foundation would like to create a new/modern build system. Objectives 1. Develop a build system for Microsoft Visual Studio (Windows), and Linux. Focus on making Windows development easy. 2. Implement the new build system in parallel with the current build system. 3. Help test the new new build system. Deliverables 1. “How to” report before programming. 2. In June, a build system capable of generating AOO in Windows and in Linux === I have also made a wiki page (also published earlier): http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Build_System_Analysis:capstone2013_windows_build I encourage everyone to participate in the discussions. rgds jan I. On 14 October 2013 09:26, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 12.10.2013 23:33, Dave Fisher wrote: Perhaps you will unlock the path to a digitally signed build for Windows. That would be huge! I don't think that that is a shortcoming of the build system (which has many). It is more a restriction on the administrative side of OpenOffice and Apache. -Andre --**--**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Mentor a new build system.
On 14 October 2013 09:38, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 11.10.2013 18:10, janI wrote: Hi. FYI: as I informed a while ago, I made a project proposal for OSU capstone. The project has been selected, so we will have 4 students working the next months to achieve the following: That is great news. Thank you for pushing this forward. http://eecs.oregonstate.edu/**capstone/viewproposal2013.php?**id=16http://eecs.oregonstate.edu/capstone/viewproposal2013.php?id=16 extract from above: motivation: Apache OpenOffice is the biggest open source office package, with 65 milllion downloads of our last version. A number of other open source packages are derived from OpenOffice, and incorporates patches and enhancements from AOO. The AOO source code is very big, 121 languages, 233 modules and 2933 makefiles (including sub-makefiles). As programming platform, we use C++ (bulk part), Java, Python, Perl and some special libraries The build system is old, a combination of perl and dmake, and has grown over the years into a non standard, hard to understand non documented system. At the same time, we want to attract more developers, therefore we want to make a new build system based on modern technology, which are easy to use especially for windows developers. goal: The goal is to: 1) make a build system suitable for use with microsoft visual studio 2) make a build system suitable for use on linux (makefiles) One of those systems should be the primary one and the other one should be automatically generated. I am not happy with that last sentence. When there is one 'primary' flavor of the build system, then that tends to get much more attention than the other flavors. This happened with both build system that we have. They heavily tend to the Unix side and are slow and hard to use on Windows. I think that we should treat our major platforms (Windows, Linux and Mac) equal. I happen to agree with you, but I missed words. I want to use visual studio solutions on windows and makefiles on Linux. Mac can be either/or (I dont have enough experience here). The visual studio project files happens to be XML, meaning its relative easy to add tags that will be needed for makefiles. Looking in the long term, I think we will end up with neutral XML files and generate the platform files from that, but I need a kickstarter, so maybe the correct wording would be We make one system first, looking at the demands of the other systems, and then later expand. The team must first understand how the current system works in general, and then build scenarios how a \\\perfect\\\** system would look like. Second task is to implement it, in parallel with the existing system Third task is to help test it on the different platforms we support. I will mentor the students, but hope that the community will be behind me and help as well. If the students turn out to be motivated they can, as volunteers and committers, be a real bonus for the project. Another apache committer who lives close to the OSU have promised to help me as well. I am aware there are very different ideas about how a new build system should look like, but lets use this possibility to get moving, if the result works it cannot be less nice than the current system. I hope that you are right. But the our second build system proves that just working does not necessarily result in an improvement. But I don't want to sound too negative. This project is a great start and I believe that you and the students and our community will be able to improve the build system greatly. I have been thinking a lot about this, and I am afraid if we try to use the all-embracing system (like gbuild) we will die before we can show anything. But I am sure you and others will help keep me and the project on a track where it can be generally used. are anybody with knowledge of build.pl etc. interested in helping out ? As you know, I have already done some reasearch in this area and I would be glad to help. Noted. The schedule right now it to make brainstorming on wiki ending up in a project plan. BUT I see this project as a kickstarter, NOT as THE new system. I am sure we will have plenty of work after the project. rgds jan I. Regards Andre --**--**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Mentor a new build system.
On 14 October 2013 10:00, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 14.10.2013 09:38, janI wrote: Sorry for top posting. There seems to be some confusion, about the project. The goal is not to replace the current system (this is only a potential long time goal). The goal is to make a parallel build system suited for windows developers, and then in a second phase generate makefiles for linux. Now I am confused :-) Can you tell us more about the goal of the new build system? Is it an improvement of building speed (or reduction of time to build), increase the ease of use, or make the system better understandable to developers. Sorry for confusing you. Maybe my problem is that I see things in stages. I see it like this: Stage 1) Make a visual studio based build system, suitable for windows developers, and to proof it is possible. Stage 2) Take a long discussion in here, on how this system can/should be expanded to cover all our platforms just for the discussion, assume my ideas are the outcome of 2) Stage 3) Expand 1) to make it cover all our platforms Stage 4) Enable it so that we on linux use standard build mechanisms (e.g. make) enabling us to be part of standard distributions. Stage 5) Remove the current build system. The project I mentor right now, primeraly covers stage 1) and if time permit part of 2) and 3). An increase of the build speed would be great on Windows but hardly possible or necessary on Linux. agreed. Can you tell us how we can manage a third (and possibly a fourth) build system when today we have problems maintaining two? Yes, we keep it in the branch until we want to replace the 2 others OR if we agree live with a third system for a short period of time (this should only be done, if we see a path and have resources to complete the remaining steps). Again, I don't want to sound too negative or discourage you. I just want to understand what you have in mind. Which is very fair. It was a pleasant surprise to me, that the project was selected, so now we have start working, and I dont have all the answers right now, just a direction. I hope this clarifies some of your confusion, its important that we all have the same view. I am sorry for trying to take small steps, but integrating genLang have shown me a lot of the difficulties ahead, and I made a positive decision not to try to change the current system, that would have been too complex (at least for me). rgds jan I. rgds jan I. -Andre In the beginning of this thread I posted information, which is repeated below: == Project SVN Branch: https://svn.apache.org/repos/**asf/openoffice/branches/**capstone2013https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/capstone2013 Motivation AOO’s current build system is old, non-standard, hard to understand, and undocumented. To attract new developers, Apache Software Foundation would like to create a new/modern build system. Objectives 1. Develop a build system for Microsoft Visual Studio (Windows), and Linux. Focus on making Windows development easy. 2. Implement the new build system in parallel with the current build system. 3. Help test the new new build system. Deliverables 1. “How to” report before programming. 2. In June, a build system capable of generating AOO in Windows and in Linux === I have also made a wiki page (also published earlier): http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Build_System_Analysis:** capstone2013_windows_buildhttp://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Build_System_Analysis:capstone2013_windows_build I encourage everyone to participate in the discussions. rgds jan I. On 14 October 2013 09:26, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 12.10.2013 23:33, Dave Fisher wrote: Perhaps you will unlock the path to a digitally signed build for Windows. That would be huge! I don't think that that is a shortcoming of the build system (which has many). It is more a restriction on the administrative side of OpenOffice and Apache. -Andre --** --**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**a**pache.orghttp://apache.org dev-unsubscribe@**openoffice.apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org --**--**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Mentor a new build system.
On 14 October 2013 11:55, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 14.10.2013 10:12, janI wrote: On 14 October 2013 10:00, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 14.10.2013 09:38, janI wrote: Sorry for top posting. There seems to be some confusion, about the project. The goal is not to replace the current system (this is only a potential long time goal). The goal is to make a parallel build system suited for windows developers, and then in a second phase generate makefiles for linux. Now I am confused :-) Can you tell us more about the goal of the new build system? Is it an improvement of building speed (or reduction of time to build), increase the ease of use, or make the system better understandable to developers. Sorry for confusing you. Maybe my problem is that I see things in stages. Don't be sorry. I have been to too many mathematics lectures to mind being a little confused :-) Do you also happen to be a numeric analysis geek like myself ? I see it like this: Stage 1) Make a visual studio based build system, suitable for windows developers, and to proof it is possible. Stage 2) Take a long discussion in here, on how this system can/should be expanded to cover all our platforms just for the discussion, assume my ideas are the outcome of 2) Stage 3) Expand 1) to make it cover all our platforms Stage 4) Enable it so that we on linux use standard build mechanisms (e.g. make) enabling us to be part of standard distributions. Stage 5) Remove the current build system. The project I mentor right now, primeraly covers stage 1) and if time permit part of 2) and 3). Thanks for the explanation. I understand your approach a little better now. Just one more question. Do you have something in mind for 1) like CMake where you have a description of WHAT to build and then derive from that a set of files (Makefiles for Unix, or a Visual Studio solution file) that define HOW to build? I like the CMake structure, and if you look at the .vproj files you will see the following structure (high level). - Description of the project, common directories etc. - Description of the HOWTO, compiler options etc. - Description of the WHAT, which files. Sadly, but true, the structure is nice BUT whenever you have a file exception, you mix. HOWTO and WHAT. I believe we can make a proof of concept with the .proj files, then extent/enhance the XML structure to e.g. get different compiler options from 1 common file. The end result could be 1 XML file for each module describing WHAT to make, with WHICH options, and have 1 (or more) XML files describing the HOWTO. Having that we can use XSLT to generate Makefile, .proj or a third type of files. The XSLT would run as part of configure. An increase of the build speed would be great on Windows but hardly possible or necessary on Linux. agreed. Can you tell us how we can manage a third (and possibly a fourth) build system when today we have problems maintaining two? Yes, we keep it in the branch until we want to replace the 2 others OR if we agree live with a third system for a short period of time (this should only be done, if we see a path and have resources to complete the remaining steps). Again, I don't want to sound too negative or discourage you. I just want to understand what you have in mind. Which is very fair. It was a pleasant surprise to me, that the project was selected, so now we have start working, and I dont have all the answers right now, just a direction. I hope this clarifies some of your confusion, its important that we all have the same view. I am sorry for trying to take small steps, but integrating genLang have shown me a lot of the difficulties ahead, and I made a positive decision not to try to change the current system, that would have been too complex (at least for me). It is perfectly OK to take small steps. That is maybe the only way to make any progress in system as complex as our build system. I would like to see you succeed and will help you as good as I can. thx for your promise. I am no oracle, and have no perfect solution (then I had made it), so much of this project is to experiment and find solutions and for that its good to discuss. rgds jan I. -Andre rgds jan I. rgds jan I. -Andre In the beginning of this thread I posted information, which is repeated below: == Project SVN Branch: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/ capstone2013https://svn.apache.org/repos/**asf/openoffice/branches/**capstone2013 https://svn.**apache.org/repos/asf/**openoffice/branches/** capstone2013https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/capstone2013 Motivation AOO’s current build system is old, non-standard, hard to understand, and undocumented. To attract new developers, Apache Software Foundation would like to create a new/modern build system. Objectives 1
Re: Mentor a new build system.
On 14 October 2013 19:44, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 12:38 AM, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 11.10.2013 18:10, janI wrote: Hi. FYI: as I informed a while ago, I made a project proposal for OSU capstone. The project has been selected, so we will have 4 students working the next months to achieve the following: That is great news. Thank you for pushing this forward. http://eecs.oregonstate.edu/**capstone/viewproposal2013.php?**id=16 http://eecs.oregonstate.edu/capstone/viewproposal2013.php?id=16 extract from above: motivation: Apache OpenOffice is the biggest open source office package, with 65 milllion downloads of our last version. A number of other open source packages are derived from OpenOffice, and incorporates patches and enhancements from AOO. The AOO source code is very big, 121 languages, 233 modules and 2933 makefiles (including sub-makefiles). As programming platform, we use C++ (bulk part), Java, Python, Perl and some special libraries The build system is old, a combination of perl and dmake, and has grown over the years into a non standard, hard to understand non documented system. At the same time, we want to attract more developers, therefore we want to make a new build system based on modern technology, which are easy to use especially for windows developers. goal: The goal is to: 1) make a build system suitable for use with microsoft visual studio 2) make a build system suitable for use on linux (makefiles) One of those systems should be the primary one and the other one should be automatically generated. I am not happy with that last sentence. When there is one 'primary' flavor of the build system, then that tends to get much more attention than the other flavors. This happened with both build system that we have. They heavily tend to the Unix side and are slow and hard to use on Windows. I think that we should treat our major platforms (Windows, Linux and Mac) equal. I plead absolute ignorance about Visual Studio 2008, but I thought it could use makefile specifications -- though maybe this is not well-integrated from what I've been reading. Makefiles have been integrated since VC 6, but once you start using it you soon find the limits, it would never support a setup like ours. In my mind, it would be great to ditch build.pl if we could, and go with a straight makefile setup. We've already worked on this aspect. To ditch build.pl alone, is a very straight forward task, a real nice task for a new developer. Remember build only controls the module/prj directories and then call dmake to do the rest. Ditching build.pl (which I have done experimental for helpcontent2 and l10ntools) consist of: 1) take the first line of */prj/build.lst and use that to build a Makefile in with module dependencies. 2) for each module use the remaining lines in */prj/build.lst to build a module/Makefile that calls dmake for the existing makefiles 3) for each mdoule use */prj/deliver.lst to expand module/Makefile with a target and a set of copy instructions. It about a little workweek to edit and test the setup. I have not thoroughly investigated the workings of build.pl, but I'm wondering if it's the mix of what we're trying to build -- e.g. the helpcontent -- that is a bottleneck here. To me, it seems code components could be built in some standard way and these other aspects built in their own environment and plugged in later at some point. Just some thoughts I've had, which might not make any sense. ;} I have because of the genLang integration been deep into build (and still are), and e.g. helpcontent2 is solely dmake files, in my ubuntu I have a helpcontent2/Makefile that replaces build.pl for the module. postprocess or instsetoo_native might be a level more difficult, but they are still only dmake make files. I have read the fuzz about having a standard make setup, but I have never understood the complexity (unless you want to make it complex). I would gladly help someone who has time to edit the Makefiles we need. rgd jan I. But, I'm happy to see this proposal and I hope it gets accepted. The more eyes we have on the build process, the better. The team must first understand how the current system works in general, and then build scenarios how a \\\perfect\\\** system would look like. Second task is to implement it, in parallel with the existing system Third task is to help test it on the different platforms we support. I will mentor the students, but hope that the community will be behind me and help as well. If the students turn out to be motivated they can, as volunteers and committers, be a real bonus for the project. Another apache committer who lives close to the OSU have promised to help me as well. I am aware there are very different ideas
Re: Mentor a new build system.
On 14 October 2013 23:34, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 2:02 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: On 14 October 2013 19:44, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 12:38 AM, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 11.10.2013 18:10, janI wrote: Hi. FYI: as I informed a while ago, I made a project proposal for OSU capstone. The project has been selected, so we will have 4 students working the next months to achieve the following: That is great news. Thank you for pushing this forward. http://eecs.oregonstate.edu/**capstone/viewproposal2013.php?**id=16 http://eecs.oregonstate.edu/capstone/viewproposal2013.php?id=16 extract from above: motivation: Apache OpenOffice is the biggest open source office package, with 65 milllion downloads of our last version. A number of other open source packages are derived from OpenOffice, and incorporates patches and enhancements from AOO. The AOO source code is very big, 121 languages, 233 modules and 2933 makefiles (including sub-makefiles). As programming platform, we use C++ (bulk part), Java, Python, Perl and some special libraries The build system is old, a combination of perl and dmake, and has grown over the years into a non standard, hard to understand non documented system. At the same time, we want to attract more developers, therefore we want to make a new build system based on modern technology, which are easy to use especially for windows developers. goal: The goal is to: 1) make a build system suitable for use with microsoft visual studio 2) make a build system suitable for use on linux (makefiles) One of those systems should be the primary one and the other one should be automatically generated. I am not happy with that last sentence. When there is one 'primary' flavor of the build system, then that tends to get much more attention than the other flavors. This happened with both build system that we have. They heavily tend to the Unix side and are slow and hard to use on Windows. I think that we should treat our major platforms (Windows, Linux and Mac) equal. I plead absolute ignorance about Visual Studio 2008, but I thought it could use makefile specifications -- though maybe this is not well-integrated from what I've been reading. Makefiles have been integrated since VC 6, but once you start using it you soon find the limits, it would never support a setup like ours. OK...like I said, complete ignorance. I have ONLY used *nix builds in the course of my life. it maybe ignorance, I call it interest, and to me all input are welcome ! In my mind, it would be great to ditch build.pl if we could, and go with a straight makefile setup. We've already worked on this aspect. To ditch build.pl alone, is a very straight forward task, a real nice task for a new developer. Remember build only controls the module/prj directories and then call dmake to do the rest. Ditching build.pl (which I have done experimental for helpcontent2 and l10ntools) consist of: 1) take the first line of */prj/build.lst and use that to build a Makefile in with module dependencies. 2) for each module use the remaining lines in */prj/build.lst to build a module/Makefile that calls dmake for the existing makefiles 3) for each mdoule use */prj/deliver.lst to expand module/Makefile with a target and a set of copy instructions. It about a little workweek to edit and test the setup. Thanks for these tips. I would REALLY like to disconnect the help building to try to get tech writers more interested in development/changes of our inline help content, with minimal fuss. OK, I will play with that this week. I will be happy to assist, feel free to contact me offlist/onlist. I have spent the last week debugging the helpcontent2 build part, to make it work with genLang, and I still have some way to go. If we had some resources we should take it one step further, and replace the current help with standard help methods available. That would make it a lot easier for tech. writers. rgds jan I. I have not thoroughly investigated the workings of build.pl, but I'm wondering if it's the mix of what we're trying to build -- e.g. the helpcontent -- that is a bottleneck here. To me, it seems code components could be built in some standard way and these other aspects built in their own environment and plugged in later at some point. Just some thoughts I've had, which might not make any sense. ;} I have because of the genLang integration been deep into build (and still are), and e.g. helpcontent2 is solely dmake files, in my ubuntu I have a helpcontent2/Makefile
Re: Mentor a new build system.
On 12 October 2013 23:33, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Oct 12, 2013, at 9:23 AM, janI wrote: On 12 October 2013 17:55, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 12:10 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: Hi. FYI: as I informed a while ago, I made a project proposal for OSU capstone. The project has been selected, so we will have 4 students working the next months to achieve the following: http://eecs.oregonstate.edu/capstone/viewproposal2013.php?id=16 extract from above: motivation: Apache OpenOffice is the biggest open source office package, with 65 milllion downloads of our last version. A number of other open source packages are derived from OpenOffice, and incorporates patches and enhancements from AOO. The AOO source code is very big, 121 languages, 233 modules and 2933 makefiles (including sub-makefiles). As programming platform, we use C++ (bulk part), Java, Python, Perl and some special libraries The build system is old, a combination of perl and dmake, and has grown over the years into a non standard, hard to understand non documented system. At the same time, we want to attract more developers, therefore we want to make a new build system based on modern technology, which are easy to use especially for windows developers. goal: The goal is to: 1) make a build system suitable for use with microsoft visual studio 2) make a build system suitable for use on linux (makefiles) One of those systems should be the primary one and the other one should be automatically generated. The team must first understand how the current system works in general, and then build scenarios how a \\\perfect\\\ system would look like. Second task is to implement it, in parallel with the existing system Third task is to help test it on the different platforms we support. I will mentor the students, but hope that the community will be behind me and help as well. If the students turn out to be motivated they can, as volunteers and committers, be a real bonus for the project. This is very cool. Thanks for applying and making this happen. It is a big task, but improvements to the build system would be a big benefit to the project. One question: When you say microsoft visual studio, did you mean a build fully integrated into the IDE? Or where you thinking more of a command-line build that could be invoked as a command line tool, using Cygwin and the VC++ compiler? It depends of course on the students, but I have made some tests (feasibility studies), and my goal is to have 1 solution consisting of n projects (1 pr module), and totally integrated in the IDE, removing the need for cygwin shell. We of course still need a lot of the cygwin tools (like flex), I would integrate those with the custom build option. If we can achieve that (in parallel with the current build system), I believe (BUT I might be wrong) that extending the projects with makefile information and generating the makefiles is simple (using e.g. XALANC). But I do not want to raise too high expectations, with the state of the current build system, nearly any enhancement will be beneficial. To be honest, the team and I will need help from some of the more knowledgeable committers in the community. Perhaps you will unlock the path to a digitally signed build for Windows. That would be huge! hopefully someone will enlighten me a bit on this theme. I am only aware of the infra effort to give us and other projects code signing possibility, but maybe its the same. I would not be of much help on the technical side of this, but as the project makes progress perhaps I can help publicize the accomplishments via a blog interview or something similar. Thx, all help is appreciated, even hand holding when nothing works :-). OSUSL is the biggest Apache site (infrastructure) and this project is the only apache project selected, so we might see interest from the apache community as well as our own community. OSUOSL is where the template and extension sites were hosted before Roberto moved these to SourceForge. They were such or poor state because they were be updated when Oracle pulled the plug that OSUOSL had turned off their Nagios alerts. The admin was responsive, but it seemed like I was the only one on ooo-dev that figured out how to email them. All for OSUOSL! We have both nagios and circonus (the new system I am installing) alerts again. for general information: I have created: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Build_System_Analysis:capstone2013_windows_build where the project will try to document the primary analysis as well as define smaller goals. As we go along, comments on that page will be appreciated. rgds jan I. Regards, Dave I am not marketing, but maybe an interview with the students
Re: Mentor a new build system.
On 12 October 2013 17:55, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 12:10 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: Hi. FYI: as I informed a while ago, I made a project proposal for OSU capstone. The project has been selected, so we will have 4 students working the next months to achieve the following: http://eecs.oregonstate.edu/capstone/viewproposal2013.php?id=16 extract from above: motivation: Apache OpenOffice is the biggest open source office package, with 65 milllion downloads of our last version. A number of other open source packages are derived from OpenOffice, and incorporates patches and enhancements from AOO. The AOO source code is very big, 121 languages, 233 modules and 2933 makefiles (including sub-makefiles). As programming platform, we use C++ (bulk part), Java, Python, Perl and some special libraries The build system is old, a combination of perl and dmake, and has grown over the years into a non standard, hard to understand non documented system. At the same time, we want to attract more developers, therefore we want to make a new build system based on modern technology, which are easy to use especially for windows developers. goal: The goal is to: 1) make a build system suitable for use with microsoft visual studio 2) make a build system suitable for use on linux (makefiles) One of those systems should be the primary one and the other one should be automatically generated. The team must first understand how the current system works in general, and then build scenarios how a \\\perfect\\\ system would look like. Second task is to implement it, in parallel with the existing system Third task is to help test it on the different platforms we support. I will mentor the students, but hope that the community will be behind me and help as well. If the students turn out to be motivated they can, as volunteers and committers, be a real bonus for the project. This is very cool. Thanks for applying and making this happen. It is a big task, but improvements to the build system would be a big benefit to the project. One question: When you say microsoft visual studio, did you mean a build fully integrated into the IDE? Or where you thinking more of a command-line build that could be invoked as a command line tool, using Cygwin and the VC++ compiler? It depends of course on the students, but I have made some tests (feasibility studies), and my goal is to have 1 solution consisting of n projects (1 pr module), and totally integrated in the IDE, removing the need for cygwin shell. We of course still need a lot of the cygwin tools (like flex), I would integrate those with the custom build option. If we can achieve that (in parallel with the current build system), I believe (BUT I might be wrong) that extending the projects with makefile information and generating the makefiles is simple (using e.g. XALANC). But I do not want to raise too high expectations, with the state of the current build system, nearly any enhancement will be beneficial. To be honest, the team and I will need help from some of the more knowledgeable committers in the community. I would not be of much help on the technical side of this, but as the project makes progress perhaps I can help publicize the accomplishments via a blog interview or something similar. Thx, all help is appreciated, even hand holding when nothing works :-). OSUSL is the biggest Apache site (infrastructure) and this project is the only apache project selected, so we might see interest from the apache community as well as our own community. I am not marketing, but maybe an interview with the students (and if needed also me) on the expectations would be a good idea, to sort of announce it broader ? rgds jan I. Regards, -Rob Another apache committer who lives close to the OSU have promised to help me as well. I am aware there are very different ideas about how a new build system should look like, but lets use this possibility to get moving, if the result works it cannot be less nice than the current system. are anybody with knowledge of build.pl etc. interested in helping out ? rgds jan I. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Problem with building branch l10n40 on MacOS
On 11 October 2013 10:20, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote: On 10/11/13 9:46 AM, janI wrote: On 11 October 2013 09:39, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Jan, I will change my config setting to continue but you should take a look on --genPO swtich Entering /Users/jsc/dev/svn/l10n40/main/moz mkout -- version: 1.8 dmake: Error: -- Don't know how to make `genPO' 1 module(s): moz need(s) to be rebuilt Reason(s): ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making /Users/jsc/dev/svn/l10n40/main/moz When you have fixed the errors in that module you can resume the build by running: build --all:moz I am confused: yes dave? build --genPO build -- version: 275224 = Building module moz = Entering /share/opensource/aoo/branches/l10n40/main/moz Entering /share/opensource/aoo/branches/l10n40/main/moz/zipped Can it have something to do with the config settings: ./configure --with-jdk-home=/usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk \ --with-epm-url= http://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/ooo-extras/downloads/detail?name=3ade8cfe7e59ca8e65052644fed9fca4-epm-3.7-source.tar.gzcan=2q=epm-3.7.tar.gz \ --with-dmake-url= http://dmake.apache-extras.org.codespot.com/files/dmake-4.12.tar.bz2 \ --enable-verbose \ --enable-category-b \ --enable-dbus \ --enable-gstreamer \ --enable-bundled-dictionaries \ --enable-opengl \ --with-lang=da en-US es \ --with-package-format=rpm deb \ --with-vendor=jani local build rgds jan I. I use normally --disable-build-mozilla and use the prebuild moz files on MacOS Now I have disabled mozilla completely. hdu is working on removing moz on MacOS completely. I found the problem in moz and have corrected it (it would also show up on some other platforms). I also found the problem with help_simpress.pot (R1531582), I had forgotten to update the pot file after I corrected an error in genLang. Right now I have a pseudo problem, when genLang changes all pot files should be remade, but that does not happen automatically (no dependency) and with the current build system is not something easy to change. But its still nice to know, that you can build l10ntools and run build --genPO on your and get same result as me on ubuntu. We are slowly getting forward. rgds jan I. Juergen Juergen - 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: Problem with building branch l10n40 on MacOS
On 11 October 2013 09:39, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Jan, I will change my config setting to continue but you should take a look on --genPO swtich Entering /Users/jsc/dev/svn/l10n40/main/moz mkout -- version: 1.8 dmake: Error: -- Don't know how to make `genPO' 1 module(s): moz need(s) to be rebuilt Reason(s): ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making /Users/jsc/dev/svn/l10n40/main/moz When you have fixed the errors in that module you can resume the build by running: build --all:moz I am confused: yes dave? build --genPO build -- version: 275224 = Building module moz = Entering /share/opensource/aoo/branches/l10n40/main/moz Entering /share/opensource/aoo/branches/l10n40/main/moz/zipped Can it have something to do with the config settings: ./configure --with-jdk-home=/usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk \ --with-epm-url=http://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/ooo-extras/downloads/detail?name=3ade8cfe7e59ca8e65052644fed9fca4-epm-3.7-source.tar.gzcan=2q=epm-3.7.tar.gz; \ --with-dmake-url=http://dmake.apache-extras.org.codespot.com/files/dmake-4.12.tar.bz2 \ --enable-verbose \ --enable-category-b \ --enable-dbus \ --enable-gstreamer \ --enable-bundled-dictionaries \ --enable-opengl \ --with-lang=da en-US es \ --with-package-format=rpm deb \ --with-vendor=jani local build rgds jan I. Juergen - 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
Mentor a new build system.
Hi. FYI: as I informed a while ago, I made a project proposal for OSU capstone. The project has been selected, so we will have 4 students working the next months to achieve the following: http://eecs.oregonstate.edu/capstone/viewproposal2013.php?id=16 extract from above: motivation: Apache OpenOffice is the biggest open source office package, with 65 milllion downloads of our last version. A number of other open source packages are derived from OpenOffice, and incorporates patches and enhancements from AOO. The AOO source code is very big, 121 languages, 233 modules and 2933 makefiles (including sub-makefiles). As programming platform, we use C++ (bulk part), Java, Python, Perl and some special libraries The build system is old, a combination of perl and dmake, and has grown over the years into a non standard, hard to understand non documented system. At the same time, we want to attract more developers, therefore we want to make a new build system based on modern technology, which are easy to use especially for windows developers. goal: The goal is to: 1) make a build system suitable for use with microsoft visual studio 2) make a build system suitable for use on linux (makefiles) One of those systems should be the primary one and the other one should be automatically generated. The team must first understand how the current system works in general, and then build scenarios how a \\\perfect\\\ system would look like. Second task is to implement it, in parallel with the existing system Third task is to help test it on the different platforms we support. I will mentor the students, but hope that the community will be behind me and help as well. If the students turn out to be motivated they can, as volunteers and committers, be a real bonus for the project. Another apache committer who lives close to the OSU have promised to help me as well. I am aware there are very different ideas about how a new build system should look like, but lets use this possibility to get moving, if the result works it cannot be less nice than the current system. are anybody with knowledge of build.pl etc. interested in helping out ? rgds jan I.
Re: New Record Download Day
On 10 October 2013 16:33, Louis Suárez-Potts lui...@gmail.com wrote: On 2013-10-10, at 10:01 , Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: No, this is not a duplicate message. We hit another new download record yesterday, of 241,987 downloads, beating the record previously set on Monday of 233,070 downloads. -Rob This is impressive. Add these numbers to those also generated by LibreOffice and other versions of OpenOffice, and we can start thinking again of a seriously large installed base of ODF editors, most of which are open source. Indeed very impressive. Do we have any ideas how the other openoffice versions are doing in terms of download ? if they publish their numbers we could think about a blog post telling about the total number, that must be impressive. rgds jan I. louis - 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: Reopening the Vietnamese Forum
On 10 October 2013 21:31, Hagar Delest hagar.del...@laposte.net wrote: Hi Drew, Thanks! So we need now some news from Mr. Phan Anh. If you're not subscribed to the (dev) mailing list, you should do it ASAP, it's mandatory in case discussions occur about the forums. Registering the EN forum would be great too, some discussions apply to all NL forums and you'll see how thing are run. Once admin, the first action is to activate the moderation of the first post for every new user. Some moderators will be needed (but you can handle the volume alone at first). Then we can think about deleting Drew's admin account. Hagar Le 09/10/2013 23:59, Drew Jensen a écrit : Hi Guys, Well, the spam had been removed before it was locked, so that should not be a problem. The existing user accounts - those could be disabled, yes of course. So - I understand there is a new person to act as the admin and that is the reason for the re-opening, which I think is great BTW. I take it from the earlier email that the new admin still needed to setup their account on the en forum...or not, I don't know really - kind of a problem having me in this loop, as I have no internet access on a regular basis and as you can see am not able to get connected every day. Anyhow - I just jumped over there and logged in - yup my account still works - but imacat has all the same access rights. Which brings me to my account - honestly it is not a good idea to leave an admin account laying around unused like that - I had expected imacat to delete it. I'm saying that purely from a good practices stand point. +1, I have great respect for your work, but I agree with you that a non active admin should be deleted, if for nothing to reduce the risk of misusage Instead of deleing your admin right I would much more prefer to see you as an active admin. rgds jan I. . Here we are though. I'll be on-line a few times this week and if this needs doing (delete old accounts, etc) certainly I'll help with that - afterwards, given my circumstances it does not make a lot of sense to leave the account laying around dormant, as I already said :). *laughing* just give me marching orders and I'll carry them out In my world, the marching orders would be clean what should be cleaned. That means pages and users, but I acknowledge its just my POW as a strict admin. rgds jan I. Ps. Thanks a lot for your work in general. //drew On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 3:47 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: On 7 October 2013 20:55, Hagar Delest hagar.del...@laposte.net wrote: Le 07/10/2013 19:22, janI a écrit : Before reopening, the user base should be cleaned (preferable deleted), and all spam pages should be removed. If this cleanup is not done before reopening the forum, all other forum run the risk of bad performance. I think that the spam was removed before closing the forum. So there is no problem reopening it. I am just making a recommendation, based on the database content, if the forum admins wants it opened fine by me. rgds jan I. Hagar --**--**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org 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: New Record Download Day
On 10 October 2013 21:21, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:07 AM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: On 10 October 2013 16:33, Louis Suárez-Potts lui...@gmail.com wrote: On 2013-10-10, at 10:01 , Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: No, this is not a duplicate message. We hit another new download record yesterday, of 241,987 downloads, beating the record previously set on Monday of 233,070 downloads. -Rob This is impressive. Add these numbers to those also generated by LibreOffice and other versions of OpenOffice, and we can start thinking again of a seriously large installed base of ODF editors, most of which are open source. Indeed very impressive. Do we have any ideas how the other openoffice versions are doing in terms of download ? if they publish their numbers we could think about a blog post telling about the total number, that must be impressive. Some of them did publish download numbers, but stopped doing so after AOO 3.4.0 was released and we started publishing our numbers. But it is hard to come up with apples-to-apples comparisons. For example, Linux users get LO with their distro. They don't download. LO has been available for 3 years, but AOO for only 18 months. We're counting only full installs, LO is counting -- well, we really don't know. The products have different update cycles, so it is hard to convert downloads into users. (If you have many small releases then each user will generate several downloads). Differences like this make it hard to compare the two. But one approach is to look at Windows downloads from 3rd party websites, like download.com. This avoids all of the above problems. If you look there you see that in the last week AOO has been downloaded 21,850 times, and LibreOffice 2,664 times. But from the perspective of ODF editors, Microsoft has pretty good ODF support now as well, so the true number of ODF editor installs is probably near 1 billion now. Please bear in mind I was not trying to battle LO and AOO who has the most downloads. I was simply asking if we can come up with a somewhat reliable figure how many have downloaded a free office version against how many have paid for the version. I am still thinking about the issue about saving money, which I think is high on many goverment/departmental lists right now. Something we can use to make a slight push in direction of free software independent of branding. rgds jan I. -Rob rgds jan I. louis - 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: [INFRA] Forums down
On 8 October 2013 09:16, Ricardo Berlasso rgb.m...@gmail.com wrote: 2013/10/8 FR web forum ooofo...@free.fr Error displayed: Can't connect to local MySQL server Anybody can restart mysqld deamon? It seems forums are working now. yes mysql is running without errors. I cannot imidiatly see that there has been any problems, but maybe the php2bb needs some maintenance at least I can see the forums would benefit from a caching system like ATS. rgds jan I. Regards, Ricardo Thanks - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Source tree and multiple configs.
On 8 October 2013 17:55, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote: On 10/7/13 9:54 PM, janI wrote: Hi. Has anyone been successfull in having 1 source tree and multiple configs ? I now have: - windows7 - windows7 debug - ubuntu 12.04 - ubuntu 12.04 debug - centOS (experimental) And I am getting seriously tired of having to synchronize the source files everytime I cross compile. Is it not possible to run ./configure so that I can have everything in 1 tree, meaning when I change a source, its available to all platforms ? I haven't tried it for a long time but I assume it worked if you the configure again and again on the different platforms and use the generated env scripts (e.g. MacOSXX86Env.Set.sh, ...). On Linux you potentially run into a name conflict but you can copy the scripts before calling configure on the next Linux platform. Just try it out. I did try it, that why I ask others :-) the .sh files is not the biggest problem, unxlngx6.pro directory is my biggest problem because configure/bootstrap generates several files, which seems to want to be in unxlngx6.pro. I think I miss a configure switch to set the object directory. rgds jan I. Juergen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Help Needed: Redo the /porting/mac page
On 8 October 2013 21:38, Tal Daniel tal.re...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 5:52 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: [...] http://www.openoffice.org/porting/mac/ This page has many problems: I am not a mac specialist, but I just read the http://www.openoffice.org/porting http://www.openoffice.org/porting/mac/page, title is third part ports and distributions. So my first question is - what does a MAC page have to do here. MAC is a supported platform, not third party ? - why does the porting page not have a link to the mac page ? This of course has less to do with the content of the page, but I dont like signalling the mac is a third party port. rgds jan I. http://www.openoffice.org/porting/mac/ ... This is a good opportunity for a volunteer, new or old, to help improve a high profile web page. I know nothing about the Mac, but I can help review and check in a new page. [Tal:] Trying to fix problems on the Mac version, but if you won't find anyone, send me a note. 1) Am I in the right place? (This is the implicit first question whenever anyone has when following a link from Google search results.) The incongruous stock image does not help here. One user wrote in a while ago that this automatically made them think this was a spam site. [Tal:] I entered openoffice.org from google, pressed download, and offered this page, with the correct Mac version: http://www.openoffice.org/download/ 2) Does OpenOffice support the Mac? If so, what versions? Prerequisites? [Tal:] I used 3.4, 4.01, on Mac 10.6.8. I think there's support since 10.4/5, but read a few posts suggesting to drop these old versions. 3) Where can download it? [Tal:] See 2. 4) Where can I go for more information? Support? [Tal:] Here's a nice page, linked from the downloads page: http://www.openoffice.org/download/other.html ... -Rob
Re: Help Needed: Redo the /porting/mac page
On 8 October 2013 22:33, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: janI wrote: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/mac/ ... So my first question is - what does a MAC page have to do here. MAC is a supported platform, not third party ? - why does the porting page not have a link to the mac page ? The Mac version used to be a port (you can still find outdated information around, with the name Aqua Port), but it has been a fully supported version since 3.0.0 or around. So the porting page does not link to it since it's not a port. And the URL is... well, historical, but I wouldn't oppose to move it outside porting/ if we can setup redirects that won't break search engines. Always nice to learn some history. I agree with not moving it, but I suggest to put a text like MAC is a fully supported platform, and can be downloaded from the main download site url so nobody (like me) starts to wonder. rgds jan I. Regards, Andrea. - 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
