Re: [DISCUSS] [PMC] Proposed PMC List
On 9/25/12 7:15 AM, imacat wrote: I feel honored to be listed. I would like to help PMC if there is a chance. I am sure you will and you already does In any case, I suggest at least one female should be included in the PMC, to encourage the contribution of females in the community and bring diverse voices in PMC. It is very important to encourage more and more female contributors to join the community, and make them feel that OpenOffice is theirs', not of some male geeks. interesting view and I agree. Well I personally have never differentiated between female/male contributors and I am happy and welcome any contributor here at Apache. And I think we are on a good way. We have a growing number of female contributors here in our project and of course many of them are coming from Asia. We are now really global and have many contributors from all over the world. But we can always do better ;-) I also suggest to include Asians. From the past experience of OpenOffice.org, the main problem of the Asian community is that we are not included in the project. The problem of Asian text processing is very different than that of Latin text. It was very difficult for many most important Asian problems to be heard by non-Asian people. It shall change and make a significant difference when Asians are included in PMC. I think it is already addressed with some names on the list and I agree that Asia is important for us to grow our community. But I also think that we don't differentiate here. Nobody will get an advantage because of the simple fact that she/he is coming from Asia. I think we will recognize all contributions in the same way and when we noticed that somebody does a great job here and help us to grow the community and the project we will surely consider the PMC membership. We want to grow in all areas! Juergen On 2012/09/25 06:31, Andrea Pescetti said: On 24/09/2012 Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 9/24/12 10:26 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: Just to confirm that I have received no offline nominations. thanks for this info, it shows that the approach was not so wrong and we had no real need for this additional option. It's still good to have had this option, so we are sure that everybody who wanted to participate in the process had the opportunity to do so. And it's even better that in the end everybody decided to make their nomination in public. I am looking forward to Andrew's summary and from my perspective we should already start thinking what will be next? Before moving on with all the steps you listed (and I agree with all of them) we will need to actually see the summary and derive the potential PMC from there. So far I've seen opinions ranging from including only the 10 most popular nominees to including everybody who received at least one nomination. Probably the best solution is somewhere in between, but once we have the summary the situation will probably be clearer. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [DISCUSS] [PMC] Proposed PMC List
On 25 September 2012 06:15, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: I feel honored to be listed. I would like to help PMC if there is a chance. In any case, I suggest at least one female should be included in the PMC, to encourage the contribution of females in the community and bring diverse voices in PMC. It is very important to encourage more and more female contributors to join the community, and make them feel that OpenOffice is theirs', not of some male geeks. +1 broad representation is important. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ) www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.
Re: [REQUEST] Apache OpenOffice (incubating) - fund allocation for ACEU 2012
Hi, Thx to Chris, Ross and Lawrence for the fast feedback. Some comments and furthers question below inline. On 24.09.2012 17:34, Ross Gardler wrote: On 24 September 2012 17:14, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote: On Sep 24, 2012, at 4:48 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: ... the Apache OpenOffice (incubating) community wants to spend some of its fund for ApacheCon EU (ACEU) 2012 - see the corresponding thread on ooo-dev@i.a.o [1]. We are currently discussing the granting processes - see [2]. The purpose of this post is to assure ASF's charity status and to clarify the actual spending of the money regarding our planned fund allocation. We want to spend the following money for ACEU 2012 participants from the Apache OpenOffice (incubating) community: - 10 x 300/600 EUR for travel expense subsidy - 30 x 100 EUR for ticket discounts for non-committers Questions regarding assurence of charity status: (1) Do the planned spendings violate our charity status? I'm not the person to definitively answer this -- I believe this has to do with legal@ too, luckily the VP, Legal is also on the treasurer list :) so he can help decide if there needs to be a legal@ CC here. To my knowledge though, I think that you already have approval to proceed based on old discussions I saw regarding this topic on board@, and also based on Ross Gardler being a board@ guy and Apache OO mentor and bringing this up too. I don't speak for the board, however, the board did approve the principle of using SPI money for this. I've checked with Jim as President and he confirms that he see's no problem. The treasurer list was copied on that communication and I reported it back to the ooo-dev list. In summary, I believe we are good to go (said with my EVP hat since Jim spoke with his Pres hat so it's my problem if this is bad information) great - looks to me that we are on a save way. (2) What do we need to consider in our planned granting processes to assure our charity status? I think the most important thing is to make sure that the process is traceable and auditable, IIRC. That is correct. We should also add fair and non-discriminatory. The applications process and evaluation process needs to be public (I'm assuming this is not a needs based evaluation, if it is needs based it will be more complex as privacy is also necessary). I am taking this advice and will bring it into the current discussion of the granting processes. Questions regarding actual spending of the money: (1) Is it possible to spend the ticket discount money via a special promotion code in the ACEU 2012 ticket system? Not sure about this :) The ApacheCon folks, or Mellissa, our EA, would probably be good people to ask, so I've CC'ed Melissa here. Yes, it is possible. What we need to know (send to plann...@apachecon.com) is: - ticket name - discount code - discount level - promotion start and end dates The ApacheCon planners confirmed that a promotion code is possible. Is it ok for ASF treasurer to pay the bill for the used ticket discounts to the ACEU 2012 ticket service? (1a) If not, do you have any recommendation how the money should be spent? (2) What are the possibilities to spend the travel expense subsidy money? (2a) Do you have a recommendation how the money should be spent? Regarding the above, I'd say come up with a process that is documented, you guys decide how you want to spend it, come up with a Bill or someone to pay, provide that information to the Treasurer@ list (me and Sam) and we'll move forward with the approval process. Right now, our bills are paid by having someone with the appropriate karma put a file in: https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/financials/Bills/received/ Then, they are reviewed by someone with the appropriate budget authority (e.g., in Travel I believe that's Jim since he's the President) and then placed in: https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/financials/Bills/approved/ At that point, the Treasurer's office can pay the bill (via wire transfer; electronic funds deposit, etc.) provided that all the information is given to address the payee, and then once we pay, we move the bill into: https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/financials/Bills/paid/ I do not think that we will real bills that need to be paid as the granted travel expense subsidy will in general cover only a part of the overall travel expenses. Is it possible that the treasurer pay money based on the granting process and a final confirmation note to the Treasurer@ list? Thanks in advance for your support. Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [DISCUSS] granting processes for fund allocation for ACEU 2012
Hi, see below some important refinement and status report for the proposed granting processes. On 24.09.2012 13:01, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: Hi, I would like to discuss how the grainting processes for fund allocation for ApacheCon EU (ACEU) 2012 could work. Two processes are needed. One for granting travel expense subsidy and one for ticket discount for non-committers of the OpenOffice community. The goal is to reach (lazy) consensus on the granting processes in the next 72 hours. Here are my ideas regarding such processes: (1) ticket discount for non-committers: - 30 x 100 EUR ticket discount for non-committers can be granted. - To apply for the ticket discount people should send post to ooo-private. The details should be: -- subject = [ACEU 2012 - ticket discount] Name -- content: --- full name --- email address --- affiliation to the OpenOffice community (something like: user, contributing X, translator, ...) --- description why applying for the ticket discount and why support is needed. --- job or eduation status (something like: student, employee, freeflancer, ...) - Announce on our mailing lists and in our forum that application process is open until ending date - announcement date should be at least 7 days ahead of the ending date. - The small group of volunteers collect the applications. The group selects not more than 30 and post the decision details on ooo-private. The selection process should not take more than 2 days. The selection shall be based on the given description and the job/eduation status. - Send out corresponding notifications and details how to get the ticket discount. [Note: I will get in contact with ACEU 2012 planners, if it is possible to get a promotion code for our ticket discount.] [Another note: I will get in contact with treasu...@apache.org to assure ASF's charity status and clarify the actual spending of the money] ACEU 2012 planners confirmed that a promotion code is possible. Waiting now for final approval from ASF treasurer that this way of spending the money is ok. (2) travel expense subsidy for OpenOffice community members: - 10 x 300 resp. 600 EUR travel expense subsidy can be granted. - To apply for the travel expense subsidy people should send a post to ooo-private. The details should be: -- subject = [ACEU 2012 - travel subsidy] Name -- content: --- full name --- email address --- affiliation to the OpenOffice community (something like: committer, user, contributing X, translator, ...) --- Apache ID (if available) --- accepted or stand-by speaker at ACEU? --- description why applying for the travel expense subsidy and why support is needed. --- job or eduation status (something like: student, employee, freelancer, ...) --- estimated travel expense --- estimated needed accommodation - # of nights --- other available funding (something like: corporate, ACEU - TAC, ...) --- applying for 300 EUR or 600 EUR? - Announce on our mailing lists and in our forum that application process is open until ending date - announcement date should be at least 7 days ahead of the ending date. - The small group of volunteers collect the applications. The group selects not more than 10 and post the decision details on ooo-private. The selection process should not take more than 3 days. The selection should consider the following: -- Application shall hold the following conditions, otherwise it is invalid --- no corporate funding and no TAC funding --- travel expense must be at least 300 EUR --- accommodation needed for at least 2 nights -- The selection shall be based on the given description and the job/eduation status. -- Applications are selected in the following order: --- invited (accepted or stand-by) speakers --- committers --- non-committers - Send out corresponding notifications and details how to get the ticket discount. [Note: I will get in contact with treasu...@apache.org to assure ASF's charity status and clarify the actual spending of the money.] Taking the advice that the selection processes have to be traceable and auditable I propose that the applications should be sent to ooo-dev and that also the decision making and the final decision are done on ooo-dev, too. Best regards, Oliver.
i can't find the odfValidator.jar
Hello, i can't find the odfValidator.jar file as it mentionned on the web site. i just find a odfValidator.war could you tell me where i can find this file ? Best regards, -- Philippe Prat 04.67.14.14.39 CINES http://www.cines.fr france.
Re: [DISCUSS] [PMC] Proposed PMC List
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote: On 25 September 2012 06:15, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: I feel honored to be listed. I would like to help PMC if there is a chance. In any case, I suggest at least one female should be included in the PMC, to encourage the contribution of females in the community and bring diverse voices in PMC. It is very important to encourage more and more female contributors to join the community, and make them feel that OpenOffice is theirs', not of some male geeks. +1 broad representation is important. IMHO this is a bad idea and if we go down this route it demonstrates that we do not understand The Apache Way. The PMC *is not* representative. The PMC is inclusive of *all that show merit* for the things that the PMC is responsible for. To have a PMC based on representation suggests that members are included for things other than merit, or that other potential members are excluded based on representation concerns regardless of their demonstrated merit. Both are wrong. Of course, representation and balance in the project is important, but we should try to make gains there by encouraging contributors from all stakeholder groups. And if we are broad and inclusive of all stakeholder groups then, over time, this will lead to increased diversity in contributors, and eventually with contributors showing merit and PMC membership. So it comes naturally. But we need to aim for actual diversity in contributors, not some fake diversity via handpicked under-weighting and over-weighting of contributor groups based on factors other than merit. In other words, diversity is more than window dressing. -Rob -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ) www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.
Re: [DISCUSS] Repo in University Brazil
Hi. On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Fernando Cassia fcas...@gmail.com wrote: I think nobody can prevent you from creating local mirrors in the above universities. Yeah! However, SourceForge.net has its own set of mirrors, which mirror the entire SourceForge repository. I was saw. So if you expect to create local mirrors only of AOO and have these selected from the sourceforge.net servers, my guess is that it s impossible, as sourceforge.net redirects based on its pool of SF.net mirrors on a global (all projects) basis, not on a per-project basis. So I have to be the intermediary between the SF.net and the University? Albino
Re: [ApacheCon] BoF session on AOO community
Hi On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 1:46 AM, Peter Junge peter.ju...@gmx.org wrote: During ApacheCon Europe 2012 (ACEU 2012; http://apachecon.eu/), we will hold a 90-minute session on the state of the community. Our topic is as broad as the community and includes discussion on how to develop and further the community of contributors and users making up AOO. We hope you can be there and add your voice! We seldom have opportunity to meet in person, and this will be a great occasion to go over where we are as a community, what we need to do to improve the operations of the community, and what can be done by us all to take AOO to top-level status. Everyone is invited—and to encourage you further to participate, we hope to welcome the Apache mentors who are helping AOO move ahead. So good! At the moment, I'm responsible for this session but due to the fact that I'm located in Beijing I will not be able to attend in person. Hence, it would be great to find one or two volunteers to host this BoF session about the AOO community at the ApacheCon Europe. And I in Brazil, If you have a volunteer to go to the event. (: Enjoy the event well anyone. Albino
Re: OpenOffice 3.4.1
Hi. On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 9:07 PM, Errol Raymond r3whitme...@gmail.com wrote: I am new to OpenOffice, Welcome Errol. and want to install the new version. I currently have a imac-g5 ppc, and it is not supported on my architecture. Is there anyway to get around this issue? The extension DMG doesn't work in architecture ? I would like to effectively install, and contribute to OpenOffice. I waiting yes. Imac-g5: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMac_G5 Albino
Re: Fw: [Plugtest-org] Invitation for the Berlin 2012 plugfest
Hi. On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 4:24 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote: I have the pleasure to invite you on behalf of OpenDoc Society to participate in the 9th ODF Plugfest, a two day interoperability event on October 17th/18th 2012 kindly hosted by Bundesmin. fuer Wirtschaft und Technologie. Seems a good event, a penalty that is unavailable to me. We need events like this in Brazil. (: Albino
Re: [DISCUSS] [PMC] Proposed PMC List
On 25 September 2012 11:22, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote: On 25 September 2012 06:15, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: I feel honored to be listed. I would like to help PMC if there is a chance. In any case, I suggest at least one female should be included in the PMC, to encourage the contribution of females in the community and bring diverse voices in PMC. It is very important to encourage more and more female contributors to join the community, and make them feel that OpenOffice is theirs', not of some male geeks. +1 broad representation is important. IMHO this is a bad idea and if we go down this route it demonstrates that we do not understand The Apache Way. I don't think the idea of actively seeking broad representation is necessarily counter to the Apache Way. It depends on exactly how that representation is achieved. The PMC *is not* representative. The PMC is inclusive of *all that show merit* for the things that the PMC is responsible for. To have a PMC based on representation suggests that members are included for things other than merit, or that other potential members are excluded based on representation concerns regardless of their demonstrated merit. Both are wrong. I agree both are wrong. On the other hand I really hope that Imacat and others seek to address the issue of inclusion of all. Such work is, in itself, worthy of merit yet is often not recognised as such in software projects like those here in the ASF. Similarly, activities that limit the participation of others can destroy a project community. This can happen either intentionally (such behaviours have no place in an ASF project) or unintentionally (in which case such behaviours need to be corrected by the community). It's this latter situation that can be very hard to manage. It raises the question of does adherence to and enforcement of the code of conduct trump technical merit? [ASIDE: the Community Development PMC, d...@community.apache.org, are always looking to make the ASF more welcoming to all. There are some useful experiences there and the PMC is always looking for other ideas] Ross
Re: [CODE] gmake and AOO build system
On 24.09.2012 18:31, Andrew Rist wrote: On 9/24/2012 4:39 AM, Andre wrote: On 09/19/2012 09:58 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: Hi Andrew; - Original Message - ... I have been provided patches necessary to apply the following CWSes to AOO trunk: ause131 ause130 writerfilter10 gnumake4 sd2gbuild As I understand it this is mostly gbuild stuff that we did not want to apply to 3.4.x as it might destabilize the build. This was provided to me by Michael Stahl, and represents work done by Oracle emps when OOo was still at Oracle. Is there any resistance from checking in these patches? If I don't hear any opposition in 72 hours and the patches cleanly apply on my dev area, I will check in these changes. Not an objection at this point but this is likely to break transitorily the FreeBSD port. It would be helpful to see the patches before they are applied. Any news? (I just came back from my vacation) I put the patch up at http://people.apache.org/~arist/patches/ooo-gbuild-cws-patches.tar.gz Thanks. Do you know whether these patches can be applied without further changes? I just looked at some of the patch files and found some new files that introduce the old Oracle/GPL license header. At least this had to be changed. -Andre A. Andre Pedro.
Re: [DISCUSS] Repo in University Brazil
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 7:27 AM, Albino B Neto bin...@apache.org wrote: So I have to be the intermediary between the SF.net and the University? I don´t get what you mean by ´intermediary´. I suggest you get in touch with sourceforge and ask about mirroring just AOO, and see if they can add your new mirrors (just of AOO) to the list of SF.net mirror sites, but don´t know how that would work, technically. Otherwise, you can simply mirror the AOO files and point local users to those sites, but those downloads won´t be counted by the Sourceforge.net download stats... which poses an interesting statistical problem for the AOO project... ;) That´s why I´d suggest you get in touch with sf.net and ask... FC -- During times of Universal Deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act - George Orwell
Re: [DISCUSS] Repo in University Brazil
Hi. On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 7:58 AM, Fernando Cassia fcas...@gmail.com wrote: I don´t get what you mean by ´intermediary´. I suggest you get in touch with sourceforge and ask about mirroring just AOO, and see if they can add your new mirrors (just of AOO) to the list of SF.net mirror sites, but don´t know how that would work, technically. Thank you. Otherwise, you can simply mirror the AOO files and point local users to those sites, but those downloads won´t be counted by the Sourceforge.net download stats... which poses an interesting statistical problem for the AOO project... ;) If you must have statistics. (: But, In another location it is also possible to have statistics. That´s why I´d suggest you get in touch with sf.net and ask... Yes. Albino
Re: [DISCUSS] [PMC] Proposed PMC List
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: On 25 September 2012 11:22, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote: On 25 September 2012 06:15, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: I feel honored to be listed. I would like to help PMC if there is a chance. In any case, I suggest at least one female should be included in the PMC, to encourage the contribution of females in the community and bring diverse voices in PMC. It is very important to encourage more and more female contributors to join the community, and make them feel that OpenOffice is theirs', not of some male geeks. +1 broad representation is important. IMHO this is a bad idea and if we go down this route it demonstrates that we do not understand The Apache Way. I don't think the idea of actively seeking broad representation is necessarily counter to the Apache Way. It depends on exactly how that representation is achieved. Perhaps you missed my last paragraph where I talked specifically about seeking broad participation? The issue is not diversity. In fact Roy has stated quite bluntly that diversity in itself is not an issue with graduation. The issue is thinking of the PMC as a representative body, where participants represent some finer grained constituency and where the composition of the PMC is optimized to someone's view of what a proper distribution is, rather then on merit. If it is wrong for someone to claim to represent IBM then it is equally wrong for someone to claim to represent Asian women. We participate as individuals. IMHO we should be hearing the word representation a lot less when describing the PMC. It *is not* a representative body. Individuals participate based on their own merit, not as representatives of some other group of interest. We underestimate how radically different a meritocracy is if we do not grok this distinction. Or maybe you and Ian are using the word representation in some loose way? To note: the legacy OpenOffice.org project was representative, and some may be reverting to that mental model, of governance that had fixed set aside seats for specific representation, e.g., one person from the Calc project, one person from the NCL, one seat set aside for Sun, etc. The PMC *is not* representative. The PMC is inclusive of *all that show merit* for the things that the PMC is responsible for. To have a PMC based on representation suggests that members are included for things other than merit, or that other potential members are excluded based on representation concerns regardless of their demonstrated merit. Both are wrong. I agree both are wrong. On the other hand I really hope that Imacat and others seek to address the issue of inclusion of all. Such work is, in itself, worthy of merit yet is often not recognised as such in software projects like those here in the ASF. Inclusion != a representative PMC. Inclusion is about recruitment and ensuring that all merit is recognized. It is not about quotas. -Rob
Re: [DISCUSS] Repo in University Brazil
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Albino B Neto bin...@apache.org wrote: If you must have statistics. (: But, In another location it is also possible to have statistics. Perhaps others on this list have other opinions or comments... don´t get me wrong. I´m just an observer on this list and not related to SF.net or the AOO project administration... I´m just making an observation on how the SF.net mirroring system works, based on what I´ve seen (ie. all sf.netmirrors redirected by the sf.net download links seem to host the whole sf.net archive and not just a subset of it). FC -- During times of Universal Deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act - George Orwell
Re: svn commit: r1388877 - in /incubator/ooo/trunk/main: cui/source/dialogs/ cui/source/inc/ default_images/introabout/ default_images/res/ desktop/zipintro/ sd/source/ui/slideshow/ sfx2/inc/sfx2/ sfx
On 24.09.2012 21:12, Pavel Janík wrote: * and the using declaration: using namespace com::sun::star; The compiler should detect that system::XSystemShellExecute is com::sun::star::system::XSystemShellExecute and so on, unless it collides with a system namespace on the system's headers ? Anyway feel free to commit it, if this solves your problem. Your change looks fine. Please commit it. I'll wait for other's opinions, because I too thought that it should work as written (using c:s:s), weird. Other parts of the code use namespace css = com::sun::star; uno::Reference css::system::XSystemShellExecute xSystemShell(... despite the fact that using namespace com::sun::star is there as well. Maybe system is somehow strange. Any ideas about the strangeness? ;-) Hm, the only thing I can think of is the Koenig lookup that may be implemented differently on your compilers. But I assume that the two of you both tried this on Linux and thus probably on very similar compilers. -Andre
Re: [DISCUSS] [PMC] Proposed PMC List
On 9/25/12 1:10 PM, Rob Weir wrote: On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: On 25 September 2012 11:22, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote: On 25 September 2012 06:15, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: I feel honored to be listed. I would like to help PMC if there is a chance. In any case, I suggest at least one female should be included in the PMC, to encourage the contribution of females in the community and bring diverse voices in PMC. It is very important to encourage more and more female contributors to join the community, and make them feel that OpenOffice is theirs', not of some male geeks. +1 broad representation is important. IMHO this is a bad idea and if we go down this route it demonstrates that we do not understand The Apache Way. I don't think the idea of actively seeking broad representation is necessarily counter to the Apache Way. It depends on exactly how that representation is achieved. Perhaps you missed my last paragraph where I talked specifically about seeking broad participation? The issue is not diversity. In fact Roy has stated quite bluntly that diversity in itself is not an issue with graduation. The issue is thinking of the PMC as a representative body, where participants represent some finer grained constituency and where the composition of the PMC is optimized to someone's view of what a proper distribution is, rather then on merit. If it is wrong for someone to claim to represent IBM then it is equally wrong for someone to claim to represent Asian women. We participate as individuals. IMHO we should be hearing the word representation a lot less when describing the PMC. It *is not* a representative body. Individuals participate based on their own merit, not as representatives of some other group of interest. We underestimate how radically different a meritocracy is if we do not grok this distinction. Or maybe you and Ian are using the word representation in some loose way? To note: the legacy OpenOffice.org project was representative, and some may be reverting to that mental model, of governance that had fixed set aside seats for specific representation, e.g., one person from the Calc project, one person from the NCL, one seat set aside for Sun, etc. The PMC *is not* representative. The PMC is inclusive of *all that show merit* for the things that the PMC is responsible for. To have a PMC based on representation suggests that members are included for things other than merit, or that other potential members are excluded based on representation concerns regardless of their demonstrated merit. Both are wrong. I agree both are wrong. On the other hand I really hope that Imacat and others seek to address the issue of inclusion of all. Such work is, in itself, worthy of merit yet is often not recognised as such in software projects like those here in the ASF. Inclusion != a representative PMC. Inclusion is about recruitment and ensuring that all merit is recognized. It is not about quotas. I believe that we are all on the same track here more or less and I hope that we don't destroy this ongoing discussion on a PMC roster with too much nit-picking. The OpenOffice community had always a broader community and we welcome anybody as community member, as committer or as PMC member over time. We are open in all directions and the most important thing is that we drive things forward and don't stand idle. In the end we are mainly a software project. No software product means no project, no community, no committers, no PMC. And we are trying to address everything related to our project. So please let us continue to work and finish the things that are necessary to move forward. And any effort to grow in whatever direction is welcome. Simply start doing it and ideally talk and report about it that others have the chance to recognize it. I am a software developer, believe that I can motivate people in a community, can spread my knowledge about certain things but I am not a clairvoyant (as many others as well). So visibility of what you are doing is somewhat necessary to get recognition. Juergen
Re: svn commit: r1388877 - in /incubator/ooo/trunk/main: cui/source/dialogs/ cui/source/inc/ default_images/introabout/ default_images/res/ desktop/zipintro/ sd/source/ui/slideshow/ sfx2/inc/sfx2/ sfx
Hm, the only thing I can think of is the Koenig lookup that may be implemented differently on your compilers. But I assume that the two of you both tried this on Linux and thus probably on very similar compilers. I use Mac OS X, gcc 4.2.1 on the build machine. -- Pavel Janík
Re: [DISCUSS] [PMC] Proposed PMC List
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 7:43 AM, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote: On 9/25/12 1:10 PM, Rob Weir wrote: On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: On 25 September 2012 11:22, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote: On 25 September 2012 06:15, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: I feel honored to be listed. I would like to help PMC if there is a chance. In any case, I suggest at least one female should be included in the PMC, to encourage the contribution of females in the community and bring diverse voices in PMC. It is very important to encourage more and more female contributors to join the community, and make them feel that OpenOffice is theirs', not of some male geeks. +1 broad representation is important. IMHO this is a bad idea and if we go down this route it demonstrates that we do not understand The Apache Way. I don't think the idea of actively seeking broad representation is necessarily counter to the Apache Way. It depends on exactly how that representation is achieved. Perhaps you missed my last paragraph where I talked specifically about seeking broad participation? The issue is not diversity. In fact Roy has stated quite bluntly that diversity in itself is not an issue with graduation. The issue is thinking of the PMC as a representative body, where participants represent some finer grained constituency and where the composition of the PMC is optimized to someone's view of what a proper distribution is, rather then on merit. If it is wrong for someone to claim to represent IBM then it is equally wrong for someone to claim to represent Asian women. We participate as individuals. IMHO we should be hearing the word representation a lot less when describing the PMC. It *is not* a representative body. Individuals participate based on their own merit, not as representatives of some other group of interest. We underestimate how radically different a meritocracy is if we do not grok this distinction. Or maybe you and Ian are using the word representation in some loose way? To note: the legacy OpenOffice.org project was representative, and some may be reverting to that mental model, of governance that had fixed set aside seats for specific representation, e.g., one person from the Calc project, one person from the NCL, one seat set aside for Sun, etc. The PMC *is not* representative. The PMC is inclusive of *all that show merit* for the things that the PMC is responsible for. To have a PMC based on representation suggests that members are included for things other than merit, or that other potential members are excluded based on representation concerns regardless of their demonstrated merit. Both are wrong. I agree both are wrong. On the other hand I really hope that Imacat and others seek to address the issue of inclusion of all. Such work is, in itself, worthy of merit yet is often not recognised as such in software projects like those here in the ASF. Inclusion != a representative PMC. Inclusion is about recruitment and ensuring that all merit is recognized. It is not about quotas. I believe that we are all on the same track here more or less and I hope that we don't destroy this ongoing discussion on a PMC roster with too much nit-picking. Thanks for the reminder. I've said all I wanted to say on this topic. I'm done. Onward and upward! -Rob The OpenOffice community had always a broader community and we welcome anybody as community member, as committer or as PMC member over time. We are open in all directions and the most important thing is that we drive things forward and don't stand idle. In the end we are mainly a software project. No software product means no project, no community, no committers, no PMC. And we are trying to address everything related to our project. So please let us continue to work and finish the things that are necessary to move forward. And any effort to grow in whatever direction is welcome. Simply start doing it and ideally talk and report about it that others have the chance to recognize it. I am a software developer, believe that I can motivate people in a community, can spread my knowledge about certain things but I am not a clairvoyant (as many others as well). So visibility of what you are doing is somewhat necessary to get recognition. Juergen
Re: [DISCUSS] [PMC] Proposed PMC List
On 25 September 2012 12:10, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: On 25 September 2012 11:22, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote: On 25 September 2012 06:15, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: I feel honored to be listed. I would like to help PMC if there is a chance. In any case, I suggest at least one female should be included in the PMC, to encourage the contribution of females in the community and bring diverse voices in PMC. It is very important to encourage more and more female contributors to join the community, and make them feel that OpenOffice is theirs', not of some male geeks. +1 broad representation is important. IMHO this is a bad idea and if we go down this route it demonstrates that we do not understand The Apache Way. Demonstration of merit AND broad representation. Why these things should be mutually exclusive in a project the size of AOO is beyond me. It's not an either or it's a both. Since Apache is about community as well as code, merit can be gained by recruitment, maintaining a healthy community and maximising its growth. Apache is at least in part about inclusion according to the mentors so strategies for inclusion are just as much part of the Apache Way as merit. We should not be just cherry picking bits of the Apache Way that suit a particular perspective. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ) www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.
Re: OpenOffice in the browser?
On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Jesper Thomsen jes...@roozz.com wrote: Hi Regina, I am resending the message to this address as requested - I look forward to your feedback. Hi Jesper, Taking a look at your Roozz website, it looks like you would want to redistribute the binary packages for Apache OpenOffice, but probably not need to modify the code at the source level. If this is correct, then our open source license should give you the permissions that you need. See here: http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html In particular, no additional permission is needed to copy and redistribute OpenOffice. Note however that we do have dependencies on several other 3rd party libraries. These are included in our install and they come with their own terms. Check the LICENSE and NOTICE files that come with the install for details. Some of these licenses require that you propagate copyright notices, etc., into any derived product. You also asked about the name of the product. Do you have a preference here? Something like Roozz Office Suite Powered by Apache OpenOffice is what we normally request for derived products. But we have had cases where someone wants to repackage OpenOffice, with install-level changes, but no functional changes. After clarifying things related to labeling, support, and other factors related to user expectations, we were able to give permission to use the name Apache OpenOffice. If you want to explore that possibility in more detail, let us know. Regards, -Rob Regards, Jesper On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Jesper Thomsen jes...@roozz.com wrote: Hi Regina, Thanks a lot for your response. Let me try and answer your questions: Does this mean, that Apache OpenOffice needs to be installed and you use it when documents are shown/altered inside the browser? Or is it more like WebODF on client side? Are the documents editable inside the browser or is it a kind of ODF viewer? What this means, is that the user can simply run OpenOffice exactly as when the user runs the desktop version. They can edit and have access to exactly the same functionalities but they can run it right in any browser the prefer on any Windows operating system. As far as I know, it is not be possible to provide it from our site, unless your development becomes a project in Apache. We provide the source of Apache OpenOffice and some localized, ready to use binaries. Okay - thanks for that response. If possible, we are happy to distribute it from our various sites to new and existing user - so far some 1 million users have installed the Roozz plugin. As the ODF format becomes more and more known and Google has it as file type, such application might be useful. It is the purpose of the Apache license, that you can do all such exciting things with the code. And this mailing list is indeed the place, to get help if needed. That sounds good. So the Apache license would also allow us to distribute such an in-browser version from our own site, if I understand you correctly? Kind regards, Jesper On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Regina Henschel rb.hensc...@t-online.dewrote: Hi Jesper, Jesper Thomsen schrieb: Hi Apache Team, Apache Team is not the right term for us. We are individual persons belonging to the incubating OpenOffice project. Roozz is a Danish startup and we have a technology that can turn Windows desktop software into online browser versions running in any Windows OS and any browser. We think it could be great for your users to have OpenOffice as an in-browser version. We have so far not looked at converting it in detail, but we believe there are very good chances we can make it run at native performance. Does this mean, that Apache OpenOffice needs to be installed and you use it when documents are shown/altered inside the browser? Or is it more like WebODF on client side? Are the documents editable inside the browser or is it a kind of ODF viewer? Before we spend too much time, would you be interested in joining forces with us and provide such a version from your site? As far as I know, it is not be possible to provide it from our site, unless your development becomes a project in Apache. We provide the source of Apache OpenOffice and some localized, ready to use binaries. Alternatively, would be allowed to distribute it from our side using a name such as Roozz Office Suite Powered by Apache OpenOffice (or similar - as per the example on your site). There are of course no costs of any kind to you. I am excited to hear what you think of this - thanks in advance. As the ODF format becomes more and more known and Google has it as file type, such application might be useful. It is the purpose of the Apache license, that you can do all such exciting things with the code. And this mailing list is indeed the place, to get help if needed. Kind regards Regina -- Yours sincerely, Jesper Wendel
Re: [DISCUSS] [PMC] Proposed PMC List
On 9/25/12 2:49 PM, Ian Lynch wrote: On 25 September 2012 12:10, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: On 25 September 2012 11:22, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote: On 25 September 2012 06:15, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: I feel honored to be listed. I would like to help PMC if there is a chance. In any case, I suggest at least one female should be included in the PMC, to encourage the contribution of females in the community and bring diverse voices in PMC. It is very important to encourage more and more female contributors to join the community, and make them feel that OpenOffice is theirs', not of some male geeks. +1 broad representation is important. IMHO this is a bad idea and if we go down this route it demonstrates that we do not understand The Apache Way. Demonstration of merit AND broad representation. Why these things should be mutually exclusive in a project the size of AOO is beyond me. It's not an either or it's a both. Since Apache is about community as well as code, merit can be gained by recruitment, maintaining a healthy community and maximising its growth. Apache is at least in part about inclusion according to the mentors so strategies for inclusion are just as much part of the Apache Way as merit. We should not be just cherry picking bits of the Apache Way that suit a particular perspective. please Ian, this thread is not the best place to continue this discussion. And again we are all on the same train. We had a thread about What is a good Project Management Committee? and this is probably the better place. Juergen
Re: [CODE] gmake and AOO build system
Hi *, On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:56:32PM +0200, Andre Fischer wrote: I put the patch up at http://people.apache.org/~arist/patches/ooo-gbuild-cws-patches.tar.gz Thanks. Do you know whether these patches can be applied without further changes? I just looked at some of the patch files and found some new files that introduce the old Oracle/GPL license header. At least this had to be changed. At this point, wouldn't it be simpler if we create a branch, and Andrew, as Oracle representative, commits the patches? Then, everyone willing to contribute to include the code on trunk, can check it out and help fixing things on the platform they work. Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina pgpTv1Viu6tw6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Help us brainstorm ideas for Apache OpenOffice 4.0
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: As we perform the final preparations to release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 it is a good time to look ahead to the future. A big opportunity is OpenOffice 4.0. That once seemed so very far away, but 2013 is getting closer every day. Will it be a large collection of small ideas? Will it have a major overarching theme? Or will it just be whatever random stuff we happen to have on a given date when we release 4.0? The answer, of course, depends on what we, as project members/volunteers decide to do. It is a good time now, as a background activity, to poll the community and wider ecosystem on ideas for Apache OpenOffice 4.0. To participate, go to this page on Google Moderator, where you can help us gather and rate ideas: https://www.google.com/moderator/#16/e=2011d5 A few project members have already seeded this with some initial ideas. Of course, you are encouraged to add your own ideas, as well as rate the ideas of others. Try not to censor yourself from thinking outside-of-the-box. We need big ideas as well as incremental ones. We don't have a close date on this brainstorming activity, but it is good to get your ideas in early, so there is an opportunity for others to rate and comment on it. This brainstorming has been ongoing for 3 weeks now. So far, so good. The latest stats are: 533 people have submitted 456 ideas and cast 6,491 votes Today, a week later: 633 users - 527 ideas - 7,607 votes So we are still getting a good amount of feedback. I added a mention of this brainstorming on the www.openoffice.org website header. That should give this even more visibility. I've heard from some that it would be good to get to a point where we can take a snapshot of the feedback received, and process that, to help set priorities for AOO 4.0. Would it make sense to do that in another week, say on October 1st? At that point we can: 1) Put a thank you note on the Google Moderator page and stop accepting new suggestions. Point the users to the ooo-users or ooo-dev mailing list instead, 2) Export the ideas and scores received so far to a CSV file and archive that someplace. 3) Discuss the results received 4) Maybe a blog post to highlight the brainstorming activity and the results received? Any other ideas? I don't need to own any of this, but since I started it I'm willing to finish it. But if anyone else wants to take a lead on this, please volunteer. Regards, -Rob If you have not reviewed the new ideas recently, it would be worth taking another look. It is good that all ideas are rated, not just the ones that came in early. Maybe let it run to the end of September and then we can snapshot it and start analyzing the results? Or mid October? It would be good to wrap this up in advance of ApacheCon, so we can discuss further there. Regards, -Rob Regards, -Rob
Re: svn commit: r1388877 - in /incubator/ooo/trunk/main: cui/source/dialogs/ cui/source/inc/ default_images/introabout/ default_images/res/ desktop/zipintro/ sd/source/ui/slideshow/ sfx2/inc/sfx2/ sfx
Hi, Before I notice this discussion, I have already committed the fix code for this problem by revision 1389717. I also don't have an idea why it doesn't work. The fix code build passed on both Mac and Linux. Let me know if you have any concerns. regards, zhangjf On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 24.09.2012 21:12, Pavel Janík wrote: * and the using declaration: using namespace com::sun::star; The compiler should detect that system::XSystemShellExecute is com::sun::star::system::XSystemShellExecute and so on, unless it collides with a system namespace on the system's headers ? Anyway feel free to commit it, if this solves your problem. Your change looks fine. Please commit it. I'll wait for other's opinions, because I too thought that it should work as written (using c:s:s), weird. Other parts of the code use namespace css = com::sun::star; uno::Reference css::system::XSystemShellExecute xSystemShell(... despite the fact that using namespace com::sun::star is there as well. Maybe system is somehow strange. Any ideas about the strangeness? ;-) Hm, the only thing I can think of is the Koenig lookup that may be implemented differently on your compilers. But I assume that the two of you both tried this on Linux and thus probably on very similar compilers. -Andre
Re: Help us brainstorm ideas for Apache OpenOffice 4.0
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 09:27:04 -0400 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: As we perform the final preparations to release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 it is a good time to look ahead to the future. A big opportunity is OpenOffice 4.0. That once seemed so very far away, but 2013 is getting closer every day. Will it be a large collection of small ideas? Will it have a major overarching theme? Or will it just be whatever random stuff we happen to have on a given date when we release 4.0? The answer, of course, depends on what we, as project members/volunteers decide to do. It is a good time now, as a background activity, to poll the community and wider ecosystem on ideas for Apache OpenOffice 4.0. To participate, go to this page on Google Moderator, where you can help us gather and rate ideas: https://www.google.com/moderator/#16/e=2011d5 A few project members have already seeded this with some initial ideas. Of course, you are encouraged to add your own ideas, as well as rate the ideas of others. Try not to censor yourself from thinking outside-of-the-box. We need big ideas as well as incremental ones. We don't have a close date on this brainstorming activity, but it is good to get your ideas in early, so there is an opportunity for others to rate and comment on it. This brainstorming has been ongoing for 3 weeks now. So far, so good. The latest stats are: 533 people have submitted 456 ideas and cast 6,491 votes Today, a week later: 633 users - 527 ideas - 7,607 votes So we are still getting a good amount of feedback. I added a mention of this brainstorming on the www.openoffice.org website header. That should give this even more visibility. I've heard from some that it would be good to get to a point where we can take a snapshot of the feedback received, and process that, to help set priorities for AOO 4.0. Would it make sense to do that in another week, say on October 1st? We should close feedback nominaly at end of September. At that point we can: 1) Put a thank you note on the Google Moderator page and stop accepting new suggestions. Point the users to the ooo-users or ooo-dev mailing list instead, 2) Export the ideas and scores received so far to a CSV file and archive that someplace. This is probably the first step in the analysis of the feedback; many of the suggestions will amalgamate under more general headings, for example, suggestions for better doc/docx support will most probably amalgamate with suggestions for better MS format support. 3) Discuss the results received 4) Maybe a blog post to highlight the brainstorming activity and the results received? Any other ideas? After the analysis process perhaps list the top ten on the Google Moderator site, without committment that they will be progressed into AOO 4.0 I don't need to own any of this, but since I started it I'm willing to finish it. But if anyone else wants to take a lead on this, please volunteer. Regards, -Rob If you have not reviewed the new ideas recently, it would be worth taking another look. It is good that all ideas are rated, not just the ones that came in early. Maybe let it run to the end of September and then we can snapshot it and start analyzing the results? Or mid October? It would be good to wrap this up in advance of ApacheCon, so we can discuss further there. Regards, -Rob Regards, -Rob -- Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie
Re: [CODE] gmake and AOO build system
On 25.09.2012 15:21, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: Hi *, On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:56:32PM +0200, Andre Fischer wrote: I put the patch up at http://people.apache.org/~arist/patches/ooo-gbuild-cws-patches.tar.gz Thanks. Do you know whether these patches can be applied without further changes? I just looked at some of the patch files and found some new files that introduce the old Oracle/GPL license header. At least this had to be changed. At this point, wouldn't it be simpler if we create a branch, and Andrew, as Oracle representative, commits the patches? Then, everyone willing to contribute to include the code on trunk, can check it out and help fixing things on the platform they work. +1 Regards
Re: [DISCUSS] [PMC] Proposed PMC List
On 25 September 2012 14:20, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote: On 9/25/12 2:49 PM, Ian Lynch wrote: On 25 September 2012 12:10, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: On 25 September 2012 11:22, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote: On 25 September 2012 06:15, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: I feel honored to be listed. I would like to help PMC if there is a chance. In any case, I suggest at least one female should be included in the PMC, to encourage the contribution of females in the community and bring diverse voices in PMC. It is very important to encourage more and more female contributors to join the community, and make them feel that OpenOffice is theirs', not of some male geeks. +1 broad representation is important. IMHO this is a bad idea and if we go down this route it demonstrates that we do not understand The Apache Way. Demonstration of merit AND broad representation. Why these things should be mutually exclusive in a project the size of AOO is beyond me. It's not an either or it's a both. Since Apache is about community as well as code, merit can be gained by recruitment, maintaining a healthy community and maximising its growth. Apache is at least in part about inclusion according to the mentors so strategies for inclusion are just as much part of the Apache Way as merit. We should not be just cherry picking bits of the Apache Way that suit a particular perspective. please Ian, this thread is not the best place to continue this discussion. It is important to understand that the list is not decided on misconceptions. That is relevant to this thread. But I'll also post on the other thread. And again we are all on the same train. We had a thread about What is a good Project Management Committee? and this is probably the better place. Juergen -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ) www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.
Re: Help us brainstorm ideas for Apache OpenOffice 4.0
2012/9/25 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com On 9/25/12 3:27 PM, Rob Weir wrote: On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: As we perform the final preparations to release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 it is a good time to look ahead to the future. A big opportunity is OpenOffice 4.0. That once seemed so very far away, but 2013 is getting closer every day. Will it be a large collection of small ideas? Will it have a major overarching theme? Or will it just be whatever random stuff we happen to have on a given date when we release 4.0? The answer, of course, depends on what we, as project members/volunteers decide to do. It is a good time now, as a background activity, to poll the community and wider ecosystem on ideas for Apache OpenOffice 4.0. To participate, go to this page on Google Moderator, where you can help us gather and rate ideas: https://www.google.com/moderator/#16/e=2011d5 A few project members have already seeded this with some initial ideas. Of course, you are encouraged to add your own ideas, as well as rate the ideas of others. Try not to censor yourself from thinking outside-of-the-box. We need big ideas as well as incremental ones. We don't have a close date on this brainstorming activity, but it is good to get your ideas in early, so there is an opportunity for others to rate and comment on it. This brainstorming has been ongoing for 3 weeks now. So far, so good. The latest stats are: 533 people have submitted 456 ideas and cast 6,491 votes Today, a week later: 633 users - 527 ideas - 7,607 votes So we are still getting a good amount of feedback. I added a mention of this brainstorming on the www.openoffice.org website header. That should give this even more visibility. I've heard from some that it would be good to get to a point where we can take a snapshot of the feedback received, and process that, to help set priorities for AOO 4.0. Would it make sense to do that in another week, say on October 1st? At that point we can: 1) Put a thank you note on the Google Moderator page and stop accepting new suggestions. Point the users to the ooo-users or ooo-dev mailing list instead, 2) Export the ideas and scores received so far to a CSV file and archive that someplace. 3) Discuss the results received 4) Maybe a blog post to highlight the brainstorming activity and the results received? Any other ideas? not directly. We should analyze it first and should create some overall story out of it for our next release. I think this can help to prepare some marketing material in time for this release as well. It's time that we sell our work a little bit better ;-) I agree with all 4 points and I am willing to help them where I can. I expect point 3) will be a bigger item where hopefully many will participate and I am looking forward to this. I saw many interesting stuff already. I'm also willing to help. I think we can break down the work and each people take different topics to categorize the ideas and count the vote. - Simon Juergen I don't need to own any of this, but since I started it I'm willing to finish it. But if anyone else wants to take a lead on this, please volunteer. Regards, -Rob If you have not reviewed the new ideas recently, it would be worth taking another look. It is good that all ideas are rated, not just the ones that came in early. Maybe let it run to the end of September and then we can snapshot it and start analyzing the results? Or mid October? It would be good to wrap this up in advance of ApacheCon, so we can discuss further there. Regards, -Rob Regards, -Rob
Re: What is a good Project Management Committee?
The Apache Way came up on the PMC list thread. Is the Apache Way exclusively about certain types of merit and not about any other factor or attribute? It seems from what mentors have written that community is a big part of the Apache Way and merit in building the community is important as well as the characteristics needed to sustain a strong community. The acknowledged problem with merit is that it is difficult to be sure how to measure it, it seems to be more a consensus thing. If two community members have similar merit and there is only one place on the PMC, what determines which one is chosen? We can't determine merit to a high degree of measured precision. It is a strawman argument to say someone will be included on the PMC without merit, that has never been a consideration. If we assume all members of the PMC have appropriate merit, other considerations will come into play and it seems to me that that has no conflict with the Apache Way. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ) www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.
Re: [RELEASE] 3.5, 4.0, fixpack, milestone build...
2012/9/24 Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net Rob Weir wrote: On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Shenfeng Liu liush...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, all, After 3.4.1, we are focusing on preparation of the community graduation. But I still want to remind us to take some time to think about our future releases. We have the discussion early about what 3.5 and 4.0 should look like. If I remember correctly: (1) 3.5 should be more about fidelity, reliability, performance and translation, new platform support... (2) While 4.0, in addition to the same focuses as 3.5, should also add significant UX enhancements (e.g. sidebar, modern UI) and new values (e.g. Accessibility, social integration capability, enhanced installer, new features...). If we make good progress on those items at the same time, we may consider to skip 3.5. (3) There are also more requirements (e.g. fixpack mechanism, simplifying the build structure, OOMXL export, smartArt...) we need to put into our backlog and consider their priority. Even we don't need to discuss the solid plan now, but there are already a lot of development activities on the trunk. So I think we need to keep certain track on it. Though it may be too early to set a target date for the next release, but it is important for us to tell more about what we think the next release should contain. So I'm suggesting the following: 1. Keep updating the current release planning wiki: - https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** AOO+3.5+Release+Planninghttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.5+Release+Planning - https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** AOO+4.0+Release+Planninghttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Planning I know it is a little confusing for 2 places to input. But think about the scope we agreed above. You can input to the wiki that you think your work belong to. I personally will monitor both wiki pages. 2. Figure out a better way to manage our release backlog. e.g. set Target Milestone to 3.5 or 4.0 in Bugzilla for what we recommended. 3. Deliver milestone builds to harvest our development fruits. A milestone build is: (a) a development snapshot that contains the features/enhancements that implemented till now; (b) passed regression test to ensure no severe defects; (c) announced on a development wiki; (d) with documents on the wiki for the list of features and bug fixes in this milestone build (like a release notes). Since whatever 3.5 or 4.0 sounds to me like some thing in next year or at least close to the end of this year, milestone builds can be light weigh on process to show our development progress, and give people a more clear view on how far are we to the next release. Looking forward every one's comments! Maybe also start a release notes page on the wiki. Whenever a new feature or important bug fix is added to the trunk also add something to the release notes. If something can be show with a before and after screen shot, include that. This might be easier than waiting until the end to prepare the release notes. -Rob - Simon Rob; A Release Notes page already exists or 3.5 and one or 4.0 can be easily added. The complication I see here is since we have not decided whether the next release will be 3.5 or 4.0 that would require adding it in two places. I see that as a lot of overhead at this point. IMHO, the name is not so important. Everything in the trunk goes into the next release. Nothing not in the trunk goes into the next release. So if we want a wiki page that is called Release notes for AOO Target January 2013 then it would be sufficient. Just describe significant changes there made in the trunk. Maybe in the end we call it Apache OpenOffice 2013, or Apache OpenOffice Adventitious Armadillo or something like that. That decision can come later. -Rob In that case lets use the existing 3.5 Release Notes as Armin has already put a number of entries in there the name can be change to protect the innocent later. +1 to use the existing 3.5 Release Notes wiki. And I just made a query in BZ, for defects fixed after 3.4 (May 8), and excluded (1) some Products as qa, www, (2) those Target Milestone set to 3.4.1, and (3) Issue Type not in (DEFECT, FEATURE, ENHANCEMENT). And I got about 500 results. I picked some of them in the list and believe there are still many items need to be taken out, e.g. those fixed 1 year ago, but just validated recently. So I think I can quickly go through them, and for those who are really fixed/implemented in trunk after 3.4 and not in 3.4.1, I will set the Target Milestone to AOO 3.5.0. And this list can be a base for our release notes. How do you
Re: What is a good Project Management Committee?
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote: The Apache Way came up on the PMC list thread. Is the Apache Way exclusively about certain types of merit and not about any other factor or attribute? It seems from what mentors have written that community is a big part of the Apache Way and merit in building the community is important as well as the characteristics needed to sustain a strong community. The acknowledged problem with merit is that it is difficult to be sure how to measure it, it seems to be more a consensus thing. If two community members have similar merit and there is only one place on the PMC, what determines which one is That is a problem with a representational system. Who do you pick in that case? My point is that this is not a real problem once we put aside the (IMHO) incorrect view that a PMC is allocated on a representational basis. If you have two community members with similar merit, then both should be on the PMC. No question about it. IMHO we should reject the notion that there are finite seats on the PMC and we need to allocate them on a representational basis. We can never have enough help, enough merit, enough volunteers. Or at least we're no where near the scale where we need to think about PMC size limits. My guess is we'd be encouraged to split into separate Apache projects before we would be encouraged to limit PMC membership based on size limitations. Finally, note that what Andrew is doing in this thread is *not* limiting the size of the PMC. It was seeding an initial list of PMC members, so that that initial membership can then evolve the PMC membership further. At least that is how I understood it. Start with those of undoubted merit. Then that group can deliberate and bring in anyone who was missed. And no doubt we did miss some, since the quiet contributor tends to be overlooked. But I'd fully expect that this initial PMC list, via Andrew's method, would deal with that before a roster is proposed for graduation. -Rob chosen? We can't determine merit to a high degree of measured precision. It is a strawman argument to say someone will be included on the PMC without merit, that has never been a consideration. If we assume all members of the PMC have appropriate merit, other considerations will come into play and it seems to me that that has no conflict with the Apache Way. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ) www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.
Re: [REQUEST] Apache OpenOffice (incubating) - fund allocation for ACEU 2012
Hi Chris, again Thanks for your feedback. On 25.09.2012 16:18, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: Hi Oliver, Thanks! Comments below: On Sep 25, 2012, at 1:17 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: [..snip...] (1a) If not, do you have any recommendation how the money should be spent? (2) What are the possibilities to spend the travel expense subsidy money? (2a) Do you have a recommendation how the money should be spent? Regarding the above, I'd say come up with a process that is documented, you guys decide how you want to spend it, come up with a Bill or someone to pay, provide that information to the Treasurer@ list (me and Sam) and we'll move forward with the approval process. Right now, our bills are paid by having someone with the appropriate karma put a file in: https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/financials/Bills/received/ Then, they are reviewed by someone with the appropriate budget authority (e.g., in Travel I believe that's Jim since he's the President) and then placed in: https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/financials/Bills/approved/ At that point, the Treasurer's office can pay the bill (via wire transfer; electronic funds deposit, etc.) provided that all the information is given to address the payee, and then once we pay, we move the bill into: https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/financials/Bills/paid/ I do not think that we will real bills that need to be paid as the granted travel expense subsidy will in general cover only a part of the overall travel expenses. Is it possible that the treasurer pay money based on the granting process and a final confirmation note to the Treasurer@ list? Well I think the point is that I need something to appear in Bills/received/ in order to pay something. So, IOW, RE: travel grants and so forth, we can offer to use our money to reimburse things like airfare, or hotel, or, we probably can figure out a way to simply send $$$ to someone, but we'd need payment information for them somehow that would probably best fit into the workflow to show up in ./Bills/received (even if it's not a bill, and simply a request to pay). That way the President can review it, approve it, and then I or Sam Ruby (Asst Treasurer) can pay it. Make sense? I am somehow believing that I know how the spending is working and what are the preconditions and the needs. But I am not 100% sure. Thus, let me allow to present my concrete idea, which I have in mind: my idea When a certain travel expense subsidy application has been accepted, we will ask the person to provide corresponding payment information to Treasurer@ list. Treasurer@ list can receive confirmation from ooo-dev that the person's application has been accepted for amount 300 EUR or 600 EUR. Thus, an entry into the received folder can be created. On the ApacheCon EU 2012 the person comes to a Treasurer@ or selected ooo-dev representative to confirm that she/he is attending and that she/he has spent certain travel expenses. Treasurer@ or selected ooo-dev rep. can then approve the payment -- formerly created entry is moved from received folder to approved folder. The Treasurer@ pays the 300 EUR resp. 600 EUR according to the payment information -- entry is moved from approved to paid. /my idea Is something like this or similar working? As far as I understood we need the following: - an accepted application (full name and amount from the granting process) and payment information for an entry in received. - confirmation that travel expenses are spent for ApacheCon EU 2012 to get the entry into approved. Do I have the correct understanding? Best regards, Oliver.
Re: What is a good Project Management Committee?
On 9/25/12 4:39 PM, Ian Lynch wrote: The Apache Way came up on the PMC list thread. Is the Apache Way exclusively about certain types of merit and not about any other factor or attribute? It seems from what mentors have written that community is a big part of the Apache Way and merit in building the community is important as well as the characteristics needed to sustain a strong community. The acknowledged problem with merit is that it is difficult to be sure how to measure it, it seems to be more a consensus thing. If two community members have similar merit and there is only one place on the PMC, what determines which one is chosen? We can't determine merit to a high degree of measured precision. It is a strawman argument to say someone will be included on the PMC without merit, that has never been a consideration. If we assume all members of the PMC have appropriate merit, other considerations will come into play and it seems to me that that has no conflict with the Apache Way. I think that is clear to most people here and of course community building is an important part in an open source project. Not only at Apache and of course it is not really new. And I think we welcome anybody who will concentrate on this only and will help to grow our community. And we will welcome any kind of contribution in this area independent if it is a one time shot or a continuous and ongoing effort. And the really important part is how to recognize this contributions which is the challenge in any community. We learned at Apache that everything happened on the mailing list or didn't happened at all. Mmmh, very strange I think and from my perspective not always possible. But I believe that it is possible to wrap up any kind of action, contribution, activity that goes in community building or whatever on this mailing list that is the central place in our project according the Apache way. I expect that if we don't recognize this kind of contribution that people make us aware of it. We can't see anything, especially not when it is not reported or communicated here on the list by whomsoever. This is no failure as long as we take the appropriate actions afterwards. And I believe we don't have a limited count of seats (or places if you want to name it this way) in our PMC. If somebody merits the membership I hope we will recognize it over time. We are for sure not perfect yet and will never be but I am sure that we will learn and grow over time. Juergen
Re: Fw: [Plugtest-org] Invitation for the Berlin 2012 plugfest
Hi, On 24.09.2012 21:24, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote: Forwarded with the permission of the author, inviting members of the AOO community to attend this worthy event. A similar presentation to the one which I had submitted together with Svante Schubert for the ApacheCon EU 2012 will be given at this ODF Plugfest. Please see [1] for the complete program. Unfortunately, I will not attend in person due to a my vacation with my family. [1] http://plugfest.opendocsociety.org/doku.php?id=plugfests:201210_berlin:info Best regards, Oliver. Regards, -Rob - Forwarded by Robert Weir/Cambridge/IBM on 09/24/2012 03:20 PM - From: Michiel Leenaars michiel...@opendocsociety.org To: ODF Plugfest mailinglist plugt...@opendocsociety.org, Cc: plugtest-organis...@opendocsociety.org Date: 09/21/2012 08:45 AM Subject:[Plugtest-org] Invitation for the Berlin 2012 plugfest Sent by:plugtest-organisers-boun...@opendocsociety.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dear recipient, I have the pleasure to invite you on behalf of OpenDoc Society to participate in the 9th ODF Plugfest, a two day interoperability event on October 17th/18th 2012 kindly hosted by Bundesmin. fuer Wirtschaft und Technologie. The event is held in conjunction with the annual LibreOffice Conference, also to be held in Berlin at the same venue. The ODF plugfests are a platform where different stakeholders around Open Document Format join together to combine their knowledge and technical experience on the details of ODF to improve product, interoperability and in the end, customer satisfaction. Previous plugfests have proven to be a useful instrument for vendors to evaluate the interoperability between each others product in a private setting. On the first day a series of presentations will update you on the status of ODF, present some new RD projects and highlight improvements and lessons learned in a number of implementations. On the second day the actual testing will take place with vendors and users going through several scenarios for creating and importing ODF documents. Sitting side by side, the compatibility of documents between applications in these scenario's can be easily checked and openly discussed in the privacy of the workshop. It is essential to have all stakeholders with an interest in ODF engaged in furthering the implementation of ODF. We hope that you will send a delegation or attend as a person, as well as participate directly in the process.Past experience has shown developers and technical management from larger and smaller vendors as well as community leaders have valued the chance to attend and work on real world interoperability. The meeting host kindly asks you to register at http://odfplugfest.org no later than October 8th, 2012, with your name and address. They apologize for the inconvenience, which is due to security regulations in ministry buildings. There is no fee required to participate in the ODF plugfest, courtesy of OpenDoc Society. When you register, please be so kind as to inform us in the comments in case you are registering for the LibreOffice conference as well. This will help us to avoid double registrations. There are still some sponsor opportunities to help make the event even more attractive, please contact OpenDoc Society for more details (i...@opendocsociety.org). If you yourself are not able to attend this plugfest, but are aware of other representatives from your organisation that are, can you please forward this information to them? We will gladly help you out with any questions, and are happy to provide assistance with a visa application. Please visit: http://odfplugfest.org or contact: plugtest-organis...@opendocsociety.org We hope to see you in Berlin! Regards, on behalf of the plugfest organisers Michiel Leenaars OpenDoc Society N.B. If you want to host or help organise the 10th ODF plugfest, please contact us at i...@opendocsociety.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAlBcYUkACgkQPPKB2FVlk19J0wCfT2vR8hmNuCGzc/UZm8V8UiDX J1wAnilprbEY1ZtoPAxQgDkPDszb8Ber =IuxB -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ plugtest-organisers mailing list plugtest-organis...@opendocsociety.org https://open.nlnet.nl/mailman/listinfo/plugtest-organisers
Re: [CODE] gmake and AOO build system
+1 Specially since this code is orphaned and no one will be taking responsibility for fixing breakage. From: Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 8:21 AM Subject: Re: [CODE] gmake and AOO build system Hi *, On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:56:32PM +0200, Andre Fischer wrote: I put the patch up at http://people.apache.org/~arist/patches/ooo-gbuild-cws-patches.tar.gz Thanks. Do you know whether these patches can be applied without further changes? I just looked at some of the patch files and found some new files that introduce the old Oracle/GPL license header. At least this had to be changed. At this point, wouldn't it be simpler if we create a branch, and Andrew, as Oracle representative, commits the patches? Then, everyone willing to contribute to include the code on trunk, can check it out and help fixing things on the platform they work. Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina
Re: [REQUEST] Apache OpenOffice (incubating) - fund allocation for ACEU 2012
Hi Chris, nice ping-pong communication :-) On 25.09.2012 17:09, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: Hey Oliver, On Sep 25, 2012, at 8:02 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: Hi Chris, again Thanks for your feedback. Same to you! Comments below: [..snip..] Well I think the point is that I need something to appear in Bills/received/ in order to pay something. So, IOW, RE: travel grants and so forth, we can offer to use our money to reimburse things like airfare, or hotel, or, we probably can figure out a way to simply send $$$ to someone, but we'd need payment information for them somehow that would probably best fit into the workflow to show up in ./Bills/received (even if it's not a bill, and simply a request to pay). That way the President can review it, approve it, and then I or Sam Ruby (Asst Treasurer) can pay it. Make sense? I am somehow believing that I know how the spending is working and what are the preconditions and the needs. But I am not 100% sure. Thus, let me allow to present my concrete idea, which I have in mind: my idea When a certain travel expense subsidy application has been accepted, we will ask the person to provide corresponding payment information to Treasurer@ list. Treasurer@ list can receive confirmation from ooo-dev that the person's application has been accepted for amount 300 EUR or 600 EUR. Thus, an entry into the received folder can be created. Sounds right. On the ApacheCon EU 2012 the person comes to a Treasurer@ or selected ooo-dev representative to confirm that she/he is attending and that she/he has spent certain travel expenses. Treasurer@ or selected ooo-dev rep. can then approve the payment -- formerly created entry is moved from received folder to approved folder. Yep. Sounds good to me, and sounds like Ross as the EVP thinks this is fine too. You may want to add a CC to president@ and operations@ to keep them in the loop in addition to sending to treasurer@. The Treasurer@ pays the 300 EUR resp. 600 EUR according to the payment information -- entry is moved from approved to paid. /my idea Yep that works. Is something like this or similar working? You got it! As far as I understood we need the following: - an accepted application (full name and amount from the granting process) and payment information for an entry in received. - confirmation that travel expenses are spent for ApacheCon EU 2012 to get the entry into approved. Do I have the correct understanding? Yep! Thanks for the concrete description. great. Something which is not urgent and can be clarified later. It would be great to have it at hand when the accepted application notifications are sent out: What kind of data for which payment type is needed? Thanks and best regards, Oliver.
[code][cft] Raptor update
Hello; I spent some time updating Raptor1 which was badly outdated and this new patch should work well on all platforms: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121083 FWIW, adapting newer versions of the redland support to use the AOO buildsystem is rather painful so I think this is the best we can do for a while. I don't really use the code though (FreeBSD uses Raptor2 already) but Windows and Mac users should benefit from the bugfixes. I think it's safe but I won't commit this. Hopefully someone else will take over. enjoy, Pedro.
Re: [CODE] gmake and AOO build system
On 9/25/2012 3:56 AM, Andre Fischer wrote: On 24.09.2012 18:31, Andrew Rist wrote: On 9/24/2012 4:39 AM, Andre wrote: On 09/19/2012 09:58 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: Hi Andrew; - Original Message - ... I have been provided patches necessary to apply the following CWSes to AOO trunk: ause131 ause130 writerfilter10 gnumake4 sd2gbuild As I understand it this is mostly gbuild stuff that we did not want to apply to 3.4.x as it might destabilize the build. This was provided to me by Michael Stahl, and represents work done by Oracle emps when OOo was still at Oracle. Is there any resistance from checking in these patches? If I don't hear any opposition in 72 hours and the patches cleanly apply on my dev area, I will check in these changes. Not an objection at this point but this is likely to break transitorily the FreeBSD port. It would be helpful to see the patches before they are applied. Any news? (I just came back from my vacation) I put the patch up at http://people.apache.org/~arist/patches/ooo-gbuild-cws-patches.tar.gz Thanks. Do you know whether these patches can be applied without further changes? I just looked at some of the patch files and found some new files that introduce the old Oracle/GPL license header. At least this had to be changed. And thus why I am involved - I expect to check in, followed by header update. A. -Andre A. Andre Pedro.
[PMC] PMC List Result
I have collected up all the feedback and will summarize here. I will send a follow on email with some proposals for the next step. I think this exercise was quite useful and will help identify the way forward. * I have checked in my spreadsheet compiling all the lists to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/pmc/pmc-selection/PMCNominations.ods - and pasted below * A total of 36 people were identified on at least one list * A total of 23 people made more than 3 lists. * Because this list seems pretty representative of the project, it also represents the diversity of the project - in terms of geographic distribution, project function distribution, skill set distribution (and gender, also) Here is the table - don't know if the text email format will munge the formatting: arist pfg kschenk khirano jsc orw robweir rgb-es regina marcus mayongl pj ingotian pescetti thegurkha louis zhangjf wolfhalton arielch wave jza Jürgen Schmidt (jsc)17 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Pedro Giffuni (pfg) 16 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Andrea Pescetti (pescetti) 15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Drew Jensen (atjensen) 12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ariel Constenla-Haile (arielch) 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Donald Harbison (dpharbison)11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 RGB.ES (rgb-es) 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Andrew Rist (arist) 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Dave Fisher (wave) 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Kay Schenk (kschenk)7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann (orw)7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Regina Henschel (regina)7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Roberto Galoppini (galoppini) 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Yang Shih-Ching (imacat)7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Andre Fischer (af) 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 Kazunari Hirano (khirano) 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 Peter Junge (pj)6 1 1 1 1 1 1 Louis Suarez-Potts (louis) 5 1 1 1 1 1 Marcus Lange (marcus) 5
WaE: sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx
Hi, the current build is almost WaE clean. Module sw contains this warning: sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx: In member function ‘void WW8_WrtBookmarks::MoveFieldMarks(sal_uLong, sal_uLong)’: sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:315: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions Please fix this. Thanks. -- Pavel Janík
Draft Blog Post: Use the Source, Luke
https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=use_the_source_luke Could use the usual proof reading. Also, specific requests: 1) Anyone have a recent KLOC estimate for the source code? 2) Any other recent non-end-user product uses that we should highlight? -Rob
WaE: sd/source/ui/slideshow/slideshowimpl.cxx
Hi, this code emits Warning about unused bLoad: bool bLoad = vcl::ImageRepository::loadBrandingImage( rtl::OUString( RTL_CONSTASCII_USTRINGPARAM( logo ) ), aImage ); OSL_ENSURE( bLoad, Can't load logo image); Can't we OSL_ENSURE that aImage is initialized properly instead? -- Pavel Janík
Re: Openoffice.org
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Edward Morrow edwardjmor...@gmail.comwrote: IT KEEPS CRASHING EVERY TIME I TRY TO DO ANYTHING AND I MEAN ANY THING WITH THE PROGRAM. First please fix your keyboard. It seems the caps lock key is stuck. ;) Second, your post is as useful as going to a mechanic and saying this car is broken, and not providing any additional detals. Please tell us what is the error message that you are getting and when do the crashes happen, while loading files, when saving, while working with a document? Is there any error message displayed after the crash? what does it say? What is your operating system (Windows XP, Windows Vista, Win7, ? Linux? Mac OS X?). With that information someone will be able to help you... FC -- During times of Universal Deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act - George Orwell
Re: Openoffice.org
Hello Edward, On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 01:26:48PM -0400, Edward Morrow wrote: I have had Open Office on my computer for over five years and I would like to say : your source code really sucks since you let Apache take over. I'm really sorry you are having troubles. On the other hand, I'm happy you could read the code, it's rather huge and complicated :) I haven't been able to use Open Office since they put their name on the product because IT KEEPS CRASHING EVERY TIME I TRY TO DO ANYTHING AND I MEAN ANY THING WITH THE PROGRAM. It seems you are facing the issue described in the release notes: http://www.openoffice.org/development/releases/3.4.1.html#AOO3.4.1ReleaseNotes-KnownIssues Apache OpenOffice 3.4.0 and 3.4.1 manage the user profile differently than previous versions. The old user profile is automatically converted so that users can keep their extensions and settings. In a minority of cases, especially with highly customized profiles (many extensions or customizations) the conversion doesn't succeed, Common symptoms are. frequent application crashes, problems with dictionaries or thesaurus, OpenOffice starting and crashing after a few seconds. To solve this, just reset/rename your user profile as explained in the official OpenOffice forum. http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12426 Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina pgpFwyDcckp6W.pgp Description: PGP signature
[PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process
I would like to propose the following list as the initial PMC for Apache OpenOffice, with a procedure for consolidating this list into a final list. * The list is made up of the names that received more than 3 nominations. This was a spot in the data that had a step. This produces a list of 23 names which is 'no too big, and not too small'. * We will reach out on list to the people on the list to verify their interest and commitment to the PMC. This may result in the removal of several names. * I want to avoid too much discussion on individual names, as all of the people who received nominations (and some who did not) have given a lot to this project. If there is a particular person who is missing from the list, who has overwhelming merit, they should be added to the list through a consensus process. * Note that this will be the initial PMC, and that one of the functions of the PMC going forward will be to identify those of considerable merit and add them to the PMC, continually refreshing the PMC to represent the project. Proposed Process: * 48 hour window to build consensus on this process moving forward (Tues-Wed) * 48 hour (+48 hour weekend) discussion period (Thurs-Fri + Sat Sun) - stabilization of the finalized Initial PMC List * 72 hour vote on the resulting list as the initial PMC list (ending next Wed.) Proposed Working List: Andre Fischer (af) Andrea Pescetti (pescetti) Andrew Rist (arist) Ariel Constenla-Haile (arielch) Armin Le Grand (alg) Dave Fisher (wave) Donald Harbison (dpharbison) Drew Jensen (atjensen) Ian Lynch (ingotian) Jürgen Schmidt (jsc) Kay Schenk (kschenk) Kazunari Hirano (khirano) Louis Suarez-Potts (louis) Marcus Lange (marcus) Oliver-Rainer Wittmann (orw) Pedro Giffuni (pfg) Peter Junge (pj) Raphael Bircher (rbircher) Regina Henschel (regina) RGB.ES (rgb-es) Roberto Galoppini (galoppini) Yang Shih-Ching (imacat) Yong Lin Ma (mayongl)
[Call for review] improvements for linear/axial gradients #120604 and #120957
Hi all, I have attached patches to https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120957 and https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120604 They change the blending so, that first color is start color, last color is end color and they set the number of steps to 2 * number in UI in case of style 'axial', as discussed here some time ago. My coding skills are not professional and the Draw module is confusing, so please have a look. Kind regards Regina
Re: [PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process
Hi at all I think, we should also ask this people, if they are willing to contribute to the PMC. I find this realy important. A short statement from everyone on the list would be nice. Maybe also with a Comment if s/he is willing to take over a PMC Chair. Greetings Raphael Am 25.09.12 20:35, schrieb Andrew Rist: I would like to propose the following list as the initial PMC for Apache OpenOffice, with a procedure for consolidating this list into a final list. * The list is made up of the names that received more than 3 nominations. This was a spot in the data that had a step. This produces a list of 23 names which is 'no too big, and not too small'. * We will reach out on list to the people on the list to verify their interest and commitment to the PMC. This may result in the removal of several names. * I want to avoid too much discussion on individual names, as all of the people who received nominations (and some who did not) have given a lot to this project. If there is a particular person who is missing from the list, who has overwhelming merit, they should be added to the list through a consensus process. * Note that this will be the initial PMC, and that one of the functions of the PMC going forward will be to identify those of considerable merit and add them to the PMC, continually refreshing the PMC to represent the project. Proposed Process: * 48 hour window to build consensus on this process moving forward (Tues-Wed) * 48 hour (+48 hour weekend) discussion period (Thurs-Fri + Sat Sun) - stabilization of the finalized Initial PMC List * 72 hour vote on the resulting list as the initial PMC list (ending next Wed.) Proposed Working List: Andre Fischer (af) Andrea Pescetti (pescetti) Andrew Rist (arist) Ariel Constenla-Haile (arielch) Armin Le Grand (alg) Dave Fisher (wave) Donald Harbison (dpharbison) Drew Jensen (atjensen) Ian Lynch (ingotian) Jürgen Schmidt (jsc) Kay Schenk (kschenk) Kazunari Hirano (khirano) Louis Suarez-Potts (louis) Marcus Lange (marcus) Oliver-Rainer Wittmann (orw) Pedro Giffuni (pfg) Peter Junge (pj) Raphael Bircher (rbircher) Regina Henschel (regina) RGB.ES (rgb-es) Roberto Galoppini (galoppini) Yang Shih-Ching (imacat) Yong Lin Ma (mayongl)
Re: OpenOffice 3.4.1
Am 09/25/2012 02:07 AM, schrieb Errol Raymond: I am new to OpenOffice, and want to install the new version. I currently have a imac-g5 ppc, and it is not supported on my architecture. Is there anyway to get around this issue? Currently we don't offer any builds for MacOS X on the PPC platform as it was the case with OOo 3.3.0 and older releases. And to be honest, I don't think that we will do it with newer releases. This platform is - from the today's point of view - too old and we have nobody here in the project that would support it. To support it means taking the source code, building the installable files, do detailed QA tests to verify its stability. I would like to effectively install, and contribute to OpenOffice. Finally, I can just offer you the most recent OOo legacy release (3.3.0 and older) for the PPC platform and hope it's available for your favorite language: http://www.openoffice.org/download/legacy/other.html HTH Marcus
[DISCUSS][PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process
My recommendation: 48-hour steps are too short. Take at least 72 minimums, state fixed UTC earliest-end date-times (so no one has to figure out when from now is), and maybe skip over weekend days. There's no rush. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Andrew Rist [mailto:andrew.r...@oracle.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 11:36 To: ooo-dev Subject: [PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process [ ... ] Proposed Process: * 48 hour window to build consensus on this process moving forward (Tues-Wed) * 48 hour (+48 hour weekend) discussion period (Thurs-Fri + Sat Sun) - stabilization of the finalized Initial PMC List * 72 hour vote on the resulting list as the initial PMC list (ending next Wed.) [ ... ]
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] maybe time for a home page facelift?
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: With our graduation coming up soon, it might be time for us to consider a slight update to the user portal web site -- http://www.openoffice.org/ -- for this momentous occasion. To this end, I've moved some entities to the test directory, and updated robots.txt to not index this directory. I've wanted to fix some of the styling for a while to deal with horizontal placement issues, but I'm sure some of you have some ideas as well. Maybe a wiki page would be a good idea as well to present graphic mockups of ideas. Good topic to bring up. With graduation we'll have to think about changes to two websites. www.openoffice.org, of course. But also our project website, which will end up at openoffice.apache.org. The mailing lists will also update, e.g., ooo-dev@i.a.o -- d...@openoffice.apache.org. Our subversion tree changes as well. Ditto for Apache dist directory. So that leads to several sets of website changes: 1) Any rebranding we need/want to do, e.g. remove incubator disclaimer and references. There was talk at one point about refreshing the logo design at this time as well. 2) Updating URL's, email list address, SVN and dist directory references. There may be others. This is pretty much a search replace operation. 3) Any work to freshen the website UI. IMHO it is always a good time to improve the website ;-) I wonder if it would be a good time to rethink the default font on the website. Look at our plain text versus Mozilla's website, which uses OpenSans (Apache 2.0 License): http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/features/ http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Open+Sans To me this is much more legible than our current font (Liberation?) Regards, -Rob So...get your creative juices flowing and let's see what we can do. -- MzK Just 'cause you got the monkey off your back doesn't mean the circus has left town. -- George Carlin
Some stats and observations on OpenOffice upgrades
I've been looking at the upgrade numbers, the downloads that are triggered from upgrade notifications in the OpenOffice client. Although we are not tracking how many times such notifications pop up in the OpenOffice client we do know from Google Analytics how many users click the link to get more information on the update, and how many of these users actually download the upgrade. The trends have been pretty steady, a slight peak when a release is initially made, but a lingering steady state of upgrade requests even several weeks later. For example, let's look at the status for a single day, last Wednesday, Sept. 19th. On that date we had 164,752 total downloads of AOO. Of those downloads, it looks like 54% of them come from upgrading users. The remainder are either from new users, or existing users that went to the website directly rather than from an upgrade notification. (No easy way of distinguishing these two). The interesting thing is the breakdown by OpenOffice client version. For the upgrade installs on Sept 19th we see: 31% of upgrades were from AOO 3.4.0 52% of upgrades were from OOo 3.3.0 15% of upgrades were from OOo 3.2.1 3% of upgrades were from OOo 3.2.0 Note the OOo 3.3.0 numbers. Nearly 4 months after AOO 3.4 was released we are still getting large numbers of OOo 3.3.0 users receiving and responding to upgrade notifications, nearly 20,000/day. I'm not sure how to explain this. Upgrade notifications should surface once a week. Maybe: A) Some users are sporadically connected to the internet and the upgrade check rarely is successful B) Some users ignore/defer the upgrade notifications until a later time, in some cases months later C) Some user run OpenOffice rarely, sometimes at an interval of several months D) Someone, some web site, some organization, etc., is still distributing OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 to users, and after they install they get the AOO upgrade notification. If D), this is somewhat a concern, since users running OOo 3.3.0 are exposed to several security flaws. -Rob
Re: [PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process
Personally I think this is a great approach and love to see it progress Cheers Christian On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Andrew Rist andrew.r...@oracle.com wrote: I would like to propose the following list as the initial PMC for Apache OpenOffice, with a procedure for consolidating this list into a final list. * The list is made up of the names that received more than 3 nominations. This was a spot in the data that had a step. This produces a list of 23 names which is 'no too big, and not too small'. * We will reach out on list to the people on the list to verify their interest and commitment to the PMC. This may result in the removal of several names. * I want to avoid too much discussion on individual names, as all of the people who received nominations (and some who did not) have given a lot to this project. If there is a particular person who is missing from the list, who has overwhelming merit, they should be added to the list through a consensus process. * Note that this will be the initial PMC, and that one of the functions of the PMC going forward will be to identify those of considerable merit and add them to the PMC, continually refreshing the PMC to represent the project. Proposed Process: * 48 hour window to build consensus on this process moving forward (Tues-Wed) * 48 hour (+48 hour weekend) discussion period (Thurs-Fri + Sat Sun) - stabilization of the finalized Initial PMC List * 72 hour vote on the resulting list as the initial PMC list (ending next Wed.) Proposed Working List: Andre Fischer (af) Andrea Pescetti (pescetti) Andrew Rist (arist) Ariel Constenla-Haile (arielch) Armin Le Grand (alg) Dave Fisher (wave) Donald Harbison (dpharbison) Drew Jensen (atjensen) Ian Lynch (ingotian) Jürgen Schmidt (jsc) Kay Schenk (kschenk) Kazunari Hirano (khirano) Louis Suarez-Potts (louis) Marcus Lange (marcus) Oliver-Rainer Wittmann (orw) Pedro Giffuni (pfg) Peter Junge (pj) Raphael Bircher (rbircher) Regina Henschel (regina) RGB.ES (rgb-es) Roberto Galoppini (galoppini) Yang Shih-Ching (imacat) Yong Lin Ma (mayongl) -- http://www.grobmeier.de https://www.timeandbill.de
Re: [PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process
Andrew Rist wrote: * The list is made up of the names that received more than 3 nominations. This was a spot in the data that had a step. This produces a list of 23 names which is 'no too big, and not too small'. I had a look at numbers just to put this in context and: - The proposed 23 names would cover 90.47% (180/210) of the total nominations expressed by voters. - With the proposed list, everyone who voted would see at least 7 of their 10 nominees in the PMC. These numbers of course don't take into account several factors, but they may give a rough idea. Anyone can easily compute the same numbers for any possible list by using the ODS file. Note that https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/pmc/pmc-selection/PMCNominations.ods is missing a nomination (RGB nominated kschenk too): I noticed it while calculating the above statistics, so I considered it in my calculations but I didn't fix it in SVN. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process
Hi Andrew, Great coverage. I think that this is a good group to move OpenOffice forward. I am +1 on a vote now and don't really see my opinion changing. I'll read the thread regardless. Well done! Dave On Sep 25, 2012, at 11:35 AM, Andrew Rist wrote: I would like to propose the following list as the initial PMC for Apache OpenOffice, with a procedure for consolidating this list into a final list. * The list is made up of the names that received more than 3 nominations. This was a spot in the data that had a step. This produces a list of 23 names which is 'no too big, and not too small'. * We will reach out on list to the people on the list to verify their interest and commitment to the PMC. This may result in the removal of several names. * I want to avoid too much discussion on individual names, as all of the people who received nominations (and some who did not) have given a lot to this project. If there is a particular person who is missing from the list, who has overwhelming merit, they should be added to the list through a consensus process. * Note that this will be the initial PMC, and that one of the functions of the PMC going forward will be to identify those of considerable merit and add them to the PMC, continually refreshing the PMC to represent the project. Proposed Process: * 48 hour window to build consensus on this process moving forward (Tues-Wed) * 48 hour (+48 hour weekend) discussion period (Thurs-Fri + Sat Sun) - stabilization of the finalized Initial PMC List * 72 hour vote on the resulting list as the initial PMC list (ending next Wed.) Proposed Working List: Andre Fischer (af) Andrea Pescetti (pescetti) Andrew Rist (arist) Ariel Constenla-Haile (arielch) Armin Le Grand (alg) Dave Fisher (wave) Donald Harbison (dpharbison) Drew Jensen (atjensen) Ian Lynch (ingotian) Jürgen Schmidt (jsc) Kay Schenk (kschenk) Kazunari Hirano (khirano) Louis Suarez-Potts (louis) Marcus Lange (marcus) Oliver-Rainer Wittmann (orw) Pedro Giffuni (pfg) Peter Junge (pj) Raphael Bircher (rbircher) Regina Henschel (regina) RGB.ES (rgb-es) Roberto Galoppini (galoppini) Yang Shih-Ching (imacat) Yong Lin Ma (mayongl)
Re: [PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process
2012/9/25 Andrew Rist andrew.r...@oracle.com I would like to propose the following list as the initial PMC for Apache OpenOffice, with a procedure for consolidating this list into a final list. * The list is made up of the names that received more than 3 nominations. This was a spot in the data that had a step. This produces a list of 23 names which is 'no too big, and not too small'. * We will reach out on list to the people on the list to verify their interest and commitment to the PMC. This may result in the removal of several names. * I want to avoid too much discussion on individual names, as all of the people who received nominations (and some who did not) have given a lot to this project. If there is a particular person who is missing from the list, who has overwhelming merit, they should be added to the list through a consensus process. * Note that this will be the initial PMC, and that one of the functions of the PMC going forward will be to identify those of considerable merit and add them to the PMC, continually refreshing the PMC to represent the project. Proposed Process: * 48 hour window to build consensus on this process moving forward (Tues-Wed) * 48 hour (+48 hour weekend) discussion period (Thurs-Fri + Sat Sun) - stabilization of the finalized Initial PMC List * 72 hour vote on the resulting list as the initial PMC list (ending next Wed.) +1 to all. Thanks Andrew for your work! Regards Ricardo Proposed Working List: Andre Fischer (af) Andrea Pescetti (pescetti) Andrew Rist (arist) Ariel Constenla-Haile (arielch) Armin Le Grand (alg) Dave Fisher (wave) Donald Harbison (dpharbison) Drew Jensen (atjensen) Ian Lynch (ingotian) Jürgen Schmidt (jsc) Kay Schenk (kschenk) Kazunari Hirano (khirano) Louis Suarez-Potts (louis) Marcus Lange (marcus) Oliver-Rainer Wittmann (orw) Pedro Giffuni (pfg) Peter Junge (pj) Raphael Bircher (rbircher) Regina Henschel (regina) RGB.ES (rgb-es) Roberto Galoppini (galoppini) Yang Shih-Ching (imacat) Yong Lin Ma (mayongl)
Re: [RELEASE] 3.5, 4.0, fixpack, milestone build...
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 7:51 AM, Shenfeng Liu liush...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/9/24 Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net Rob Weir wrote: On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Shenfeng Liu liush...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, all, After 3.4.1, we are focusing on preparation of the community graduation. But I still want to remind us to take some time to think about our future releases. We have the discussion early about what 3.5 and 4.0 should look like. If I remember correctly: (1) 3.5 should be more about fidelity, reliability, performance and translation, new platform support... (2) While 4.0, in addition to the same focuses as 3.5, should also add significant UX enhancements (e.g. sidebar, modern UI) and new values (e.g. Accessibility, social integration capability, enhanced installer, new features...). If we make good progress on those items at the same time, we may consider to skip 3.5. (3) There are also more requirements (e.g. fixpack mechanism, simplifying the build structure, OOMXL export, smartArt...) we need to put into our backlog and consider their priority. Even we don't need to discuss the solid plan now, but there are already a lot of development activities on the trunk. So I think we need to keep certain track on it. Though it may be too early to set a target date for the next release, but it is important for us to tell more about what we think the next release should contain. So I'm suggesting the following: 1. Keep updating the current release planning wiki: - https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** AOO+3.5+Release+Planning https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.5+Release+Planning - https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** AOO+4.0+Release+Planning https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Planning I know it is a little confusing for 2 places to input. But think about the scope we agreed above. You can input to the wiki that you think your work belong to. I personally will monitor both wiki pages. 2. Figure out a better way to manage our release backlog. e.g. set Target Milestone to 3.5 or 4.0 in Bugzilla for what we recommended. 3. Deliver milestone builds to harvest our development fruits. A milestone build is: (a) a development snapshot that contains the features/enhancements that implemented till now; (b) passed regression test to ensure no severe defects; (c) announced on a development wiki; (d) with documents on the wiki for the list of features and bug fixes in this milestone build (like a release notes). Since whatever 3.5 or 4.0 sounds to me like some thing in next year or at least close to the end of this year, milestone builds can be light weigh on process to show our development progress, and give people a more clear view on how far are we to the next release. Looking forward every one's comments! Maybe also start a release notes page on the wiki. Whenever a new feature or important bug fix is added to the trunk also add something to the release notes. If something can be show with a before and after screen shot, include that. This might be easier than waiting until the end to prepare the release notes. -Rob - Simon Rob; A Release Notes page already exists or 3.5 and one or 4.0 can be easily added. The complication I see here is since we have not decided whether the next release will be 3.5 or 4.0 that would require adding it in two places. I see that as a lot of overhead at this point. IMHO, the name is not so important. Everything in the trunk goes into the next release. Nothing not in the trunk goes into the next release. So if we want a wiki page that is called Release notes for AOO Target January 2013 then it would be sufficient. Just describe significant changes there made in the trunk. Maybe in the end we call it Apache OpenOffice 2013, or Apache OpenOffice Adventitious Armadillo or something like that. That decision can come later. -Rob In that case lets use the existing 3.5 Release Notes as Armin has already put a number of entries in there the name can be change to protect the innocent later. +1 to use the existing 3.5 Release Notes wiki. And I just made a query in BZ, for defects fixed after 3.4 (May 8), and excluded (1) some Products as qa, www, (2) those Target Milestone set to 3.4.1, and (3) Issue Type not in (DEFECT, FEATURE, ENHANCEMENT). And I got about 500 results. I picked some of them in the list and believe there are still many items need to be taken out, e.g. those fixed 1 year ago, but just validated recently. So I think I can
Re: [PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process
On 9/25/12, Raphael Bircher rbirc...@apache.org wrote: Hi at all I think, we should also ask this people, if they are willing to contribute to the PMC. I find this realy important. A short statement from everyone on the list would be nice. Maybe also with a Comment if s/he is willing to take over a PMC Chair. I think is important to document the process. (if this will be the elegibility process from now on). And also understand the time period to do the next elections which I am sure I remember read this in some of the other threads. Congratulations for the PMC and also Andrew for the effort he put on the process. Greetings Raphael Am 25.09.12 20:35, schrieb Andrew Rist: I would like to propose the following list as the initial PMC for Apache OpenOffice, with a procedure for consolidating this list into a final list. * The list is made up of the names that received more than 3 nominations. This was a spot in the data that had a step. This produces a list of 23 names which is 'no too big, and not too small'. * We will reach out on list to the people on the list to verify their interest and commitment to the PMC. This may result in the removal of several names. * I want to avoid too much discussion on individual names, as all of the people who received nominations (and some who did not) have given a lot to this project. If there is a particular person who is missing from the list, who has overwhelming merit, they should be added to the list through a consensus process. * Note that this will be the initial PMC, and that one of the functions of the PMC going forward will be to identify those of considerable merit and add them to the PMC, continually refreshing the PMC to represent the project. Proposed Process: * 48 hour window to build consensus on this process moving forward (Tues-Wed) * 48 hour (+48 hour weekend) discussion period (Thurs-Fri + Sat Sun) - stabilization of the finalized Initial PMC List * 72 hour vote on the resulting list as the initial PMC list (ending next Wed.) Proposed Working List: Andre Fischer (af) Andrea Pescetti (pescetti) Andrew Rist (arist) Ariel Constenla-Haile (arielch) Armin Le Grand (alg) Dave Fisher (wave) Donald Harbison (dpharbison) Drew Jensen (atjensen) Ian Lynch (ingotian) Jürgen Schmidt (jsc) Kay Schenk (kschenk) Kazunari Hirano (khirano) Louis Suarez-Potts (louis) Marcus Lange (marcus) Oliver-Rainer Wittmann (orw) Pedro Giffuni (pfg) Peter Junge (pj) Raphael Bircher (rbircher) Regina Henschel (regina) RGB.ES (rgb-es) Roberto Galoppini (galoppini) Yang Shih-Ching (imacat) Yong Lin Ma (mayongl) -- Alexandro Colorado PPMC Apache OpenOffice http://es.openoffice.org
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] maybe time for a home page facelift?
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: With our graduation coming up soon, it might be time for us to consider a slight update to the user portal web site -- http://www.openoffice.org/-- for this momentous occasion. To this end, I've moved some entities to the test directory, and updated robots.txt to not index this directory. I've wanted to fix some of the styling for a while to deal with horizontal placement issues, but I'm sure some of you have some ideas as well. Maybe a wiki page would be a good idea as well to present graphic mockups of ideas. Good topic to bring up. With graduation we'll have to think about changes to two websites. www.openoffice.org, of course. But also our project website, which will end up at openoffice.apache.org. The mailing lists will also update, e.g., ooo-dev@i.a.o -- d...@openoffice.apache.org. Our subversion tree changes as well. Ditto for Apache dist directory. So that leads to several sets of website changes: 1) Any rebranding we need/want to do, e.g. remove incubator disclaimer and references. There was talk at one point about refreshing the logo design at this time as well. 2) Updating URL's, email list address, SVN and dist directory references. There may be others. This is pretty much a search replace operation. 3) Any work to freshen the website UI. IMHO it is always a good time to improve the website ;-) I wonder if it would be a good time to rethink the default font on the website. Look at our plain text versus Mozilla's website, which uses OpenSans (Apache 2.0 License): http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/features/ http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Open+Sans To me this is much more legible than our current font (Liberation?) I know we'll have quite a number of references to change after we graduate, and I thought we were planning on using the area where we have the Apache incubator icon for something else but I'd need to go look that up. re: fonts --- I'll need to investigate this. I didn't realize we had much of anything specified. h Regards, -Rob So...get your creative juices flowing and let's see what we can do. -- MzK Just 'cause you got the monkey off your back doesn't mean the circus has left town. -- George Carlin -- MzK Just 'cause you got the monkey off your back doesn't mean the circus has left town. -- George Carlin
Re: [PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Andrew Rist andrew.r...@oracle.comwrote: I would like to propose the following list as the initial PMC for Apache OpenOffice, with a procedure for consolidating this list into a final list. * The list is made up of the names that received more than 3 nominations. This was a spot in the data that had a step. This produces a list of 23 names which is 'no too big, and not too small'. * We will reach out on list to the people on the list to verify their interest and commitment to the PMC. This may result in the removal of several names. * I want to avoid too much discussion on individual names, as all of the people who received nominations (and some who did not) have given a lot to this project. If there is a particular person who is missing from the list, who has overwhelming merit, they should be added to the list through a consensus process. * Note that this will be the initial PMC, and that one of the functions of the PMC going forward will be to identify those of considerable merit and add them to the PMC, continually refreshing the PMC to represent the project. Proposed Process: * 48 hour window to build consensus on this process moving forward (Tues-Wed) * 48 hour (+48 hour weekend) discussion period (Thurs-Fri + Sat Sun) - stabilization of the finalized Initial PMC List * 72 hour vote on the resulting list as the initial PMC list (ending next Wed.) +1 this process sounds fine to me... Proposed Working List: Andre Fischer (af) Andrea Pescetti (pescetti) Andrew Rist (arist) Ariel Constenla-Haile (arielch) Armin Le Grand (alg) Dave Fisher (wave) Donald Harbison (dpharbison) Drew Jensen (atjensen) Ian Lynch (ingotian) Jürgen Schmidt (jsc) Kay Schenk (kschenk) Kazunari Hirano (khirano) Louis Suarez-Potts (louis) Marcus Lange (marcus) Oliver-Rainer Wittmann (orw) Pedro Giffuni (pfg) Peter Junge (pj) Raphael Bircher (rbircher) Regina Henschel (regina) RGB.ES (rgb-es) Roberto Galoppini (galoppini) Yang Shih-Ching (imacat) Yong Lin Ma (mayongl) -- MzK Just 'cause you got the monkey off your back doesn't mean the circus has left town. -- George Carlin
Re: [RELEASE] 3.5, 4.0, fixpack, milestone build...
Shenfeng Liu wrote: 2012/9/24 Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net Rob Weir wrote: On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Shenfeng Liu liush...@gmail.com wrote: snip Maybe also start a release notes page on the wiki. Whenever a new feature or important bug fix is added to the trunk also add something to the release notes. If something can be show with a before and after screen shot, include that. This might be easier than waiting until the end to prepare the release notes. -Rob - Simon Rob; A Release Notes page already exists or 3.5 and one or 4.0 can be easily added. The complication I see here is since we have not decided whether the next release will be 3.5 or 4.0 that would require adding it in two places. I see that as a lot of overhead at this point. IMHO, the name is not so important. Everything in the trunk goes into the next release. Nothing not in the trunk goes into the next release. So if we want a wiki page that is called Release notes for AOO Target January 2013 then it would be sufficient. Just describe significant changes there made in the trunk. Maybe in the end we call it Apache OpenOffice 2013, or Apache OpenOffice Adventitious Armadillo or something like that. That decision can come later. -Rob In that case lets use the existing 3.5 Release Notes as Armin has already put a number of entries in there the name can be change to protect the innocent later. +1 to use the existing 3.5 Release Notes wiki. And I just made a query in BZ, for defects fixed after 3.4 (May 8), and excluded (1) some Products as qa, www, (2) those Target Milestone set to 3.4.1, and (3) Issue Type not in (DEFECT, FEATURE, ENHANCEMENT). And I got about 500 results. I picked some of them in the list and believe there are still many items need to be taken out, e.g. those fixed 1 year ago, but just validated recently. So I think I can quickly go through them, and for those who are really fixed/implemented in trunk after 3.4 and not in 3.4.1, I will set the Target Milestone to AOO 3.5.0. And this list can be a base for our release notes. How do you think? Another thing is that we need to define a test plan for the milestone build, which can be a lightweight regression test suite. The plan can be published on a wiki, and executed against very milestone build. I agree with Juergen that we should start as early as possible. While I still hope to get the confirmation from our QE team, since IMO they are the key to this plan. :) - Simon Simon; Thank you for doing that. One question is the query public and if so where is it? My idea was not only to use it as a base for the release notes, but to also link to it from the release notes for those who are interested in a particular bug and also in place of listing every bug in the release notes that was fixed. Regards Keith snip
Re: [PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process
On 25 September 2012 22:34, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Andrew Rist andrew.r...@oracle.comwrote: I would like to propose the following list as the initial PMC for Apache OpenOffice, with a procedure for consolidating this list into a final list. * The list is made up of the names that received more than 3 nominations. This was a spot in the data that had a step. This produces a list of 23 names which is 'no too big, and not too small'. * We will reach out on list to the people on the list to verify their interest and commitment to the PMC. This may result in the removal of several names. * I want to avoid too much discussion on individual names, as all of the people who received nominations (and some who did not) have given a lot to this project. If there is a particular person who is missing from the list, who has overwhelming merit, they should be added to the list through a consensus process. * Note that this will be the initial PMC, and that one of the functions of the PMC going forward will be to identify those of considerable merit and add them to the PMC, continually refreshing the PMC to represent the project. Proposed Process: * 48 hour window to build consensus on this process moving forward (Tues-Wed) * 48 hour (+48 hour weekend) discussion period (Thurs-Fri + Sat Sun) - stabilization of the finalized Initial PMC List * 72 hour vote on the resulting list as the initial PMC list (ending next Wed.) +1 this process sounds fine to me... Proposed Working List: Andre Fischer (af) Andrea Pescetti (pescetti) Andrew Rist (arist) Ariel Constenla-Haile (arielch) Armin Le Grand (alg) Dave Fisher (wave) Donald Harbison (dpharbison) Drew Jensen (atjensen) Ian Lynch (ingotian) Jürgen Schmidt (jsc) Kay Schenk (kschenk) Kazunari Hirano (khirano) Louis Suarez-Potts (louis) Marcus Lange (marcus) Oliver-Rainer Wittmann (orw) Pedro Giffuni (pfg) Peter Junge (pj) Raphael Bircher (rbircher) Regina Henschel (regina) RGB.ES (rgb-es) Roberto Galoppini (galoppini) Yang Shih-Ching (imacat) Yong Lin Ma (mayongl) -- MzK Just 'cause you got the monkey off your back doesn't mean the circus has left town. -- George Carlin Great job Andrew +1 -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ) www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.
Re: [PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process
Am 09/25/2012 08:35 PM, schrieb Andrew Rist: I would like to propose the following list as the initial PMC for Apache OpenOffice, with a procedure for consolidating this list into a final list. [...] Thanks a lot for your effort to process the listed names. Looks like the diversity is given and a big step forward in direction of graduation. Marcus
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] maybe time for a home page facelift?
Should we have a webdev list? In the past we did had dedicated list for each line of the project. I am not sure this is something that should be discussed as the work on redesign start growing. Some suggestions on the design of the site: - Show the product, currently there is nothing visual that relates the software with office productivity. - Responsive design, mobile browsers, tablets and devices can have different dimensions on the site, having a RD conformant site could help our users browse through the site. - Corporate theme, ViewVC, cWiki, Forum(?), Bugzilla have their own theme, should there be efforts to adopt the same design like the templates/extension/wiki site. - Website QA - Possible broken pages due to the change in frameworks (from Oracle to Apache) on smaller projects. On 9/25/12, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: With our graduation coming up soon, it might be time for us to consider a slight update to the user portal web site -- http://www.openoffice.org/-- for this momentous occasion. To this end, I've moved some entities to the test directory, and updated robots.txt to not index this directory. I've wanted to fix some of the styling for a while to deal with horizontal placement issues, but I'm sure some of you have some ideas as well. Maybe a wiki page would be a good idea as well to present graphic mockups of ideas. Good topic to bring up. With graduation we'll have to think about changes to two websites. www.openoffice.org, of course. But also our project website, which will end up at openoffice.apache.org. The mailing lists will also update, e.g., ooo-dev@i.a.o -- d...@openoffice.apache.org. Our subversion tree changes as well. Ditto for Apache dist directory. So that leads to several sets of website changes: 1) Any rebranding we need/want to do, e.g. remove incubator disclaimer and references. There was talk at one point about refreshing the logo design at this time as well. 2) Updating URL's, email list address, SVN and dist directory references. There may be others. This is pretty much a search replace operation. 3) Any work to freshen the website UI. IMHO it is always a good time to improve the website ;-) I wonder if it would be a good time to rethink the default font on the website. Look at our plain text versus Mozilla's website, which uses OpenSans (Apache 2.0 License): http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/features/ http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Open+Sans To me this is much more legible than our current font (Liberation?) I know we'll have quite a number of references to change after we graduate, and I thought we were planning on using the area where we have the Apache incubator icon for something else but I'd need to go look that up. re: fonts --- I'll need to investigate this. I didn't realize we had much of anything specified. h Regards, -Rob So...get your creative juices flowing and let's see what we can do. -- MzK Just 'cause you got the monkey off your back doesn't mean the circus has left town. -- George Carlin -- MzK Just 'cause you got the monkey off your back doesn't mean the circus has left town. -- George Carlin -- Alexandro Colorado PPMC Apache OpenOffice http://es.openoffice.org
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] maybe time for a home page facelift?
On Sep 25, 2012, at 3:26 PM, Alexandro Colorado wrote: Should we have a webdev list? We discussed using the tags [WWW] last year. In the past we did had dedicated list for each line of the project. I am not sure this is something that should be discussed as the work on redesign start growing. Generally everything should be here. Some suggestions on the design of the site: - Show the product, currently there is nothing visual that relates the software with office productivity. Perhaps we should setup an area in ooo-site where we can have a design contest. Let me think about how to do that technically using the CMS. Kay - you should continue to with whatever efforts you have in mind with the main page. What I am thinking about is redesigning the headers and footers. - Responsive design, mobile browsers, tablets and devices can have different dimensions on the site, having a RD conformant site could help our users browse through the site. Sure. I think the best strategy might be to use a common set of css tags in device specific css files that can then be varied according to the dimensions of the browser. - Corporate theme, ViewVC, cWiki, Forum(?), Bugzilla have their own theme, should there be efforts to adopt the same design like the templates/extension/wiki site. The way the CMS works the templates used for the websites can be ported by the sysadmins and teams in the Forum and mWiki. cWiki is harder. I'm sure that SF can follow as well. - Website QA - Possible broken pages due to the change in frameworks (from Oracle to Apache) on smaller projects. Download the source, discuss any errors, make the changes - JFDI. Regards, Dave On 9/25/12, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: With our graduation coming up soon, it might be time for us to consider a slight update to the user portal web site -- http://www.openoffice.org/-- for this momentous occasion. To this end, I've moved some entities to the test directory, and updated robots.txt to not index this directory. I've wanted to fix some of the styling for a while to deal with horizontal placement issues, but I'm sure some of you have some ideas as well. Maybe a wiki page would be a good idea as well to present graphic mockups of ideas. Good topic to bring up. With graduation we'll have to think about changes to two websites. www.openoffice.org, of course. But also our project website, which will end up at openoffice.apache.org. The mailing lists will also update, e.g., ooo-dev@i.a.o -- d...@openoffice.apache.org. Our subversion tree changes as well. Ditto for Apache dist directory. So that leads to several sets of website changes: 1) Any rebranding we need/want to do, e.g. remove incubator disclaimer and references. There was talk at one point about refreshing the logo design at this time as well. 2) Updating URL's, email list address, SVN and dist directory references. There may be others. This is pretty much a search replace operation. 3) Any work to freshen the website UI. IMHO it is always a good time to improve the website ;-) I wonder if it would be a good time to rethink the default font on the website. Look at our plain text versus Mozilla's website, which uses OpenSans (Apache 2.0 License): http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/features/ http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Open+Sans To me this is much more legible than our current font (Liberation?) I know we'll have quite a number of references to change after we graduate, and I thought we were planning on using the area where we have the Apache incubator icon for something else but I'd need to go look that up. re: fonts --- I'll need to investigate this. I didn't realize we had much of anything specified. h Regards, -Rob So...get your creative juices flowing and let's see what we can do. -- MzK Just 'cause you got the monkey off your back doesn't mean the circus has left town. -- George Carlin -- MzK Just 'cause you got the monkey off your back doesn't mean the circus has left town. -- George Carlin -- Alexandro Colorado PPMC Apache OpenOffice http://es.openoffice.org
Re: Some stats and observations on OpenOffice upgrades
On 09/25/2012 12:06 PM, Rob Weir wrote: I've been looking at the upgrade numbers, the downloads that are triggered from upgrade notifications in the OpenOffice client. Although we are not tracking how many times such notifications pop up in the OpenOffice client we do know from Google Analytics how many users click the link to get more information on the update, and how many of these users actually download the upgrade. The trends have been pretty steady, a slight peak when a release is initially made, but a lingering steady state of upgrade requests even several weeks later. For example, let's look at the status for a single day, last Wednesday, Sept. 19th. On that date we had 164,752 total downloads of AOO. Of those downloads, it looks like 54% of them come from upgrading users. The remainder are either from new users, or existing users that went to the website directly rather than from an upgrade notification. (No easy way of distinguishing these two). The interesting thing is the breakdown by OpenOffice client version. For the upgrade installs on Sept 19th we see: 31% of upgrades were from AOO 3.4.0 52% of upgrades were from OOo 3.3.0 15% of upgrades were from OOo 3.2.1 3% of upgrades were from OOo 3.2.0 Note the OOo 3.3.0 numbers. Nearly 4 months after AOO 3.4 was released we are still getting large numbers of OOo 3.3.0 users receiving and responding to upgrade notifications, nearly 20,000/day. I'm not sure how to explain this. Upgrade notifications should surface once a week. Maybe: A) Some users are sporadically connected to the internet and the upgrade check rarely is successful B) Some users ignore/defer the upgrade notifications until a later time, in some cases months later C) Some user run OpenOffice rarely, sometimes at an interval of several months D) Someone, some web site, some organization, etc., is still distributing OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 to users, and after they install they get the AOO upgrade notification. If D), this is somewhat a concern, since users running OOo 3.3.0 are exposed to several security flaws. You can also set the upgrade to never check and just do it manually. Some may have set never check after the long period when there were no upgrades, and they got tired of the start up lag time due to this situation. So, maybe some of these older ones just got wind of a new version from friends or whatever, and decided to see what would happen. Anyway, this is interesting. But maybe not terribly surprising. We're likely to see (at least) more 3.2.0 folks trickle in for a while. -Rob -- MzK Just 'cause you got the monkey off your back doesn't mean the circus has left town. -- George Carlin
Change of 'soffice' name
There has been issues in installing LibreOffice and OpenOffice basically because they are derived from StarOffice, since the Oracle transfer StarOffice no longer exist however OOo still have it's roots on it's code and libraries. Issues however when trying to have LibreOffice and OpenOffice has causes clash between both soffice binaries on many of the Linux (and other) distributions. One example is the menu service where OOo/LibO hold the same XML definition. I wonder if there are any plans on ever modifying this branding issue. -- Alexandro Colorado PPMC Apache OpenOffice http://es.openoffice.org
Re: [REQUEST] Apache OpenOffice (incubating) - fund allocation for ACEU 2012
Hi Oliver, Thanks! Comments below: On Sep 25, 2012, at 1:17 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: [..snip...] (1a) If not, do you have any recommendation how the money should be spent? (2) What are the possibilities to spend the travel expense subsidy money? (2a) Do you have a recommendation how the money should be spent? Regarding the above, I'd say come up with a process that is documented, you guys decide how you want to spend it, come up with a Bill or someone to pay, provide that information to the Treasurer@ list (me and Sam) and we'll move forward with the approval process. Right now, our bills are paid by having someone with the appropriate karma put a file in: https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/financials/Bills/received/ Then, they are reviewed by someone with the appropriate budget authority (e.g., in Travel I believe that's Jim since he's the President) and then placed in: https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/financials/Bills/approved/ At that point, the Treasurer's office can pay the bill (via wire transfer; electronic funds deposit, etc.) provided that all the information is given to address the payee, and then once we pay, we move the bill into: https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/financials/Bills/paid/ I do not think that we will real bills that need to be paid as the granted travel expense subsidy will in general cover only a part of the overall travel expenses. Is it possible that the treasurer pay money based on the granting process and a final confirmation note to the Treasurer@ list? Well I think the point is that I need something to appear in Bills/received/ in order to pay something. So, IOW, RE: travel grants and so forth, we can offer to use our money to reimburse things like airfare, or hotel, or, we probably can figure out a way to simply send $$$ to someone, but we'd need payment information for them somehow that would probably best fit into the workflow to show up in ./Bills/received (even if it's not a bill, and simply a request to pay). That way the President can review it, approve it, and then I or Sam Ruby (Asst Treasurer) can pay it. Make sense? Thanks in advance for your support. Anytime! Cheers, Chris ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++
Re: [REQUEST] Apache OpenOffice (incubating) - fund allocation for ACEU 2012
Hey Oliver, On Sep 25, 2012, at 8:02 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: Hi Chris, again Thanks for your feedback. Same to you! Comments below: [..snip..] Well I think the point is that I need something to appear in Bills/received/ in order to pay something. So, IOW, RE: travel grants and so forth, we can offer to use our money to reimburse things like airfare, or hotel, or, we probably can figure out a way to simply send $$$ to someone, but we'd need payment information for them somehow that would probably best fit into the workflow to show up in ./Bills/received (even if it's not a bill, and simply a request to pay). That way the President can review it, approve it, and then I or Sam Ruby (Asst Treasurer) can pay it. Make sense? I am somehow believing that I know how the spending is working and what are the preconditions and the needs. But I am not 100% sure. Thus, let me allow to present my concrete idea, which I have in mind: my idea When a certain travel expense subsidy application has been accepted, we will ask the person to provide corresponding payment information to Treasurer@ list. Treasurer@ list can receive confirmation from ooo-dev that the person's application has been accepted for amount 300 EUR or 600 EUR. Thus, an entry into the received folder can be created. Sounds right. On the ApacheCon EU 2012 the person comes to a Treasurer@ or selected ooo-dev representative to confirm that she/he is attending and that she/he has spent certain travel expenses. Treasurer@ or selected ooo-dev rep. can then approve the payment -- formerly created entry is moved from received folder to approved folder. Yep. Sounds good to me, and sounds like Ross as the EVP thinks this is fine too. You may want to add a CC to president@ and operations@ to keep them in the loop in addition to sending to treasurer@. The Treasurer@ pays the 300 EUR resp. 600 EUR according to the payment information -- entry is moved from approved to paid. /my idea Yep that works. Is something like this or similar working? You got it! As far as I understood we need the following: - an accepted application (full name and amount from the granting process) and payment information for an entry in received. - confirmation that travel expenses are spent for ApacheCon EU 2012 to get the entry into approved. Do I have the correct understanding? Yep! Thanks for the concrete description. Cheers, Chris ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++
Re: [REQUEST] Apache OpenOffice (incubating) - fund allocation for ACEU 2012
Hey Oliver, On Sep 25, 2012, at 8:37 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: Hi Chris, nice ping-pong communication :-) Right back at ya ;) Final comments below! On 25.09.2012 17:09, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: [..snip..] Yep! Thanks for the concrete description. great. Something which is not urgent and can be clarified later. It would be great to have it at hand when the accepted application notifications are sent out: What kind of data for which payment type is needed? Yep, the types of thing we typically need: * If they are in the US and have a US bank we can pay from a Bank Account/Routing # * If they are abroad, we can do an International Wire transfer * If they want a wire transfer in the US, we can do that too * We can probably do a check payment, though I am not sure and Sam can confirm that In addition to the above, name, address, phone would also probably be good things to collect too. Thanks! Cheers, Chris ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++
Re: [PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process
Andrew, Thanks a lot. This is a big progress. But to me, the 3 is a magic number. Did we reach consesus with it? I would suggest we develop a plan to discuss all the member who have been nominated but not in current lis. This can be done before or after initial PMC list be finalized. On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:35 AM, Andrew Rist andrew.r...@oracle.com wrote: I would like to propose the following list as the initial PMC for Apache OpenOffice, with a procedure for consolidating this list into a final list. * The list is made up of the names that received more than 3 nominations. This was a spot in the data that had a step. This produces a list of 23 names which is 'no too big, and not too small'. * We will reach out on list to the people on the list to verify their interest and commitment to the PMC. This may result in the removal of several names. * I want to avoid too much discussion on individual names, as all of the people who received nominations (and some who did not) have given a lot to this project. If there is a particular person who is missing from the list, who has overwhelming merit, they should be added to the list through a consensus process. * Note that this will be the initial PMC, and that one of the functions of the PMC going forward will be to identify those of considerable merit and add them to the PMC, continually refreshing the PMC to represent the project. Proposed Process: * 48 hour window to build consensus on this process moving forward (Tues-Wed) * 48 hour (+48 hour weekend) discussion period (Thurs-Fri + Sat Sun) - stabilization of the finalized Initial PMC List * 72 hour vote on the resulting list as the initial PMC list (ending next Wed.) Proposed Working List: Andre Fischer (af) Andrea Pescetti (pescetti) Andrew Rist (arist) Ariel Constenla-Haile (arielch) Armin Le Grand (alg) Dave Fisher (wave) Donald Harbison (dpharbison) Drew Jensen (atjensen) Ian Lynch (ingotian) Jürgen Schmidt (jsc) Kay Schenk (kschenk) Kazunari Hirano (khirano) Louis Suarez-Potts (louis) Marcus Lange (marcus) Oliver-Rainer Wittmann (orw) Pedro Giffuni (pfg) Peter Junge (pj) Raphael Bircher (rbircher) Regina Henschel (regina) RGB.ES (rgb-es) Roberto Galoppini (galoppini) Yang Shih-Ching (imacat) Yong Lin Ma (mayongl) -- Regards Yong Lin Ma
Re: [DISCUSS][PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process
On 9/26/2012 3:20 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: My recommendation: 48-hour steps are too short. Take at least 72 minimums, state fixed UTC earliest-end date-times (so no one has to figure out when from now is), and maybe skip over weekend days. There's no rush. +1 - Dennis -Original Message- From: Andrew Rist [mailto:andrew.r...@oracle.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 11:36 To: ooo-dev Subject: [PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process [ ... ] Proposed Process: * 48 hour window to build consensus on this process moving forward (Tues-Wed) * 48 hour (+48 hour weekend) discussion period (Thurs-Fri + Sat Sun) - stabilization of the finalized Initial PMC List * 72 hour vote on the resulting list as the initial PMC list (ending next Wed.) [ ... ]
Re: Some stats and observations on OpenOffice upgrades
KG01 - see comments inline On Sep 26, 2012, at 7:25 AM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On 09/25/2012 12:06 PM, Rob Weir wrote: I've been looking at the upgrade numbers, the downloads that are triggered from upgrade notifications in the OpenOffice client. Although we are not tracking how many times such notifications pop up in the OpenOffice client we do know from Google Analytics how many users click the link to get more information on the update, and how many of these users actually download the upgrade. The trends have been pretty steady, a slight peak when a release is initially made, but a lingering steady state of upgrade requests even several weeks later. For example, let's look at the status for a single day, last Wednesday, Sept. 19th. On that date we had 164,752 total downloads of AOO. Of those downloads, it looks like 54% of them come from upgrading users. The remainder are either from new users, or existing users that went to the website directly rather than from an upgrade notification. (No easy way of distinguishing these two). The interesting thing is the breakdown by OpenOffice client version. For the upgrade installs on Sept 19th we see: 31% of upgrades were from AOO 3.4.0 52% of upgrades were from OOo 3.3.0 15% of upgrades were from OOo 3.2.1 3% of upgrades were from OOo 3.2.0 Note the OOo 3.3.0 numbers. Nearly 4 months after AOO 3.4 was released we are still getting large numbers of OOo 3.3.0 users receiving and responding to upgrade notifications, nearly 20,000/day. I'm not sure how to explain this. Upgrade notifications should surface once a week. Maybe: A) Some users are sporadically connected to the internet and the upgrade check rarely is successful B) Some users ignore/defer the upgrade notifications until a later time, in some cases months later C) Some user run OpenOffice rarely, sometimes at an interval of several months D) Someone, some web site, some organization, etc., is still distributing OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 to users, and after they install they get the AOO upgrade notification. If D), this is somewhat a concern, since users running OOo 3.3.0 are exposed to several security flaws. You can also set the upgrade to never check and just do it manually. KG01 - perhaps we could revisit the update notification experience to ensure that users are aware of an available update, but are free to download and install according to there preferred way. This might mitigate the risk of automatic updaters lack of visibility of a new release. AOO.next features, such as a start screen, or community side bar panel presents opportunities to surface such info. Oh, final thought. If we want people to be aware of the versions, we'll need to include information on their version number in the splash screen and other update views. Some may have set never check after the long period when there were no upgrades, and they got tired of the start up lag time due to this situation. So, maybe some of these older ones just got wind of a new version from friends or whatever, and decided to see what would happen. Anyway, this is interesting. But maybe not terribly surprising. We're likely to see (at least) more 3.2.0 folks trickle in for a while. -Rob -- MzK Just 'cause you got the monkey off your back doesn't mean the circus has left town. -- George Carlin
Re: [PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process
Hi Andrew, thanks a lot for the proposal. Great work! What I would like to do is also including those who got 2 nominations, because I find some names there that certainly contribute a lot but are just not as visible as others. As Dennis had proposed, I would also prefer to move on in 72 hour steps. For everything else a big +1! Thanks again, Peter On 9/26/2012 2:35 AM, Andrew Rist wrote: I would like to propose the following list as the initial PMC for Apache OpenOffice, with a procedure for consolidating this list into a final list. * The list is made up of the names that received more than 3 nominations. This was a spot in the data that had a step. This produces a list of 23 names which is 'no too big, and not too small'. * We will reach out on list to the people on the list to verify their interest and commitment to the PMC. This may result in the removal of several names. * I want to avoid too much discussion on individual names, as all of the people who received nominations (and some who did not) have given a lot to this project. If there is a particular person who is missing from the list, who has overwhelming merit, they should be added to the list through a consensus process. * Note that this will be the initial PMC, and that one of the functions of the PMC going forward will be to identify those of considerable merit and add them to the PMC, continually refreshing the PMC to represent the project. Proposed Process: * 48 hour window to build consensus on this process moving forward (Tues-Wed) * 48 hour (+48 hour weekend) discussion period (Thurs-Fri + Sat Sun) - stabilization of the finalized Initial PMC List * 72 hour vote on the resulting list as the initial PMC list (ending next Wed.) Proposed Working List: Andre Fischer (af) Andrea Pescetti (pescetti) Andrew Rist (arist) Ariel Constenla-Haile (arielch) Armin Le Grand (alg) Dave Fisher (wave) Donald Harbison (dpharbison) Drew Jensen (atjensen) Ian Lynch (ingotian) Jürgen Schmidt (jsc) Kay Schenk (kschenk) Kazunari Hirano (khirano) Louis Suarez-Potts (louis) Marcus Lange (marcus) Oliver-Rainer Wittmann (orw) Pedro Giffuni (pfg) Peter Junge (pj) Raphael Bircher (rbircher) Regina Henschel (regina) RGB.ES (rgb-es) Roberto Galoppini (galoppini) Yang Shih-Ching (imacat) Yong Lin Ma (mayongl)
Re: WaE: sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx
I will have a look..thanks. On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Pavel Janík pa...@janik.cz wrote: Hi, the current build is almost WaE clean. Module sw contains this warning: sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx: In member function ‘void WW8_WrtBookmarks::MoveFieldMarks(sal_uLong, sal_uLong)’: sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:315: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions Please fix this. Thanks. -- Pavel Janík -- Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Re: [RELEASE] 3.5, 4.0, fixpack, milestone build...
2012/9/26 Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net Shenfeng Liu wrote: 2012/9/24 Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net Rob Weir wrote: On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Shenfeng Liu liush...@gmail.com wrote: snip Maybe also start a release notes page on the wiki. Whenever a new feature or important bug fix is added to the trunk also add something to the release notes. If something can be show with a before and after screen shot, include that. This might be easier than waiting until the end to prepare the release notes. -Rob - Simon Rob; A Release Notes page already exists or 3.5 and one or 4.0 can be easily added. The complication I see here is since we have not decided whether the next release will be 3.5 or 4.0 that would require adding it in two places. I see that as a lot of overhead at this point. IMHO, the name is not so important. Everything in the trunk goes into the next release. Nothing not in the trunk goes into the next release. So if we want a wiki page that is called Release notes for AOO Target January 2013 then it would be sufficient. Just describe significant changes there made in the trunk. Maybe in the end we call it Apache OpenOffice 2013, or Apache OpenOffice Adventitious Armadillo or something like that. That decision can come later. -Rob In that case lets use the existing 3.5 Release Notes as Armin has already put a number of entries in there the name can be change to protect the innocent later. +1 to use the existing 3.5 Release Notes wiki. And I just made a query in BZ, for defects fixed after 3.4 (May 8), and excluded (1) some Products as qa, www, (2) those Target Milestone set to 3.4.1, and (3) Issue Type not in (DEFECT, FEATURE, ENHANCEMENT). And I got about 500 results. I picked some of them in the list and believe there are still many items need to be taken out, e.g. those fixed 1 year ago, but just validated recently. So I think I can quickly go through them, and for those who are really fixed/implemented in trunk after 3.4 and not in 3.4.1, I will set the Target Milestone to AOO 3.5.0. And this list can be a base for our release notes. How do you think? Another thing is that we need to define a test plan for the milestone build, which can be a lightweight regression test suite. The plan can be published on a wiki, and executed against very milestone build. I agree with Juergen that we should start as early as possible. While I still hope to get the confirmation from our QE team, since IMO they are the key to this plan. :) - Simon Simon; Thank you for doing that. One question is the query public and if so where is it? My idea was not only to use it as a base for the release notes, but to also link to it from the release notes for those who are interested in a particular bug and also in place of listing every bug in the release notes that was fixed. I created a query named TargetTo350AllFixed and shared it. Ideally it can be the base for the release notes. But the problem is, as I mentioned above, people didn't set this field correctly for all issues. Some fixes in trunk didn't set the Target Milestone, and some issues last changed 1 years ago are in the list (which is so strange, because there is even no AOO 1 at that time...) So I need to go through the list, and correct this field. I think we should force the input to this field when an issue is resolved. - Simon Regards Keith snip
Re: [RELEASE] 3.5, 4.0, fixpack, milestone build...
2012/9/26 Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 7:51 AM, Shenfeng Liu liush...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/9/24 Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net Rob Weir wrote: On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Shenfeng Liu liush...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, all, After 3.4.1, we are focusing on preparation of the community graduation. But I still want to remind us to take some time to think about our future releases. We have the discussion early about what 3.5 and 4.0 should look like. If I remember correctly: (1) 3.5 should be more about fidelity, reliability, performance and translation, new platform support... (2) While 4.0, in addition to the same focuses as 3.5, should also add significant UX enhancements (e.g. sidebar, modern UI) and new values (e.g. Accessibility, social integration capability, enhanced installer, new features...). If we make good progress on those items at the same time, we may consider to skip 3.5. (3) There are also more requirements (e.g. fixpack mechanism, simplifying the build structure, OOMXL export, smartArt...) we need to put into our backlog and consider their priority. Even we don't need to discuss the solid plan now, but there are already a lot of development activities on the trunk. So I think we need to keep certain track on it. Though it may be too early to set a target date for the next release, but it is important for us to tell more about what we think the next release should contain. So I'm suggesting the following: 1. Keep updating the current release planning wiki: - https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** AOO+3.5+Release+Planning https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.5+Release+Planning - https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** AOO+4.0+Release+Planning https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Planning I know it is a little confusing for 2 places to input. But think about the scope we agreed above. You can input to the wiki that you think your work belong to. I personally will monitor both wiki pages. 2. Figure out a better way to manage our release backlog. e.g. set Target Milestone to 3.5 or 4.0 in Bugzilla for what we recommended. 3. Deliver milestone builds to harvest our development fruits. A milestone build is: (a) a development snapshot that contains the features/enhancements that implemented till now; (b) passed regression test to ensure no severe defects; (c) announced on a development wiki; (d) with documents on the wiki for the list of features and bug fixes in this milestone build (like a release notes). Since whatever 3.5 or 4.0 sounds to me like some thing in next year or at least close to the end of this year, milestone builds can be light weigh on process to show our development progress, and give people a more clear view on how far are we to the next release. Looking forward every one's comments! Maybe also start a release notes page on the wiki. Whenever a new feature or important bug fix is added to the trunk also add something to the release notes. If something can be show with a before and after screen shot, include that. This might be easier than waiting until the end to prepare the release notes. -Rob - Simon Rob; A Release Notes page already exists or 3.5 and one or 4.0 can be easily added. The complication I see here is since we have not decided whether the next release will be 3.5 or 4.0 that would require adding it in two places. I see that as a lot of overhead at this point. IMHO, the name is not so important. Everything in the trunk goes into the next release. Nothing not in the trunk goes into the next release. So if we want a wiki page that is called Release notes for AOO Target January 2013 then it would be sufficient. Just describe significant changes there made in the trunk. Maybe in the end we call it Apache OpenOffice 2013, or Apache OpenOffice Adventitious Armadillo or something like that. That decision can come later. -Rob In that case lets use the existing 3.5 Release Notes as Armin has already put a number of entries in there the name can be change to protect the innocent later. +1 to use the existing 3.5 Release Notes wiki. And I just made a query in BZ, for defects fixed after 3.4 (May 8), and excluded (1) some Products as qa, www, (2) those Target Milestone set to 3.4.1, and (3) Issue Type not in (DEFECT, FEATURE, ENHANCEMENT).
Re: WaE: sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx
Hi Pavel, The patch for this issue has been submitted for review..Could you please help the code review https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121066 before delivering it?Thanks. On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 10:22 AM, chengjh chen...@apache.org wrote: I will have a look..thanks. On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Pavel Janík pa...@janik.cz wrote: Hi, the current build is almost WaE clean. Module sw contains this warning: sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx: In member function ‘void WW8_WrtBookmarks::MoveFieldMarks(sal_uLong, sal_uLong)’: sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:315: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions Please fix this. Thanks. -- Pavel Janík -- Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng -- Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Re: Help us brainstorm ideas for Apache OpenOffice 4.0
UX is willing to help as well. Regards, Kevin On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Shenfeng Liu liush...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/9/25 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com On 9/25/12 3:27 PM, Rob Weir wrote: On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: As we perform the final preparations to release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 it is a good time to look ahead to the future. A big opportunity is OpenOffice 4.0. That once seemed so very far away, but 2013 is getting closer every day. Will it be a large collection of small ideas? Will it have a major overarching theme? Or will it just be whatever random stuff we happen to have on a given date when we release 4.0? The answer, of course, depends on what we, as project members/volunteers decide to do. It is a good time now, as a background activity, to poll the community and wider ecosystem on ideas for Apache OpenOffice 4.0. To participate, go to this page on Google Moderator, where you can help us gather and rate ideas: https://www.google.com/moderator/#16/e=2011d5 A few project members have already seeded this with some initial ideas. Of course, you are encouraged to add your own ideas, as well as rate the ideas of others. Try not to censor yourself from thinking outside-of-the-box. We need big ideas as well as incremental ones. We don't have a close date on this brainstorming activity, but it is good to get your ideas in early, so there is an opportunity for others to rate and comment on it. This brainstorming has been ongoing for 3 weeks now. So far, so good. The latest stats are: 533 people have submitted 456 ideas and cast 6,491 votes Today, a week later: 633 users - 527 ideas - 7,607 votes So we are still getting a good amount of feedback. I added a mention of this brainstorming on the www.openoffice.org website header. That should give this even more visibility. I've heard from some that it would be good to get to a point where we can take a snapshot of the feedback received, and process that, to help set priorities for AOO 4.0. Would it make sense to do that in another week, say on October 1st? At that point we can: 1) Put a thank you note on the Google Moderator page and stop accepting new suggestions. Point the users to the ooo-users or ooo-dev mailing list instead, 2) Export the ideas and scores received so far to a CSV file and archive that someplace. 3) Discuss the results received 4) Maybe a blog post to highlight the brainstorming activity and the results received? Any other ideas? not directly. We should analyze it first and should create some overall story out of it for our next release. I think this can help to prepare some marketing material in time for this release as well. It's time that we sell our work a little bit better ;-) I agree with all 4 points and I am willing to help them where I can. I expect point 3) will be a bigger item where hopefully many will participate and I am looking forward to this. I saw many interesting stuff already. I'm also willing to help. I think we can break down the work and each people take different topics to categorize the ideas and count the vote. - Simon Juergen I don't need to own any of this, but since I started it I'm willing to finish it. But if anyone else wants to take a lead on this, please volunteer. Regards, -Rob If you have not reviewed the new ideas recently, it would be worth taking another look. It is good that all ideas are rated, not just the ones that came in early. Maybe let it run to the end of September and then we can snapshot it and start analyzing the results? Or mid October? It would be good to wrap this up in advance of ApacheCon, so we can discuss further there. Regards, -Rob Regards, -Rob
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] maybe time for a home page facelift?
KG01 - See comments inline On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 6:47 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Sep 25, 2012, at 3:26 PM, Alexandro Colorado wrote: Should we have a webdev list? We discussed using the tags [WWW] last year. In the past we did had dedicated list for each line of the project. I am not sure this is something that should be discussed as the work on redesign start growing. Generally everything should be here. KG01 - agreed Some suggestions on the design of the site: - Show the product, currently there is nothing visual that relates the software with office productivity. KG01 - I think we should focus on content before we worry about styling or visual design. Please create a wiki page on cwiki to capture the proposed enhancements. Perhaps we should setup an area in ooo-site where we can have a design contest. Let me think about how to do that technically using the CMS. Kay - you should continue to with whatever efforts you have in mind with the main page. What I am thinking about is redesigning the headers and footers. - Responsive design, mobile browsers, tablets and devices can have different dimensions on the site, having a RD conformant site could help our users browse through the site. Sure. I think the best strategy might be to use a common set of css tags in device specific css files that can then be varied according to the dimensions of the browser. - Corporate theme, ViewVC, cWiki, Forum(?), Bugzilla have their own theme, should there be efforts to adopt the same design like the templates/extension/wiki site. The way the CMS works the templates used for the websites can be ported by the sysadmins and teams in the Forum and mWiki. cWiki is harder. I'm sure that SF can follow as well. - Website QA - Possible broken pages due to the change in frameworks (from Oracle to Apache) on smaller projects. Download the source, discuss any errors, make the changes - JFDI. Regards, Dave On 9/25/12, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: With our graduation coming up soon, it might be time for us to consider a slight update to the user portal web site -- http://www.openoffice.org/-- for this momentous occasion. To this end, I've moved some entities to the test directory, and updated robots.txt to not index this directory. I've wanted to fix some of the styling for a while to deal with horizontal placement issues, but I'm sure some of you have some ideas as well. Maybe a wiki page would be a good idea as well to present graphic mockups of ideas. KG01 - Yes, good idea. Actually, UX is setting up a virtual studio to show sketches, mockups and screen caps of ideas. Good topic to bring up. With graduation we'll have to think about changes to two websites. www.openoffice.org, of course. But also our project website, which will end up at openoffice.apache.org. The mailing lists will also update, e.g., ooo-dev@i.a.o -- d...@openoffice.apache.org. Our subversion tree changes as well. Ditto for Apache dist directory. So that leads to several sets of website changes: 1) Any rebranding we need/want to do, e.g. remove incubator disclaimer and references. There was talk at one point about refreshing the logo design at this time as well. KG01 - Short term re-branding could remove the incubation reference. More broadly, we should style the site to reflect any updates to our branding. 2) Updating URL's, email list address, SVN and dist directory references. There may be others. This is pretty much a search replace operation. 3) Any work to freshen the website UI. IMHO it is always a good time to improve the website ;-) KG01 - Long term UI refresh, should be associated with any enhancement to our brand moving foward. 4.0 presents an opportunity to launch such a re-branding. KG01 - Who can lead a re-branding effort? Marketing? PMC? Thoughts? I wonder if it would be a good time to rethink the default font on the website. Look at our plain text versus Mozilla's website, which uses OpenSans (Apache 2.0 License): http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/features/ http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Open+Sans KG01 - Agree, nice font. Very legible onscreen. To me this is much more legible than our current font (Liberation?) I know we'll have quite a number of references to change after we graduate, and I thought we were planning on using the area where we have the Apache incubator icon for something else but I'd need to go look that up. re: fonts --- I'll need to investigate this. I didn't realize we had much of anything specified. h Regards, -Rob So...get your creative juices flowing and let's see what we can do. --
Re: Some stats and observations on OpenOffice upgrades
2012.09.25. 21:06 keltezéssel, Rob Weir írta: I've been looking at the upgrade numbers, the downloads that are triggered from upgrade notifications in the OpenOffice client. Although we are not tracking how many times such notifications pop up in the OpenOffice client we do know from Google Analytics how many users click the link to get more information on the update, and how many of these users actually download the upgrade. The trends have been pretty steady, a slight peak when a release is initially made, but a lingering steady state of upgrade requests even several weeks later. For example, let's look at the status for a single day, last Wednesday, Sept. 19th. On that date we had 164,752 total downloads of AOO. Of those downloads, it looks like 54% of them come from upgrading users. The remainder are either from new users, or existing users that went to the website directly rather than from an upgrade notification. (No easy way of distinguishing these two). The interesting thing is the breakdown by OpenOffice client version. For the upgrade installs on Sept 19th we see: 31% of upgrades were from AOO 3.4.0 52% of upgrades were from OOo 3.3.0 15% of upgrades were from OOo 3.2.1 3% of upgrades were from OOo 3.2.0 Note the OOo 3.3.0 numbers. Nearly 4 months after AOO 3.4 was released we are still getting large numbers of OOo 3.3.0 users receiving and responding to upgrade notifications, nearly 20,000/day. I'm not sure how to explain this. Upgrade notifications should surface once a week. Maybe: A) Some users are sporadically connected to the internet and the upgrade check rarely is successful B) Some users ignore/defer the upgrade notifications until a later time, in some cases months later Some features not supported in AOO 3.4.x especially, the report builder not developed any more, and Base users meet problems with reports containing charts. For this reason they after upgrade to AOO 3.4.x downgrade back az least one computer in companies to OOo 3.3 for report creating, and not care about update warning. And waiting for solution, and we can not provide them real solution, It is from forum posts (LibO no solutions for them, because their report builder has different bugs, which prevent from daily work.) Zoltan C) Some user run OpenOffice rarely, sometimes at an interval of several months D) Someone, some web site, some organization, etc., is still distributing OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 to users, and after they install they get the AOO upgrade notification. If D), this is somewhat a concern, since users running OOo 3.3.0 are exposed to several security flaws. -Rob
Re: [DISCUSS]: What should be part of AOO by default or what belongs more into a broader eco-system around AOO
Hello All, Great topic. I too belong to the less is more school. Great in theory, harder to realize with a moving ship ;) Re: connectors - this is a great way to extend the core - perhaps we could create a stronger development eco-system for extensions - perhaps we could make the extension more consumable and discoverable for end users Re: smaller footprint - this is also great - perhaps the core becomes so light that it can be the base for full on custom applications - I assume this is a core theme in Future AOO? Hope so - build a full eco-system like Firefox, or Evernote - the default install for AOO could include the core, and some common extensions - then we make it easy for people to manage extensions - perhaps we explore ways for people to discover and access extension to extend the core in the context of a task ex: I'm doing some advanced publishing, and I trigger a one-click installation of an extension from within an AOO view or dialog related to formating content -- on demand capabilities - more broadly, we could provide a better experience to enable or disable extensions on demand Thoughts? Oh ya, I wanted to mention that UX is in the process of deploying a task prioritization surveyhttp://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AOO_Survey_Templates_-_Task_Prioritization, the results of which can feed into the conversation. Regards, Kevin On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Shenfeng Liu liush...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/9/13 Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org On 11/09/2012 Rob Weir wrote: On Sep 11, 2012, at 12:27 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: Things that comes to my mind where I would always prefer an extension solution: - Connectors to some non free, non open source software based on proprietary API's. ... - Dependencies on external GPL, LGPL libraries. - Rarely used features ... I think those are reasonable guidelines. Amother category is a standard extension that is under ALv2 and is part of a release. I agree, these components should be packaged as extensions. We should probably think of what install enhancements we can make to better facilitate bundling of extensions. To the developer and user, extension + easy install integration should feel the same as adding a feature to the core. The main problem is that the ecosystem around OpenOffice is completely unknown to most end users. It would be a huge leap forward to use the bottom-right part of the Start Centre to promote this ecosystem (Extensions, Templates, everything that makes sense) by displaying a couple lines of dynamic content retrieved from sources we control. Examples of content we could broadcast there: - Add a grammar checker to OpenOffice: [link to LanguageTool/LightProof on the Extensions site] - Download a CV template for OpenOffice: [link to a template on the Templates site] - Add clipart to OpenOffice: [relevant link] - Tip of the day: using styles in OpenOffice [link to wiki page] Instead of promoting certain items, I think generally we should make the Search function more visible to users. Just like I don't know what's in App Stores, I just try a search and see what I can get. The current 3 small icons at the bottom-left of the welcome page for templet/extension/website are too far to get users' attention, even though the web pages they link to are very cool. We can redesign it will more visible icons and sentences, even search dialog on the welcome page. Of course, Quickstarter is another good place. - Simon This shouldn't be hard to do and it would allow us to make users aware of the ecosystem around OpenOffice, which in turn means we can be confident that users will try to find functionality in Extensions if they don't have it readily available in OpenOffice. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [Extension]Task panel/ sidebar view
Hey All, Thanks for the links to existing effort. This is useful to see what has been considered already. As a reminder, AOO UX looked at the Symphony Task Pane and prepared a report that identified positive aspects of the Symphony task pane to emulate via merge/migration, and which aspects to avoid. We also identified a number of opportunities for improvement for the task pane implementation moving forward. See: AOO Symphony UX Migration/Merge Analysis - Task Panehttp://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AOO_Symphony_UX_Migration/Merge_Analysis_-_Task_Panefor more information. Regards, Kevin On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Dali Liu wawal...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/9/20 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com On 9/19/12 8:24 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: Hi Jürgen, On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 01:13:23PM +0200, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: But more important is the question how we can move forward with the already planned improvements of this feature (see the wiki pages). I guess in the usual way: someone sits down, and writes code ;) Especially the tabs on the right site with icons etc. comparable to the side bar in Symphony. Symphony comes here with some good improvements and useful property side bars. Now that you mentioned it: although the property side bar is something new and may be useful from a user perspective, it has several drawbacks, and introduces several regressions compared to what AOO actually has to offer: - from the user perspective, AOO currently supports a way to customize User Interface elements, at application and document level (Tools - Customize dialog). Symphony's property side bars are completely hard-coded in resource files, no way to customize them - from the programmability perspective: AOO currently offers extension developer a whole set of features, from disabling commands via configuration, dispatch interception, menu and toolbar merging, etc. Symphony's property sidebars cannot be extended by the merging mechanism (as said before, their structure is hard-coded). The most important part is that the property sidebar wasn't design taking programmability into account: try disabling some command as explain in http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/WritingUNO/Disable_Commands it will work with toolbars and menus (in context menus the command is not disabled, but at least the command is not dispatched); but in the property sidebar the command is enabled and even dispatched While some of these regressions can be fixed (among other things, not dispatching through the SfxDispatcher but through the SfxBindings, ...), allowing customization of the sidebars seems not doable (at least in the current state of the application framework). In conclusion, I wouldn't speak about a revolutionary UI change in the code that has been contributed; as explained above, it has several drawbacks and, from some perspective, is a regression from what AOO currently offers to users and extension developers. I agree and share all your observations. Nobody said a revolutionary UI change but the property side bar is of course a very useful approach to make these features better and more intuitive available. We should keep in mind that this UI was also awarded, feedback was positive and users like it. From my point of view reasons enough to at least take such an UI into account. The technical realization is of course a different thing. And we have already a mechanism to integrate such task panes/side bars via extensions. We should think about how we can bring together both ... I recall that Carsten Driesner told me that the way how the tool panel was implemented was a sort of hack; the real solution was in the refactoring he was doing in the layout manager code, to support docking windows as new UI elements; unfortunately, he no longer works on OpenOffice, and there isn't much in the cws dockingwindows2 to get an idea. I agree and there was work ongoing. My point is that we have to take care of potential existing solutions and if we can support the exiting API's in some way. But even if not we have to think about a good migration of existing extensions making already use of this feature. This shows another drawback of the Symphony sidebar implementation, as completely designed in the old sfx2 framework, away from all the UNO stuff that makes the application programable for extension development. I guess that with a corporate mind, making this stuff extensible wasn't in the original plan; while here at Apache OpenOffice, extensibility is a way to produce a software for the public good, that can be extended without the need to modify (nor learn) a single line of code (and nor building the code by yourself from source, simply using our binaries,
Re: [Extension]Task panel/ sidebar view
Questions: Is this feature formally in AOO roadmap? If so, what release is it in plan for? Do Bugilla epics or stories exist for this work? Regards, Kevin On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Kevin Grignon kevingrignon...@gmail.comwrote: Hey All, Thanks for the links to existing effort. This is useful to see what has been considered already. As a reminder, AOO UX looked at the Symphony Task Pane and prepared a report that identified positive aspects of the Symphony task pane to emulate via merge/migration, and which aspects to avoid. We also identified a number of opportunities for improvement for the task pane implementation moving forward. See: AOO Symphony UX Migration/Merge Analysis - Task Panehttp://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AOO_Symphony_UX_Migration/Merge_Analysis_-_Task_Panefor more information. Regards, Kevin On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Dali Liu wawal...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/9/20 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com On 9/19/12 8:24 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: Hi Jürgen, On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 01:13:23PM +0200, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: But more important is the question how we can move forward with the already planned improvements of this feature (see the wiki pages). I guess in the usual way: someone sits down, and writes code ;) Especially the tabs on the right site with icons etc. comparable to the side bar in Symphony. Symphony comes here with some good improvements and useful property side bars. Now that you mentioned it: although the property side bar is something new and may be useful from a user perspective, it has several drawbacks, and introduces several regressions compared to what AOO actually has to offer: - from the user perspective, AOO currently supports a way to customize User Interface elements, at application and document level (Tools - Customize dialog). Symphony's property side bars are completely hard-coded in resource files, no way to customize them - from the programmability perspective: AOO currently offers extension developer a whole set of features, from disabling commands via configuration, dispatch interception, menu and toolbar merging, etc. Symphony's property sidebars cannot be extended by the merging mechanism (as said before, their structure is hard-coded). The most important part is that the property sidebar wasn't design taking programmability into account: try disabling some command as explain in http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/WritingUNO/Disable_Commands it will work with toolbars and menus (in context menus the command is not disabled, but at least the command is not dispatched); but in the property sidebar the command is enabled and even dispatched While some of these regressions can be fixed (among other things, not dispatching through the SfxDispatcher but through the SfxBindings, ...), allowing customization of the sidebars seems not doable (at least in the current state of the application framework). In conclusion, I wouldn't speak about a revolutionary UI change in the code that has been contributed; as explained above, it has several drawbacks and, from some perspective, is a regression from what AOO currently offers to users and extension developers. I agree and share all your observations. Nobody said a revolutionary UI change but the property side bar is of course a very useful approach to make these features better and more intuitive available. We should keep in mind that this UI was also awarded, feedback was positive and users like it. From my point of view reasons enough to at least take such an UI into account. The technical realization is of course a different thing. And we have already a mechanism to integrate such task panes/side bars via extensions. We should think about how we can bring together both ... I recall that Carsten Driesner told me that the way how the tool panel was implemented was a sort of hack; the real solution was in the refactoring he was doing in the layout manager code, to support docking windows as new UI elements; unfortunately, he no longer works on OpenOffice, and there isn't much in the cws dockingwindows2 to get an idea. I agree and there was work ongoing. My point is that we have to take care of potential existing solutions and if we can support the exiting API's in some way. But even if not we have to think about a good migration of existing extensions making already use of this feature. This shows another drawback of the Symphony sidebar implementation, as completely designed in the old sfx2 framework, away from all the UNO stuff that makes the application programable for extension development. I guess that with a corporate mind, making this stuff extensible wasn't in the original plan; while here
Re: [DISCUSS] defining roles for management, coordination, work items...
Hello All, Great collection of community roles. Without creating a full method library, which is really heavy lifting, might we make some associations between the roles with activities, work products and responsibilities. We could include a RACI (responsible, accountable, consulted, informed) matrix to define how roles who perform work and create work product, work with other roles to deliver. Some thoughts... Regards, Kevin On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Yue Helen helenyu...@gmail.com wrote: This is a pretty good proposal! I have seen much discussion around the criteria of PMC, and this one seems most solid to me. A PMC is a group of people who have respective leadership in his/her areas, and can lead this product to success. Helen 2012/9/7 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com Hi, I would like to give my thoughts on defining roles for management, ... as the thread Specific actions needed for developing the community tends to become a general one on this topic. For me we, the AOO community, need to have an idea about the different roles which need to be fullfilled to drive our project: - role of developer - role of forum admin - role of tester - role of UX practitioners - role of release manager - role of community manager - role of marketing person - role of press contact - role of distribution manager - role of buildbot admin - ... From my point of view these are more or less areas of the project which need to be fullfilled with certain actions and coordination. What I do not believe is that we need to assign certain individuals on these roles (*). I agree with Jürgen that certain individuals will grow their expertise in a certain role/area and as a contributor will take action or raise flag due to lack of resources, knowlegde, ... I think we already had quite a couple of good examples for such a habit. But, I also have to admit that for certain other roles we did not yet succeed as we could and should. And here comes the responsibility of the (P)PMC - its management duty, if you want. The (P)PMC as a group takes care that the roles are fullfilled. E.g., by raising a corresponding gap on ooo-dev, by calling for discussion and volunteers, by leveraging new and/or established members. My thoughts are also based on the fact that Apache had only two roles in a project to by assigned to a certain individual - the PMC chair and the release manager. As pointed out above, I think that we need to work out the need and the working tasks for certain roles in our project. This work out is from my point of view a community task which could or may be should be driven by the current PPMC in order to demonstrate our self-governance. Best regards, Oliver. (*) except the ones for the PMC chair and the release manager, of course, as they are part of the Apache Way.
[UX] [Call for review] Task Prioritization Survey Questions
Hello All, I've captured a series of questions for inclusion in an upcoming AOO survey. The questions are intended to help us understand which features and capabilities are most frequently used in the editors. Insight from this survey will help us focus our attention on core task, and help prioritize future effort. I've captured the questions in a spreadsheet. Please visit the UX wiki to download and review the questions. *AOO Survey Templates - Task Prioritization* http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AOO_Survey_Templates_-_Task_Prioritization These questions, along with others, will be included in re-usable question packages that can be deployed in LimeSurvey, our new survey tooling. I will send out a note on the LimeSurvey effort soon. Regards, Kevin
