Hello,
for the first time in history Slovenian builds (3.2.0) have been fully
tested and promoted to mirrors (folder localized/sl), so please add
appropriate links on the main download page (
http://download.openoffice.org/other.html), there is no Slovenian builds on
that page now, neither full
Hello Martin
Martin Srebotnjak schrieb:
Hello,
for the first time in history Slovenian builds (3.2.0) have been fully
tested and promoted to mirrors (folder localized/sl), so please add
appropriate links on the main download page (
http://download.openoffice.org/other.html), there is no
Aha, OK, I figured so, but just wanted to remember, that Slovenian now
belongs to the A list :)
Lp, m.
2010/2/11 Mechtilde o...@mechtilde.de
Hello Martin
Martin Srebotnjak schrieb:
Hello,
for the first time in history Slovenian builds (3.2.0) have been fully
tested and promoted to
Hi Martin,
Martin Srebotnjak wrote (11-02-10 12:40)
Aha, OK, I figured so, but just wanted to remember, that Slovenian now
belongs to the A list :)
Reason for congratulations - many kudos!
Cor
--
Your office 2010 software: the new OpenOffice.org
Cor Nouws
- ideas/remarks for the
Hi Martin,
don't worry, the 3.2.0 directory is already visible on the reference
server but not yet the builds itself.
I'll try to modify the download websites as soon as possible.
Best regards
Marcus
Martin Srebotnjak wrote:
Aha, OK, I figured so, but just wanted to remember, that
Martin Srebotnjak wrote:
Hi Martin,
I was warned again by Slovenian community about the wording of the
Disclaimer on the download site (http://download.openoffice.org/all_rc.html
):
*OpenOffice.org 3.1.1 RC2 - untested full installation sets* *Disclaimer:
The software in the following table is
2009/11/23 Marcus Lange marcus.la...@sun.com
Now it's:
The software in the following table is based on the final release but the
final tests were not done yet. Therefore it cannot be seen
as a released build and it is not recommended to deploy in a production
environment.
These two
Hello, Marcus et. al.,
I was warned again by Slovenian community about the wording of the
Disclaimer on the download site (http://download.openoffice.org/all_rc.html
):
*OpenOffice.org 3.1.1 RC2 - untested full installation sets* *Disclaimer:
The software in the following table is based on the
You are mostly right. Anyways, I dont believe that there exists some
widely used software that you can FULLY rely on in production. Maybe
some space and military pieces ... ;)
Maybe then: these untested packages can fail with a bit bigger
probability than tested ones but are still much better in
Hi Marcus,
thank you for all you work.
One thingy though: I think you could remove the sub-yellow and
sub-orange divs. They don't seem to be useful (as opposed to the
sub-green div), and IMO may only cause unneeded confusion (e.g.
should I click this link, or that link?).
as it is always
This sentence irritates me a bit in the head of RC downloads:
The software in the following table is not recommended for production
deployment. These builds are under development and therefore
unstable.
This software is based on final source of released version, therefore
these builds are not
Ain Vagula wrote:
Hi Ain,
This sentence irritates me a bit in the head of RC downloads:
The software in the following table is not recommended for production
deployment. These builds are under development and therefore
unstable.
yes, it is not the best wording for a RC.
This software is
Hi Marcus,
2009.11.16 18:48, Marcus Lange rašė:
both websites are now online.
Cool, thanks!
One thingy though: I think you could remove the sub-yellow and
sub-orange divs. They don't seem to be useful (as opposed to the
sub-green div), and IMO may only cause unneeded confusion (e.g. should
Thank you!
ain.
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 18:05, Marcus Lange marcus.la...@sun.com wrote:
Ain Vagula wrote:
Hi Ain,
This sentence irritates me a bit in the head of RC downloads:
The software in the following table is not recommended for production
deployment. These builds are under
Rimas Kudelis wrote:
2009.11.16 18:48, Marcus Lange rašė:
both websites are now online.
Hi Rimas,
Cool, thanks!
One thingy though: I think you could remove the sub-yellow and
sub-orange divs. They don't seem to be useful (as opposed to the
sub-green div), and IMO may only cause unneeded
Hi all,
both websites are now online.
Best regards
Marcus
Marcus Lange wrote:
Hi all,
when there are no further comments, then I'll start to bring both sites
to the new location at download.openoffice.org/other.html and
download.openoffice.org/langpack.html.
Thanks
Marcus
Marcus
Hi all,
when there are no further comments, then I'll start to bring both sites
to the new location at download.openoffice.org/other.html and
download.openoffice.org/langpack.html.
Thanks
Marcus
Marcus Lange wrote:
Hi,
because IA64 and Linux PPC builds are only available for English US
Hi,
because IA64 and Linux PPC builds are only available for English US and
no other language, I've moved the columns to a separate table below the
first one. This will save a bit space to the right hand side.
Best regards
Marcus
Marcus Lange wrote:
Hi,
I've done some further changes:
Hi Marcus,
I suggest to name the top two links as follows:
* Download OOo 3.1.1 and older - tested and released installation sets
* Download OOo 3.1.1 RC2 - untested installation sets
to make it clearer what the second link is about and why the first table
contains older builds among
2009/11/6 Rimas Kudelis r...@akl.lt
Hi Marcus,
I suggest to name the top two links as follows:
* Download OOo 3.1.1 and older - tested and released installation sets
* Download OOo 3.1.1 RC2 - untested installation sets
to make it clearer what the second link is about and why the
Martin Srebotnjak wrote:
Hi Martin,
BTW:
Please don't hit me when I use Firefox as example ;-) but Mozilla has also
split it up (fully localized and beta):
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all.html
I am localizing many OS software packages, but not even one requires QA for
every language
Hello Martin, *,
Martin Srebotnjak schrieb:
2009/11/2 Marcus Lange marcus.la...@sun.com
BTW:
Please don't hit me when I use Firefox as example ;-) but Mozilla has also
split it up (fully localized and beta):
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all.html
Yes and the packages of
would solve the matter I believe.
--- On Sat, 17/10/09, Mechtilde o...@mechtilde.de wrote:
From: Mechtilde o...@mechtilde.de
Subject: Re: [l10n-dev] New home for downloading language packs
To: dev@l10n.openoffice.org
Date: Saturday, 17 October, 2009, 1:44 PM
Hello,
Martin Srebotnjak schrieb:
Hi
2009/11/2 Marcus Lange marcus.la...@sun.com:
Hi all,
Hello,
as promised I thought about a new structure and have created the following
websites to ease the download of RC builds:
http://download.openoffice.org/next/other_rc.html
The first sentence on this page mentions langpacks, although
though
translated versions of language packs, listed would solve the
matter I believe.
--- On Sat, 17/10/09, Mechtilde o...@mechtilde.de wrote:
From: Mechtilde o...@mechtilde.de
Subject: Re: [l10n-dev] New home for downloading language packs
To: dev@l10n.openoffice.org
Date: Saturday, 17
Martin Srebotnjak wrote:
Hi Martin,
as promised I thought about a new structure and have created the following
websites to ease the download of RC builds:
http://download.openoffice.org/next/other_rc.html
The first sentence on this page mentions langpacks, although the page
actually lists
and another for beta untested though
translated versions of language packs, listed would solve the
matter I believe.
--- On Sat, 17/10/09, Mechtilde o...@mechtilde.de wrote:
From: Mechtilde o...@mechtilde.de
Subject: Re: [l10n-dev] New home for downloading language packs
To: dev@l10n.openoffice.org
Date
Marcus Lange wrote:
I would propose to merge the two pages you created with main
http://download.openoffice.org/other.html and
http://download.openoffice.org/langpack.html respectively.
I've tried this but don't liked it because IMHO this is too much content
for a single page.
Untested
Hello,
maybe the verified builds would get a green check mark icon, and the others
a red question mark icon? There should also be a legend stating that builds
with the green check mark are supported and verified, whereas the others
might not work as expected. That being said, they can all be put
...@mechtilde.de
Subject: Re: [l10n-dev] New home for
downloading language packs
To: dev@l10n.openoffice.org
Date: Saturday, 17 October, 2009, 1:44 PM
Hello,
Martin Srebotnjak schrieb:
Hi all,
Also, just out of my curiosity, can you
list recent
examples when a
fully localized national sdf
2009.11.02 15:52, Marcus Lange rašė:
Marcus Lange wrote:
I would propose to merge the two pages you created with main
http://download.openoffice.org/other.html and
http://download.openoffice.org/langpack.html respectively.
I've tried this but don't liked it because IMHO this is too much
...@sun.com wrote:
From: Marcus Lange marcus.la...@sun.com
Subject: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs
To: dev@l10n.openoffice.org, relea...@openoffice.org
Date: Monday, 2 November, 2009, 4:37 PM
Hi all,
as promised I thought about a new structure and have
created
Hi again,
thanks for your work! :) I have a few notes though. Or basically, maybe
it's just one note.
How visible will those builds be? I think we've agreed that they should
I haven't seen the agreement. In which mail was it?
I think this whole thread (or at least the sub-thread) is about
Rimas Kudelis wrote:
Hi Rimas,
OK, with the hint of Untested it could work. I've to play with this
setup.
I tried to start with this but I still think we should not mix stable
and unstable builds together:
- even so all builds for Mac OS PPC (which are done by Maho) have to be
integrsted,
Martin Srebotnjak wrote:
Hi Martin,
maybe the verified builds would get a green check mark icon, and the others
a red question mark icon? There should also be a legend stating that builds
with the green check mark are supported and verified, whereas the others
might not work as expected. That
Hi,
IMHO nobody has said this. ;-) We are doing full install sets when the
L10N has reached 75 or 80 %. Langpacks are always done.
Sun Hamburg team is doing full builds if
at least 80% UI has been translated and at least 80% help content has
been translated
Sun Hamburg team is building
Interesting, I have several years UI translation between 99-100% and
Help over 90 and always stated it when submitting translations. Though
I havent seen full builds exept pre-last release when I asked Ivo to
make a build for win32.
ain
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 18:11, Joost Andrae
Hi all,
as an alternative I've created a langpack website with all files listed
in 2 tables:
http://download.openoffice.org/next/langpack_all.html
Maybe we can agree on this as commpromise?
Best regards
Marcus
Marcus Lange wrote:
Hi all,
as promised I thought about a new structure and
Hi, I think this is better.
Why are the untested builds marked as RC2? I mean, you already divided the
tested/approved and untested builds into two tables, why make users wonder
if this RC2 might mean this is not really 3.1.1 (or whatever the latest
version is)?
Yes, they are not released so
for 3.2.0.
Best regards
Marcus
--- On Mon, 2/11/09, Marcus Lange marcus.la...@sun.com wrote:
From: Marcus Lange marcus.la...@sun.com
Subject: [l10n-dev] Re: Re: New home for downloading language packs
To: dev@l10n.openoffice.org, relea...@openoffice.org
Date: Monday, 2 November, 2009, 4:37
Wouldn't this table look much better, if it was only one?
And if the tested/release versions cells would have a green background
indicating these are the ones that are green-state in QA?
It confuses user if she finds her language in the first table but not the OS
she looked for (yeah, it is
Martin Srebotnjak wrote:
Hi Martin,
Hi, I think this is better.
Why are the untested builds marked as RC2? I mean, you already divided the
tested/approved and untested builds into two tables, why make users wonder
if this RC2 might mean this is not really 3.1.1 (or whatever the latest
version
2009/11/2 Marcus Lange marcus.la...@sun.com
because it is the official suffix before it get tested and released. It's
the same with a beta release.
Yes, they are not released so they remain release candidates, but actually
the actual code is same as released version. I think this degrades
Martin Srebotnjak wrote:
2009/11/2 Marcus Lange marcus.la...@sun.com
because it is the official suffix before it get tested and released. It's
the same with a beta release.
Yes, they are not released so they remain release candidates, but actually
the actual code is same as released
Martin Srebotnjak wrote:
Hi Martin,
Wouldn't this table look much better, if it was only one?
And if the tested/release versions cells would have a green background
indicating these are the ones that are green-state in QA?
the question is not if it looks better but if it would be an
2009/11/2 Marcus Lange marcus.la...@sun.com
BTW:
Please don't hit me when I use Firefox as example ;-) but Mozilla has also
split it up (fully localized and beta):
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all.html
I am localizing many OS software packages, but not even one requires QA for
every
46 matches
Mail list logo
