Hello,
one of the legal requirements of running a foundation is to send in an
annual report. In fact, it's two reports: One financial report, which
mostly Thorsten takes care of (thanks so much!), and one activity
report, which is mostly on my desk at the moment.
We need to list all
Hi Keith,
On Sat, 2013-03-09 at 16:16 -0800, Keith Curtis wrote:
I see how LO is heading in this direction, but you could be
explicit about it, create more workitems,
There always plenty of work-items and opinions; the only shortage is of
people to work on them. Working code speaks far
Hello,
one of the legal requirements of running a foundation is to send in an
annual report. In fact, it's two reports: One financial report, which
mostly Thorsten takes care of (thanks so much!), and one activity
report, which is mostly on my desk at the moment.
We need to list all
How could I infer? Because, as I stated, it was
*specifically* inferred to other entities who subsequently
asked me if I knew the real answer.
As such, I specifically asked the 2 controlling bodies of
the 2 projects. I rec'd a responses quickly from AOO, but
none was coming from LO, and therefore
I'm with you on the UI design, Keith. The way software looks influences how
people perceive its capability, and LO looks like something from the 90's. I
like your design because it's attractive, yet leaves the menus in place for
those users who can't get into using the ribbon.
Now on the idea
Since you answered a different question and continue to allege your
question has not been answered, I will ask again:
How could you infer *from any earlier answer* that triple-licensed
contributions would be inherently refused as you allege? Like
Andrew Pitonyak and Jonathon Blake I read exactly
Hi;
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 3:43 AM, Michael Meeks michael.me...@suse.com wrote:
Hi Keith,
On Sat, 2013-03-09 at 16:16 -0800, Keith Curtis wrote:
I see how LO is heading in this direction, but you could be
explicit about it, create more workitems,
There always plenty of work-items
exhaustively, yes, but not concretely. The exhaustive reply
boils down to it depends, which is really no answer at
all. Furthermore, it implies that the simply inclusion of
the alv2 as part of the license suite *does* change
the dynamic, since something provided under mpl-lgplv3
as not handed the
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
exhaustively, yes, but not concretely. The exhaustive reply
boils down to it depends, which is really no answer at
all. Furthermore, it implies that the simply inclusion of
the alv2 as part of the license suite *does*
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 6:23 AM, Charles Jenkins cejw...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm with you on the UI design, Keith. The way software looks influences how
people perceive its capability, and LO looks like something from the 90's. I
like your design because it's attractive, yet leaves the menus in
Hello Jim,
There's something quite wrong in this conversation. Some entity -a
corporation or a government- has approached you and asked you questions
on how to contribute to LibreOffice (by the way, please be so kind as
using the term LibreOffice and not LO).
As the Chairman of the Apache
As stated, they contacted me because they had been
told that such licensing was not accepted to BOTH
parties, not just one. This should have been clear
from my 1st post. That is why I asked both parties.
On Mar 11, 2013, at 10:25 AM, Charles-H. Schulz
charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org wrote:
Jim,
I do not know who made these assertions to this entity, however it is
really important to understand that it was not the Document
Foundation. We have never been in contact with such parties.
Let me stress again that it is necessary for this entity to contact us
directly.
Thanks,
Charles.
I'm making some progress. Here's my code so far:
==
Public Sub OpenExcelFile(excelPath As String)
Attempt1:
on error goto Fail1
' snip The Excel method that doesn't work
' under LO, and which I don't own copyright to
exit sub
Fail1:
resume Attempt2
Hello,
There is one week left to the deadline to apply for GSoC 2013
http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/homepage/google/gsoc2013
Are there any plans to send an application for TDF and LibreOffice ?
Immanuel
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems?
Hi Immanuel,
On 11/03/2013 16:13, Immanuel Giulea wrote:
Hello,
There is one week left to the deadline to apply for GSoC 2013
http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/homepage/google/gsoc2013
Are there any plans to send an application for TDF and LibreOffice ?
Information can be found here
Hi Charles, *,
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Charles Jenkins cejw...@gmail.com wrote:
dim dummy() ' Empty array of parameters
starDesktop = createUnoService(com.sun.star.frame.Desktop)
url = ConvertToUrl( ExcelPath )
doc = starDesktop.loadComponentFromURL( url, _blank, 0,
While working on my wiki page about a new Writer toolbar, I realized
that independently of my proposal, I believe it makes sense for
LibreOffice to prefer Python. I see how LO is heading in this
direction, but you could be explicit about it, create more workitems,
perhaps track it like you do
I'm working on a proposal for building an experimental new LibreOffice
toolbar / UI in Python:
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:KeithCu
Err, I would like to point out the fact that trying to emulate MS in any
way is always a B-A-D idea.
Especially, but not limited to GUI ergonomics,
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Charles-H. Schulz
charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org wrote:
Jim,
I do not know who made these assertions to this entity, however it is
really important to understand that it was not the Document
Foundation. We have never been in contact with such parties.
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote:
So my question is: is there any reason that LibreOffice under Windows does
not install to \LibreOffice\?
Not really. AFAIK it is just a legacy setting. Default install
location can be changed either from installer UI, or by the
21 matches
Mail list logo
