Re: isnumeric function

It is clearly an odd bug isnumeric("123E456") is also True but isnumeric("123DE456") is False... Maybe there is a confusion with Hexadecimal numbers? But A,B,C and F is also False... Anyone has a clue? Regards, Pedro On Thursday 23 June 2022 14:26:33 (+01:00), Lucien Mathay wrote: > > Le

Re: QA Automated Test coverage

+1 OpenOffice 4 Excellence ;) Regards, Pedro On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 9:24 PM Matthias Seidel wrote: > Hi Carl, > > a big +1 for automated tests. > > I know that there are some, but never executed them myself. > So I am willing to learn and help to improve our QA. > > Regards, > >Matthias >

Re: Bugzilla 4.1.3 RC1

e computer knowledge... Just my 2 cents. On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 1:58 AM, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: > Pedro Lino wrote: > >> ​Yes the RC will be the same, but the file creation date and file size >> will >> be different. On a FTP server it would

Bugzilla 4.1.3 RC1

Hi all After installing 4.1.3 RC1 under Windows I found some problems but Bugzilla does not include Version 4.1.3 Can someone please add it in? Thanks Pedro

Re: Dailies/Nightlies

Hi Andrea On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 7:16 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: > On 24/08/2016 Pedro Lino wrote: > >> There seems to be a problem updating the html page (at least for the >> Windows builds) >> https://ci.apache.org/projects/openo

Dailies/Nightlies

Hi all I'm glad that Windows nightly builds are working again. Kudos to all that contributed. There seems to be a problem updating the html page (at least for the Windows builds) https://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/ compared to https://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/install/win/ Is

Re: [TESTING] Applying openoffice-4.1.2-patch1 for Windows

Hi all > REQUESTED TESTING > > * [OPTIONAL] If you are able to check any of the .asc, >.md5, and .sha256 files against the .zip, report any >difficulties that may have been encountered. > ​Checked md5 and sha256. No problem.​ Assuming advanced users will be doing this, they probably

Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

> It seems to me that RESOLVED - RESOLVED is too mysterious and RESOLVED >>> - NOTOURBUG is not much better than NOTANISSUE. >>> >>> RESOLVED - HANDLED might be closer, with the comment that achieves >>> this explains how it is handled. (I.e., documentation, workaround, >>> whatever.) >>> >>> I'm

Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

> It's not about to draw the line between issues that are resolved and > verified solutions. It's about to differentiate issues that are in the real > application and therefore need to be fixed in the source code. Here we use > (or better should use) RESOLVED - FIXED. > > But what about issues

Re: Can we add the value "N/A" to the Target Milestone field

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 10:32 PM, Marcus wrote: > Am 03/21/2016 10:36 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: > >> [top posting] >> >> Thanks for all the help with this and for the new NONE for >> target release. Hopefully, it will be used sparingly >> assuming we us e RESOLVED-FIXED as

Daily/Nightly builds for Windows?

Hi all Now that 4.1.2 is out and development is again active, I believe it would be good to have the Apache OpenOffice buildbots releasing daily binaries for Windows as well? This has been broken long before the 4.1.2 RC stage but maybe now someone could give some love to the buildbot? With

Re: Release status - Please test OpenOffice 4.1.2-RC2

but still know which version the file belongs to)? Regards, Pedro On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Pedro Lino <pedl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> Pedro Lino wrote: >> &

Re: Release status - Please test OpenOffice 4.1.2-RC2

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 8:47 AM, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: > On 18/10/2015 Pedro Lino wrote: > >> RC1 was >> AOO412m1(Build:9780) - Rev. 1705625 >> 2015-09-28 12:45:04 (Mo, 28 Sep 2015) >> >> and RC2 is >> AOO412m2(Build:9781)

Re: Release status - Please test OpenOffice 4.1.2-RC2

One question: RC1 was AOO412m1(Build:9780) - Rev. 1705625 2015-09-28 12:45:04 (Mo, 28 Sep 2015) and RC2 is AOO412m2(Build:9781) - Rev. 1707648 2015-09-28 12:45:04 (Mo, 28 Sep 2015) The date/time is the same. Is this expected or is it a Bug? Regards, Pedro On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 11:42

Re: OpenOffice 4.1.2-RC2 available (and happy birthday!)

Hi Andrea, all I just installed RC2 and noticed that it is not bundled with the latest version of the dictionaries (English and Portuguese at least). If I check for Extension Updates the latest version is available for update. The installer should include the latest version of bundled

Re: [CODE] old business...patches

Well spotted by Regina. The correct link is https://issues.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=doremlist_id=162913namedcmd=PATCHESremaction=runsharer_id=7 Regards, Pedro On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Regina Henschel rb.hensc...@t-online.de wrote: Kay Schenk schrieb: The following query

Re: No daily builds

Thank you for the quick answer I can't find any download links... Am I missing something? On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Pedro Lino pedl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all In case no one has noticed there haven't been any

Re: No daily builds

-online.de wrote: Hi Pedro, Pedro Lino schrieb: Thank you for the quick answer I can't find any download links... Am I missing something? http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/install/ Kind regards Regina On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat

No daily builds

Hi all In case no one has noticed there haven't been any daily builds since Oct 18th (and as far as Oct 6th for 32 bit Linux). http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/ Best regards, Pedro

Re: Hybrid PDF

On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: I still think that it doesn't make sense that this is an optional download. If creating a Hybrid PDF is a feature included in AOO what is the sense that trying to reopen the file you just created will show you an

Re: Hybrid PDF

Hi Ariel, all On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote: This was a change introduced in AOO4. The idea behind was to open the possibility to develop the Hybrid-PDF import independently from the PDF import, be it by any third party as an extension or

Hybrid PDF

Hi all I have an issue for QA/dev: Currently the PDF import (created by Oracle) can not be installed under AOO 4.x (it works correctly with AOO 3.4.0) This makes creation of hybrid PDFs pointless because they can not be edited again in AOO (although they work perfectly in LO where the ODF

Re: Hybrid PDF

Hi Andrea, all Let me understand: are you installing on OpenOffice 4.x this extension which is named Oracle PDF Import Extension (for OpenOffice 3.x) instead of this one (linked from the page above as the version to use for OpenOffice 4.x): Yes, I did. My bad for not noticing the link

Re: Progress and Quality

Hi Rob You are focusing on security and exploits (which is obviously a very important area). But I was thinking more in terms of program stability *during* usage. I assume that Coverity's project's defect density would reflect this? The correlation is not clear. I'd note, for

Progress and Quality

Hi all QAers I'm wondering if I'm missing something or development really stopped/slowed down since the 4.1.1 release? (according to this site http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/trunk/main/?sortby=date the last modification was *r1623850* on Tue Sep 9 15:35:43 2014 UTC) On a separate note,

Re: Progress and Quality

Hi Andrea Thank you for the quick answer. I'm wondering if I'm missing something or development really stopped/slowed down since the 4.1.1 release? I can't speak for the others. But since the latest visible commit is mine, I've been working more on the website in recent days. Actually

Please update Sourceforge

Hi all In case no one has noticed, the latest version offered by Sourceforge is still 4.1.0 http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/ Looking for the latest version? * Download Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.0_Win_x86_install_en-US.exe (140.9 MB)

Full Installation vs. Language Pack

Hi all I arrived at this page http://www.openoffice.org/download/full_vs_lp.html from the Help link in the Download page. This explanation Since OpenOffice 3.4.0 dictionaries are no longer included in language packs, only in full installations. Dictionaries are not part of the OpenOffice

Re: [RELEASE]: propose RC2 on revision 1616946

Hi Juergen, all Build 1616946 is already available from the Nightly page. I assume this is *exactly* the same (AOO411m5(Build:9757) - Rev. 1616946) as the one you are building now and therefore testers who have installed the Nightly have no need to download the en_US (or de) version again?

Re: [RELEASE]: RC2 due to dictionary updates

Hi Juergen, all I just uninstalled my Portuguese dictionary (version 14.4.1.1) just to test the Extension updates (and Dictionaries in particular since that is the reason for the new RC2). Then I installed a previous version (13.1.1.2). When I pressed Check for Updates I got a message that

Re: [RELEASE]: RC2 due to dictionary updates

it at the Extensions site? Regards, Pedro On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Pedro Lino pedl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Juergen, all I just uninstalled my Portuguese dictionary (version 14.4.1.1) just to test the Extension updates (and Dictionaries in particular since that is the reason for the new RC2). Then I

Re: [RELEASE]: RC2 due to dictionary updates

Hi Juergen On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote: On 07/08/14 15:22, Pedro Lino wrote: Would it still be possible to include that version in RC2 if they update it at the Extensions site? yes, but it have to be done immediately. Can you ask them

Re: Development progress on SVG-graphics

Hi Ariel Thank you for the detailed instructions! Yes, that does show what you get when you export to PDF and in the PNG thumbnails.. Thanks! On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote: On Sat, Aug 02, 2014 at 10:35:01AM +0100, Pedro Lino wrote: Hi

Re: Development progress on SVG-graphics

Hi Regina I'm not sure if this is what you meant, but I reported this bug on LO a long time ago but it is also present in AOO. https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=71068 Kind regards, Pedro On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 12:20 AM, Regina Henschel rb.hensc...@t-online.de wrote: Hi all,

Re: Development progress on SVG-graphics

Hu Armin, Regina On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Armin Le Grand armin.le.gr...@me.com wrote: Ho Pedro, On 01.08.2014 14:43, Regina Henschel wrote: He Pedro, Pedro Lino schrieb: Hi Regina I'm not sure if this is what you meant, but I reported this bug on LO a long time ago

Re: [RELEASE]: propose AOO 4.1.1 RC1 based on revision 1614049

Hi Juergen In case no one has noticed, Nightly builds for the Windows OS have been failing since July 22nd... http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/#win Based on your previous answer I assume this is a Tinderbox problem only but it would be worth to check/fix it? Best regards, Pedro On Mon,

Re: Windows BuildBot [was: Re: [RELEASE]: AOO 4.1.1 milestone 3, based on rev. 1612804]

Hi Oliver, Juergen, all Thank you for the feedback. The build is working perfectly so I'm glad it was such a simple problem. This seems to be a perfect candidate for 4.1.1 :) Best regards, Pedro I'm a little worried that the Windows Nightly based on the same build failed

Re: [QA][Test Report] Weekly Status Update as of 20140714

check again? On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 10:13 PM, Pedro Lino pedl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all Can any Win 7 tester can take these 2 bugs as well to verify ,since its Windows 7- specific . https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124825 Checked. It is fixed. https

Re: [RELEASE]: AOO 4.1.1 milestone 3, based on rev. 1612804

Hi Juergen, all Already installed and ran (and confirmed/tested previous bugs) It is working perfectly (at least the en_US version) I'm a little worried that the Windows Nightly based on the same build failed http://ci.apache.org/builders/aoo-win7/builds/99 Is this bad news or it is not a

Re: Marked as duplicate of a TWELVE YEAR OLD bug

Hi Ariel, all However I think that closing a new bug with more (and recent) information is not a good idea (and is not the way to move this project forward) The bug is a duplicated, then why isn't a good idea to mark it as such? Besides, I already answered on bug 8812 that I don't see

Re: Marked as duplicate of a TWELVE YEAR OLD bug

Hi Andrea, all If you are worried that people will not see it, remember that all changes to any bugs are sent to a dedicated mailing list (issues) that most of the active developers follow (so, even if you don't see them explicitly in CC, they are informed via the list). I'm glad to hear

Re: [RELEASE]: AOO 4.1.1 milestone 3, based on rev. 1611634

Hi Juergen, all In the binaries download page it probably makes sense to update the table so that the links read M3 instead of M1 I really think the Milestone installation files should include the build number (in the same way that the nightlies do). Maybe it would make sense to name them

Marked as duplicate of a TWELVE YEAR OLD bug

Hi all Today I submitted this bug request https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=125291 It was marked as a duplicate of https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=8812 Although I agree that it is a duplicate, the original was so old that when I searched for a similar bug request, it

Re: [QA][Test Report] Weekly Status Update as of 20140714

Hi all Can any Win 7 tester can take these 2 bugs as well to verify ,since its Windows 7- specific . https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124825 Checked. It is fixed. https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122368 Can't check. Don't use Netbeans *Issue 124946*

Re: [QA][Test Report] Weekly Status Update as of 20140714

Hi Yuzhen If there are any Win7 unassigned tests (especially Calc issues) you can assign them to me. I can also use/install AOO in Portuguese if needed. My Testlink ID is pedlino Should I use build 1608452 (aka Milestone 2) or the latest Nightly from http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/#win

Re: instruction book?

You should check http://www.odfauthors.org/ All books are free to download but you can order printed copies from LuLu http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/opendocument Even if some manuals refer LibreOffice they could help you since the Sidebar is quite similar (it was imported from the OpenOffice

Re: Using dailies under Windows

in production. Cheers, Pedro On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 10:15 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: On 12/06/2014 Pedro Lino wrote: But this is not what I meant... Since AOO dailies install to the standard path and use the default profile, a tester can use it as the main (and only

Re: Keeping the last successful Nightly?

Hi Herbert, all This means that all it takes to keep the previous version is to make sure it is not deleted if compiling a new one fails (i.e. deleting only after success instead of deleting before compile starts) I tested the change to accomplish this on our windows-nightly buildbot over

Re: Using dailies under Windows

Hi Ouchka msiexec / a openoffice400.msi. This is essentially what I needed ;) I still think it would be nice if the installer detected that the build is newer and allowed to install without any tricks. This would be more user friendly ;) Merci bien! Kind regards, Pedro

Re: Using dailies under Windows

From: Pedro Lino pedl...@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 2:08 PM To: qa@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: Using dailies under Windows Hi Ouchka msiexec / a openoffice400.msi. This is essentially what I needed ;) I still think it would be nice if the installer

Snapshot builds questions

Hi all 1) Is there a log with changes for the current daily/nightly build compared to the latest official release (in this case 4.1.0)? 2) Why is the latest Windows Snapshot Packages build older than 4.1.0? Thanks, Pedro

Re: AOO Post 4.1 Test Starts! Call for volunteers!

I'm on Windows XP with Office 2003. If there is some specific bug I can test, please let me know. On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: Hi Yuzhen, I finalize the tests, except for: Test Case ID AOOTest-229 :: Version : 1 Emphasis_Timing_Repeat_none I

Re: [RESULT][VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.1.0 (RC4)

Hi Juergen, all That means the ballot closed successful to release the RC as AOO 4.1 Beta. This was obviously a copypaste mistake, what you meant was as Apache OpenOffice 4.1.0 One question: will there be a 4.0.1 to 4.1.0 msp patch?

Re: [RELEASE]: RC4 available

Hi Juergen, all Running Windows XP Pro x86 SP3 en_US. Tested 4.0.1 4.1.0 both in en_US and pt. Tested install with a clean system with en_US and pt. All worked perfectly. Desktop icon, startup group and add/remove entry were update as expected. Uninstalling removed desktop icon and add/remove

Re: [RELEASE]: propose RC4 on revision 1587478

Hi Juergen The RC files are intended to be the same as the final release files if the vote will be successful. I am well aware of that. But it *is* possible to have an installer named 4.1.0RC4 and if it is accepted just rename the file. LibreOffice does that. When the final RC is accepted,

Re: [RELEASE]: propose RC4 on revision 1587478

The server seems to be slowly updating http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/milestones/4.1.0-rc/binaries/en-US/ Are these the RC4 builds? I think it's a bad option not to name the RCs clearly. It is confusing that the file always has the same name (especially because the creation date is not

Re: [RELEASE]: propose AOO 4.1.0 RC

Hi Jürgen, all the question is why we got some showstoppers so late where the code is in the snapshots since last year. We make a beta and received no critical feedback and when we start RC builds we receive one showstopper one after another. We shave to think how we can in the future. I

Re: Installation guide are asked to review and update when fix bug 124599

Sounds perfect. Adding options (instead of assuming and deciding for the user) is always positive ;) Please make sure that the fix in situation 2) is also included in the MSP On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 5:55 AM, Yuzhen Fan fanyuz...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, Bug 124599 [2] is verified fixed in

Re: [RELEASE]: propose AOO 4.1.0 RC

! On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Pedro Lino pedl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all First of all I would like to say that I'm *really* happy that update patches have arrived for the Windows OS. I was almost sure that I would never see this in a StarOffice derivative. Kudos to the AOO developers

Re: [RELEASE]: propose AOO 4.1.0 RC

Hi all First of all I would like to say that I'm *really* happy that update patches have arrived for the Windows OS. I was almost sure that I would never see this in a StarOffice derivative. Kudos to the AOO developers! I have installed scenario 2 (- Upgrade install 4.1.0 over an existing 4.0.1)

Re: 4.1. Regressions

Hi all I suggest that bugzilla should be improved to include two fields. The first is filled by the reporter (can be someone very unexperienced) and refers to the Version where the bug was observed. A second field (which is not even visible in the first filling form) named VersionFirst is

Bugs already fixed in LibreOffice

Hi all I have reported many bugs and some have already been solved in LibreOffice. I'm wondering if it makes sense to report them *again* to the Apache bugzilla... However, since the LibreOffice license is not compatible with Apache, does this mean that the solution used by LibreOffice can no

Re: Bugs already fixed in LibreOffice

Hi Rob, all If you know the bug exists in AOO as well, then feel free to report it in BZ. But it is worth checking, since there are many LO bugs that never existed in AOO. Obviously ;) Here is an example of a bug that exists in OO since 2005(!!!) and still occurs in AOO 4.1.0 Beta

Re: AOO 4.1 Full Regression Test Starts! Call for volunteers!

Hi Rob Thank you for the fast answer. When you say we focus this test do you mean there will be others where XP is considered? Wouldn't it make sense to include it sooner than later? On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 12:32 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 8:16 AM, Pedro