User: jpmcc Date: 2008-11-15 18:00:37+0000 Modified: marketing/www/planet/atom.xml marketing/www/planet/index.html marketing/www/planet/opml.xml marketing/www/planet/rss10.xml marketing/www/planet/rss20.xml
Log: Planet run at Sat Nov 15 18:00:16 GMT 2008 File Changes: Directory: /marketing/www/planet/ ================================= File [changed]: atom.xml Url: http://marketing.openoffice.org/source/browse/marketing/www/planet/atom.xml?r1=1.1168&r2=1.1169 Delta lines: +30 -30 --------------------- --- atom.xml 2008-11-15 12:00:28+0000 1.1168 +++ atom.xml 2008-11-15 18:00:34+0000 1.1169 @@ -5,9 +5,32 @@ <link rel="self" href="http://marketing.openoffice.org/planet/atom.xml"/> <link href="http://marketing.openoffice.org/planet/"/> <id>http://marketing.openoffice.org/planet/atom.xml</id> - <updated>2008-11-15T12:00:32+00:00</updated> + <updated>2008-11-15T18:00:37+00:00</updated> <generator uri="http://www.planetplanet.org/";>Planet/2.0 +http://www.planetplanet.org</generator> + <entry> + <title type="html">Why not Lotus Symphony right away ?</title> + <link href="http://lodahl.blogspot.com/2008/11/hy-not-lotus-symphony-right-away.html"/> + <id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198340507565233169.post-921724136108677387</id> + <updated>2008-11-15T17:00:30+00:00</updated> + <content type="html">As I often advocate for OpenOffice.org in both private and business societies, I get questions about Lotus Symphony and Lotus Notes 8 from time to time. My advise to companies that are already using Lotus Notes is, to take Lotus Symphony serious as a future possibility. Right now I say: "Use Openoffice.org 3.0". + +The reason for not advocating Lotus Symphony at the present time is, that the</content> + <author> + <name>Leif Lodahl</name> + <email>[EMAIL PROTECTED]</email> + <uri>http://lodahl.blogspot.com/search/label/OpenOffice.org</uri> + </author> + <source> + <title type="html">Lodahl's blog</title> + <subtitle type="html">OpenOffice.org, open source software and open standards. These are the three things you can read about on my blog. I'll try to keep you updated on news and events in Denmark. +Okay, sometimes you can read something about Lotus Notes too</subtitle> + <link rel="self" href="http://lodahl.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default/-/OpenOffice.org"/> + <id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198340507565233169</id> + <updated>2008-11-15T18:00:29+00:00</updated> + </source> + </entry> + <entry xml:lang="en"> <title type="html">Para-sites flourish - search engines turn a blind eye</title> <link href="http://www.mealldubh.org/index.php/2008/11/13/para-sites-flourish-search-engines-turn-a-blind-eye/"/> @@ -58,7 +81,7 @@ <title type="html">jpmcc's shared items in Google Reader</title> <link rel="self" href="http://www.google.co.uk/reader/public/atom/user/06203502505240591501/state/com.google/broadcast"/> <id>tag:google.com,2005:reader/user/06203502505240591501/state/com.google/broadcast</id> - <updated>2008-11-15T12:00:17+00:00</updated> + <updated>2008-11-15T18:00:23+00:00</updated> </source> </entry> @@ -132,7 +155,7 @@ <subtitle type="html">News and interesting stories about OpenOffice.org and other open source solutions.</subtitle> <link rel="self" href="http://ooomarketing.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default"/> <id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4887643299605448632</id> - <updated>2008-11-14T00:00:49+00:00</updated> + <updated>2008-11-15T18:00:27+00:00</updated> </source> </entry> @@ -199,7 +222,7 @@ <subtitle type="html">The Magic of Open Source</subtitle> <link rel="self" href="http://www.theopensourcerer.com/tag/openofficeorg/feed"/> <id>http://www.theopensourcerer.com/tag/openofficeorg/feed</id> - <updated>2008-11-15T12:00:32+00:00</updated> + <updated>2008-11-15T18:00:37+00:00</updated> </source> </entry> @@ -245,7 +268,7 @@ <subtitle type="html">News and interesting stories about OpenOffice.org and other open source solutions.</subtitle> <link rel="self" href="http://ooomarketing.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default"/> <id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4887643299605448632</id> - <updated>2008-11-14T00:00:49+00:00</updated> + <updated>2008-11-15T18:00:27+00:00</updated> </source> </entry> @@ -322,7 +345,7 @@ <subtitle type="html">Open Opinions about Open Source Software</subtitle> <link rel="self" href="http://www.italovignoli.org/?feed=rss2"/> <id>http://www.italovignoli.org/?feed=rss2</id> - <updated>2008-11-15T00:00:23+00:00</updated> + <updated>2008-11-15T18:00:25+00:00</updated> </source> </entry> @@ -394,7 +417,7 @@ <subtitle type="html">Open Opinions about Open Source Software</subtitle> <link rel="self" href="http://www.italovignoli.org/?feed=rss2"/> <id>http://www.italovignoli.org/?feed=rss2</id> - <updated>2008-11-15T00:00:23+00:00</updated> + <updated>2008-11-15T18:00:25+00:00</updated> </source> </entry> @@ -466,27 +489,4 @@ </source> </entry> - <entry xml:lang="en"> - <title type="html">2.4.2 - the real story</title> - <link href="http://www.mealldubh.org/index.php/2008/10/29/242-the-real-story/"/> - <id>http://www.mealldubh.org/?p=598</id> - <updated>2008-10-29T18:29:50+00:00</updated> - <content type="html"><p>There has been comment <a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2085">in various blogs</a> about new security vulnerabilities in <a href="http://www.openoffice.org">OpenOffice.org</a>. Some of these posts and the comments on them are completely bizarre. So here&#8217;s the real story.</p> -<p>The OpenOffice.org security team were alerted to a couple of potential vulnerabilities in the code. I&#8217;ve blogged about this process many times before - there&#8217;s no suggestion that anyone has ever tried to exploit these vulnerabilities, or even that it is possible to do so. But we went ahead and fixed the code - as you do.</p> -<p>As <a href="http://www.openoffice.org/security/bulletin.html">the security bulletin</a> states, the recently released OpenOffice.org 3.0 isn&#8217;t affected. However, there are people out there who haven&#8217;t moved on to 3.0 - maybe they are using some add-on that isn&#8217;t yet available for 3.0; maybe they just don&#8217;t use version n.0 of anything on principle. Anyway, to cater for these users, we decided to do a new release 2.4.2 which fixes the vulnerabilities and has a pile of miscellaneous fixes in it for good measure.</p> -<p>We were all set to announce 2.4.2 this morning at the same time as announcing the vulnerabilities (that&#8217;s the recommended way of doing these things). Unfortunately the Bouncer service that we use to redirect downloads to local mirrors hasn&#8217;t picked up the new version, so people can&#8217;t actually download 2.4.2 from <a href="http://download.openoffice.org">our download page</a>.</p> -<p>So, please bear with us. As soon as the good people who run the Bouncer for us (and for several other open-source projects like Mozilla) have got it fixed, we&#8217;ll make the public announcement that 2.4.2 is available.</p></content> - <author> - <name>John McCreesh</name> - <uri>http://www.mealldubh.org</uri> - </author> - <source> - <title type="html">Meall Dubh » OpenOffice.org</title> - <subtitle type="html">a view from a dark hill</subtitle> - <link rel="self" href="http://www.mealldubh.org/index.php/category/open-source/openofficeorg/feed"/> - <id>http://www.mealldubh.org/index.php/category/open-source/openofficeorg/feed</id> - <updated>2008-11-14T00:00:15+00:00</updated> - </source> - </entry> - </feed> File [changed]: index.html Url: http://marketing.openoffice.org/source/browse/marketing/www/planet/index.html?r1=1.1175&r2=1.1176 Delta lines: +18 -20 --------------------- --- index.html 2008-11-15 12:00:28+0000 1.1175 +++ index.html 2008-11-15 18:00:34+0000 1.1176 @@ -37,8 +37,25 @@ <a href="rss20.xml"><img src="rss2.gif" alt="Link to RSS 2 feed" /></a> </div> -<p><em>Bloggings on marketing topics by project members - see <a href="#disclaimer">disclaimer</a>.<br />Last updated: November 15, 2008 12:00 PM GMT</em></p> +<p><em>Bloggings on marketing topics by project members - see <a href="#disclaimer">disclaimer</a>.<br />Last updated: November 15, 2008 06:00 PM GMT</em></p> +<h2>November 15, 2008</h2> +<h3> +<a href="http://lodahl.blogspot.com/search/label/OpenOffice.org"; title="Lodahl's blog"> +Leif Lodahl</a> : +<a href="http://lodahl.blogspot.com/2008/11/hy-not-lotus-symphony-right-away.html";> +Why not Lotus Symphony right away ?</a> +</h3> +<p> +As I often advocate for OpenOffice.org in both private and business societies, I get questions about Lotus Symphony and Lotus Notes 8 from time to time. My advise to companies that are already using Lotus Notes is, to take Lotus Symphony serious as a future possibility. Right now I say: "Use Openoffice.org 3.0". + +The reason for not advocating Lotus Symphony at the present time is, that the</p> +<p> +<em><a href="http://lodahl.blogspot.com/2008/11/hy-not-lotus-symphony-right-away.html";>by Leif Lodahl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) at November 15, 2008 05:00 PM GMT</a></em> +</p> +<br /> +<hr /> +<br /> <h2>November 13, 2008</h2> <h3> <a href="http://www.mealldubh.org"; title="Meall Dubh » OpenOffice.org"> @@ -414,25 +431,6 @@ <br /> <hr /> <br /> -<h2>October 29, 2008</h2> -<h3> -<a href="http://www.mealldubh.org"; title="Meall Dubh » OpenOffice.org"> -John McCreesh</a> : -<a href="http://www.mealldubh.org/index.php/2008/10/29/242-the-real-story/";> -2.4.2 - the real story</a> -</h3> -<p> -<p>There has been comment <a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2085";>in various blogs</a> about new security vulnerabilities in <a href="http://www.openoffice.org";>OpenOffice.org</a>. Some of these posts and the comments on them are completely bizarre. So here’s the real story.</p> -<p>The OpenOffice.org security team were alerted to a couple of potential vulnerabilities in the code. I’ve blogged about this process many times before - there’s no suggestion that anyone has ever tried to exploit these vulnerabilities, or even that it is possible to do so. But we went ahead and fixed the code - as you do.</p> -<p>As <a href="http://www.openoffice.org/security/bulletin.html";>the security bulletin</a> states, the recently released OpenOffice.org 3.0 isn’t affected. However, there are people out there who haven’t moved on to 3.0 - maybe they are using some add-on that isn’t yet available for 3.0; maybe they just don’t use version n.0 of anything on principle. Anyway, to cater for these users, we decided to do a new release 2.4.2 which fixes the vulnerabilities and has a pile of miscellaneous fixes in it for good measure.</p> -<p>We were all set to announce 2.4.2 this morning at the same time as announcing the vulnerabilities (that’s the recommended way of doing these things). Unfortunately the Bouncer service that we use to redirect downloads to local mirrors hasn’t picked up the new version, so people can’t actually download 2.4.2 from <a href="http://download.openoffice.org";>our download page</a>.</p> -<p>So, please bear with us. As soon as the good people who run the Bouncer for us (and for several other open-source projects like Mozilla) have got it fixed, we’ll make the public announcement that 2.4.2 is available.</p></p> -<p> -<em><a href="http://www.mealldubh.org/index.php/2008/10/29/242-the-real-story/";>by John at October 29, 2008 06:29 PM GMT</a></em> -</p> -<br /> -<hr /> -<br /> <a id="disclaimer" name="disclaimer"></a> <p><em>Disclaimer: all views expressed on this page are those of the individual contributors, and may not reflect the views of the File [changed]: opml.xml Url: http://marketing.openoffice.org/source/browse/marketing/www/planet/opml.xml?r1=1.1168&r2=1.1169 Delta lines: +1 -1 ------------------- --- opml.xml 2008-11-15 12:00:29+0000 1.1168 +++ opml.xml 2008-11-15 18:00:34+0000 1.1169 @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ <opml version="1.1"> <head> <title>Marketing Planet</title> - <dateModified>Sat, 15 Nov 2008 12:00:32 +0000</dateModified> + <dateModified>Sat, 15 Nov 2008 18:00:38 +0000</dateModified> <ownerName>Marketing Project</ownerName> <ownerEmail>[EMAIL PROTECTED]</ownerEmail> </head> File [changed]: rss10.xml Url: http://marketing.openoffice.org/source/browse/marketing/www/planet/rss10.xml?r1=1.533&r2=1.534 Delta lines: +10 -11 --------------------- --- rss10.xml 2008-11-15 00:00:26+0000 1.533 +++ rss10.xml 2008-11-15 18:00:34+0000 1.534 @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ <items> <rdf:Seq> + <rdf:li rdf:resource="tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198340507565233169.post-921724136108677387" /> <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mealldubh.org/?p=605"; /> <rdf:li rdf:resource="tag:google.com,2005:reader/item/4a50ad19bbd7ce6c" /> <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.solidoffice.com/?p=909"; /> @@ -32,11 +33,19 @@ <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.solidoffice.com/?p=901"; /> <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mealldubh.org/?p=599"; /> <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.solidoffice.com/?p=900"; /> - <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mealldubh.org/?p=598"; /> </rdf:Seq> </items> </channel> +<item rdf:about="tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198340507565233169.post-921724136108677387"> + <title>Leif Lodahl: Why not Lotus Symphony right away ?</title> + <link>http://lodahl.blogspot.com/2008/11/hy-not-lotus-symphony-right-away.html</link> + <content:encoded>As I often advocate for OpenOffice.org in both private and business societies, I get questions about Lotus Symphony and Lotus Notes 8 from time to time. My advise to companies that are already using Lotus Notes is, to take Lotus Symphony serious as a future possibility. Right now I say: "Use Openoffice.org 3.0". + +The reason for not advocating Lotus Symphony at the present time is, that the</content:encoded> + <dc:date>2008-11-15T17:00:30+00:00</dc:date> + <dc:creator>Leif Lodahl</dc:creator> +</item> <item rdf:about="http://www.mealldubh.org/?p=605";> <title>John McCreesh: Para-sites flourish - search engines turn a blind eye</title> <link>http://www.mealldubh.org/index.php/2008/11/13/para-sites-flourish-search-engines-turn-a-blind-eye/</link> @@ -250,15 +259,5 @@ <p>The entire paper is available online at the link above for a detailed reading.</p></content:encoded> <dc:date>2008-10-30T13:43:23+00:00</dc:date> </item> -<item rdf:about="http://www.mealldubh.org/?p=598";> - <title>John McCreesh: 2.4.2 - the real story</title> - <link>http://www.mealldubh.org/index.php/2008/10/29/242-the-real-story/</link> - <content:encoded><p>There has been comment <a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2085">in various blogs</a> about new security vulnerabilities in <a href="http://www.openoffice.org">OpenOffice.org</a>. Some of these posts and the comments on them are completely bizarre. So here&#8217;s the real story.</p> -<p>The OpenOffice.org security team were alerted to a couple of potential vulnerabilities in the code. I&#8217;ve blogged about this process many times before - there&#8217;s no suggestion that anyone has ever tried to exploit these vulnerabilities, or even that it is possible to do so. But we went ahead and fixed the code - as you do.</p> -<p>As <a href="http://www.openoffice.org/security/bulletin.html">the security bulletin</a> states, the recently released OpenOffice.org 3.0 isn&#8217;t affected. However, there are people out there who haven&#8217;t moved on to 3.0 - maybe they are using some add-on that isn&#8217;t yet available for 3.0; maybe they just don&#8217;t use version n.0 of anything on principle. Anyway, to cater for these users, we decided to do a new release 2.4.2 which fixes the vulnerabilities and has a pile of miscellaneous fixes in it for good measure.</p> -<p>We were all set to announce 2.4.2 this morning at the same time as announcing the vulnerabilities (that&#8217;s the recommended way of doing these things). Unfortunately the Bouncer service that we use to redirect downloads to local mirrors hasn&#8217;t picked up the new version, so people can&#8217;t actually download 2.4.2 from <a href="http://download.openoffice.org">our download page</a>.</p> -<p>So, please bear with us. As soon as the good people who run the Bouncer for us (and for several other open-source projects like Mozilla) have got it fixed, we&#8217;ll make the public announcement that 2.4.2 is available.</p></content:encoded> - <dc:date>2008-10-29T18:29:50+00:00</dc:date> -</item> </rdf:RDF> File [changed]: rss20.xml Url: http://marketing.openoffice.org/source/browse/marketing/www/planet/rss20.xml?r1=1.533&r2=1.534 Delta lines: +10 -11 --------------------- --- rss20.xml 2008-11-15 00:00:26+0000 1.533 +++ rss20.xml 2008-11-15 18:00:34+0000 1.534 @@ -8,6 +8,16 @@ <description>Marketing Planet - http://marketing.openoffice.org/planet/</description> <item> + <title>Leif Lodahl: Why not Lotus Symphony right away ?</title> + <guid>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198340507565233169.post-921724136108677387</guid> + <link>http://lodahl.blogspot.com/2008/11/hy-not-lotus-symphony-right-away.html</link> + <description>As I often advocate for OpenOffice.org in both private and business societies, I get questions about Lotus Symphony and Lotus Notes 8 from time to time. My advise to companies that are already using Lotus Notes is, to take Lotus Symphony serious as a future possibility. Right now I say: "Use Openoffice.org 3.0". + +The reason for not advocating Lotus Symphony at the present time is, that the</description> + <pubDate>Sat, 15 Nov 2008 17:00:30 +0000</pubDate> + <author>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leif Lodahl)</author> +</item> +<item> <title>John McCreesh: Para-sites flourish - search engines turn a blind eye</title> <guid>http://www.mealldubh.org/?p=605</guid> <link>http://www.mealldubh.org/index.php/2008/11/13/para-sites-flourish-search-engines-turn-a-blind-eye/</link> @@ -238,17 +248,6 @@ <p>The entire paper is available online at the link above for a detailed reading.</p></description> <pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:43:23 +0000</pubDate> </item> -<item> - <title>John McCreesh: 2.4.2 - the real story</title> - <guid>http://www.mealldubh.org/?p=598</guid> - <link>http://www.mealldubh.org/index.php/2008/10/29/242-the-real-story/</link> - <description><p>There has been comment <a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2085">in various blogs</a> about new security vulnerabilities in <a href="http://www.openoffice.org">OpenOffice.org</a>. Some of these posts and the comments on them are completely bizarre. So here&#8217;s the real story.</p> -<p>The OpenOffice.org security team were alerted to a couple of potential vulnerabilities in the code. I&#8217;ve blogged about this process many times before - there&#8217;s no suggestion that anyone has ever tried to exploit these vulnerabilities, or even that it is possible to do so. But we went ahead and fixed the code - as you do.</p> -<p>As <a href="http://www.openoffice.org/security/bulletin.html">the security bulletin</a> states, the recently released OpenOffice.org 3.0 isn&#8217;t affected. However, there are people out there who haven&#8217;t moved on to 3.0 - maybe they are using some add-on that isn&#8217;t yet available for 3.0; maybe they just don&#8217;t use version n.0 of anything on principle. Anyway, to cater for these users, we decided to do a new release 2.4.2 which fixes the vulnerabilities and has a pile of miscellaneous fixes in it for good measure.</p> -<p>We were all set to announce 2.4.2 this morning at the same time as announcing the vulnerabilities (that&#8217;s the recommended way of doing these things). Unfortunately the Bouncer service that we use to redirect downloads to local mirrors hasn&#8217;t picked up the new version, so people can&#8217;t actually download 2.4.2 from <a href="http://download.openoffice.org">our download page</a>.</p> -<p>So, please bear with us. As soon as the good people who run the Bouncer for us (and for several other open-source projects like Mozilla) have got it fixed, we&#8217;ll make the public announcement that 2.4.2 is available.</p></description> - <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 18:29:50 +0000</pubDate> -</item> </channel> </rss> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
