I am reviewing yuanlin's updated patch for the new dialog message only, https://issues.apache.org/ooo/attachment.cgi?id=78521&action=diff. And I suppose it will remove "- Fatal Error" from the error dialog title string late, so this will not introduce more strings for translation.
If there is no more concerns in 4 hours from now, I will commit this string patch to 3.4.1 at first. thanks, zhangjf On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 3:14 PM, zhangjf <[email protected]> wrote: > How about just simply remove "- Fatal Error" from the dialog title > string? it won't add one more string for translation. > > zhangjf > > On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Jürgen Schmidt > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 6/28/12 6:23 PM, zhangjf wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 12:15 AM, Jürgen Schmidt >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On 6/28/12 6:12 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: >>>>> On 6/28/12 5:33 PM, zhangjf wrote: >>>>>> If it still needs more time for discussion, I think it is also one >>>>>> option to only commit the new string change at first to catch up >>>>>> translation. It should have no impacts on function without committing >>>>>> the code. In this way, please review the new dialog and string first. >>>>>> >>>>>> Is it acceptable? >>>>> >>>>> sure, the way how it works is to check in the src file running localize >>>>> to create a new sdf, convert it, update pootle, doing the translation on >>>>> Pootle (to speed up and simplify the process) and finally merge it back >>>>> in svn. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I thunk the proposed solution is good and fulfill the requirements. Can >>>> we make a screenshot with the warning box and the English strings for >>>> review? >>>> >>> >>> Yuanlin's original first post in this mail thread contains the dialog >>> snapshot url at https://issues.apache.org/ooo/attachment.cgi?id=78482. >> >> ok thanks, I have overseen this. I have 2 questions: >> >> 1. dialog title shows "Fatal Error", is it really a Fatal Error? I don't >> think so, we detect a running instance and close the application or >> better don't continue to start. I think it's more a warning, isn't it? >> >> 2. in case of error I think we have a better error icon, in case of a >> warning the used icon is ok from my pov. >> >> Juergen >> >> >>> >>>> In general I would support the proposed solution with a clear +1 to move >>>> forward immediately. >>>> >>>> Juergen >>>> >>>> >>>>> Juergen >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> zhangjf >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 10:48 PM, Jürgen Schmidt >>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> sorry for my top posting but I think this is very urgent and important. >>>>>>> When we want to integrate this in 3.4.1 we have to do it immediately, >>>>>>> means by the end of this week. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The warning messages have to translated!!! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Any opinions >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Juergen >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 6/27/12 11:13 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: >>>>>>>> On 6/27/12 3:23 AM, Lin Yuan wrote: >>>>>>>>> Currently in AOO, only part of the data in user profile is locked and >>>>>>>>> can >>>>>>>>> not access by mutiple instances. So as tested on Windows Server 2008, >>>>>>>>> AOO >>>>>>>>> will crash in such situation. The patch is not to really support one >>>>>>>>> user >>>>>>>>> to launch multiple instances on mutiple sessions case. According to >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> suggestion in Windows 8 Certification below: >>>>>>>>> *Note*: If an app does not support multiple user sessions or remote >>>>>>>>> access, >>>>>>>>> it must clearly state this when launched from this kind of session. >>>>>>>>> With the patch, AOO will popup a warning dialog and exit in this >>>>>>>>> case. So >>>>>>>>> it will still not support mutiple user sessions for one user but the >>>>>>>>> UX is >>>>>>>>> more frendly than the current crash issue. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> we have to define fast if we want include it for 3.4.1 or not. It will >>>>>>>> require some translation effort that we have to organize in time (e.g. >>>>>>>> updating Pootle etc.) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Juergen >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> Lin Yuan >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 2012/6/27 Joost Andrae <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Rob, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> but in a Windows Terminal Server session you have user profiles >>>>>>>>>>>> for each >>>>>>>>>>>> user. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> This patch is for if you connect with Terminal Services twice using >>>>>>>>>>> the same user account. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I just wanted to make sure that there is no real problem to get >>>>>>>>>> OpenOffice >>>>>>>>>> configured so it can be used within a multi user environment (MS TS, >>>>>>>>>> Citrix, Sun SGD, or UNIX profiles). If the same user connects a >>>>>>>>>> second time >>>>>>>>>> then there might be a locking problem with his profile data. If you >>>>>>>>>> want to >>>>>>>>>> fix this then it's OK but in my opinion it's not really needed >>>>>>>>>> because >>>>>>>>>> usually it should be prevented that one user accesses the same user >>>>>>>>>> profile >>>>>>>>>> from another terminal (RDP, X11) session. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Just my two € Cents, Joost >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >>
