Re: My mwiki account appears to have vanished
Just a word of caution, if (as in this case) an account is deleted wrongly then I can only restore it as long as no new account is created with the same name. Jan. On 3 December 2012 08:01, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.netwrote: Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote: On 12/02/2012 09:31 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote: Evening; I just tried to log in to my mwiki account and was informed by a very polite error message that I no longer exist.(See Below) Login error There is no user by the name KNMcKenna. Check your spelling. I know that I logged in last week. Could this account have been deleted in the recent maintenance to clear up the spam attack? Regards Keith I cannot comment on where your account went, but in case new account creation is still disabled, I went ahead and created an account for you. You should receive a randomly generated password (if I did everything correctly, Helen gave me a bit of a tutorial on that)... Let me know if your account does not come through! Thank you Andrew the account came through with flying colours. Profile, talk and contribs pages all as they were before. Regards Keith
Re: [proposal/question] wiki.openoffice.org future: mediaWiki or Apache JSPWiki.
I agree on a lot of the things. BUT do not forget that a lot of questions/problems also applies to an upgrade. - User interface will change slightly - Data loss is not acceptlable but the UTF8 conversion might have a side effect on some browsers - The tweaks in the current mwiki, will not automatically be present after an upgrade. - we do not know if the extensions will work (in the same way) in the new version. - there are no the wiki, there are and will always be different systems out there. The argument about the text is very valid, but I think that the new version also offers new facilities, and hope that all old facilities are unchanged (but there are no quarantees). My intention was simply to make the community aware of the possibility. Because at this point in time I see the upgrade as also being quite a hurdle. Jan I. On 3 December 2012 06:49, C smau...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 11:35 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: JSPwiki just announced a new version: http://incubator.apache.org/jspwiki/ since it is a apache project, should we consider upgrading to jspwiki instead of continuing with mediawiki ? The upgrade will almost for sure be harder, but to me it seems beneficial to use products from our own family, that way we help them and they hopefully help us. I am also confident that it can be done without data loss, which is an absolute no-go to me, we will not accept data loss. If it is decided to go down this path, I will contact jspWiki and get involved with their work so we have a real influence on how the wiki software evolves (especially in regard of spam control). While certainly possible to convert from one wiki syntax to another, it's no small feat... and that's if the source wiki uses only standard syntax for the source Wiki. The current MediWiki implementation has a significant number of pages that rely on extensions for their content. To have a successful conversion, you are looking at needing to rewrite thousands of Wiki pages. Not necessarily to have 1:1 conversion, but simply to ensure that the information is still presented in a logical manner (I'm thinking of the documentation pages for example). Before anyone should really consider this, you need to gather up a sizable collection of dedicated volunteers who are willing to sift through every wiki page and validate the content, fix the broken content, correct conversion errors, and reconnect the information flow. You also will need to account for custom written extensions and the functionality (although simple) they provide. It's a very big job to convert even a small number of pages Clayton
Re: [proposal/question] wiki.openoffice.org future: mediaWiki or Apache JSPWiki.
On 3 December 2012 13:20, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:35 AM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: I agree on a lot of the things. BUT do not forget that a lot of questions/problems also applies to an upgrade. - User interface will change slightly - Data loss is not acceptlable but the UTF8 conversion might have a side effect on some browsers - The tweaks in the current mwiki, will not automatically be present after an upgrade. Which tweaks? If I knew then I could include it in the new version, problem is that a.o. imicat tells that there have been made modifications, and none of it seems to be documented. The same goes by the way for all configurations, they are not documented, so I have to do compare. - we do not know if the extensions will work (in the same way) in the new version. Have you done the research or you are just speculating? Which extensions hasn't been updated to the current version? any similar extension? I have done some research, but not to the full extent, that will be done when we start upgrading. I see no need to do it, before we start the upgrade. To me that is only one checkpoint in a long list, we have to work through when upgrading. - there are no the wiki, there are and will always be different systems out there. For the most part mediawiki is the most popular wiki out there and it's markup the more widely spread among floss projects that I know off. I might be, I have seen no statistics to support the statement, and some of the big wikis seems not to use mediawiki. Important is that the markup language is spread to other project, that would make a change easier But since the idea has already got a -1 its dead. Jan I. The argument about the text is very valid, but I think that the new version also offers new facilities, and hope that all old facilities are unchanged (but there are no quarantees). My intention was simply to make the community aware of the possibility. Because at this point in time I see the upgrade as also being quite a hurdle. Jan I. On 3 December 2012 06:49, C smau...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 11:35 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: JSPwiki just announced a new version: http://incubator.apache.org/jspwiki/ since it is a apache project, should we consider upgrading to jspwiki instead of continuing with mediawiki ? The upgrade will almost for sure be harder, but to me it seems beneficial to use products from our own family, that way we help them and they hopefully help us. I am also confident that it can be done without data loss, which is an absolute no-go to me, we will not accept data loss. If it is decided to go down this path, I will contact jspWiki and get involved with their work so we have a real influence on how the wiki software evolves (especially in regard of spam control). While certainly possible to convert from one wiki syntax to another, it's no small feat... and that's if the source wiki uses only standard syntax for the source Wiki. The current MediWiki implementation has a significant number of pages that rely on extensions for their content. To have a successful conversion, you are looking at needing to rewrite thousands of Wiki pages. Not necessarily to have 1:1 conversion, but simply to ensure that the information is still presented in a logical manner (I'm thinking of the documentation pages for example). Before anyone should really consider this, you need to gather up a sizable collection of dedicated volunteers who are willing to sift through every wiki page and validate the content, fix the broken content, correct conversion errors, and reconnect the information flow. You also will need to account for custom written extensions and the functionality (although simple) they provide. It's a very big job to convert even a small number of pages Clayton -- Alexandro Colorado Apache OpenOffice Contributor http://es.openoffice.org
Re: [proposal/question] wiki.openoffice.org future: mediaWiki or Apache JSPWiki.
於 2012年12月03日 21:48, janI 提到: On 3 December 2012 13:20, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:35 AM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: I agree on a lot of the things. BUT do not forget that a lot of questions/problems also applies to an upgrade. - User interface will change slightly - Data loss is not acceptlable but the UTF8 conversion might have a side effect on some browsers - The tweaks in the current mwiki, will not automatically be present after an upgrade. Which tweaks? If I knew then I could include it in the new version, problem is that a.o. imicat tells that there have been made modifications, and none of it seems to be documented. There are 2 ways to find it out: 1. Ask Terry Ellison himself. He left his e-mail in the user database. http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/User:TerryE 2. A more strict method: Untar a fresh-new MediaWiki 1.15, and run diff to find out what is changed. Applied the changes to MediaWiki 1.16 *on a test site* to see if they work. If they work, do the same on the live site and update the symbolic link to point to the patched MediaWiki 1.16. This is how I did when upgrading my lab's WordPress from its tweaked older version. -- Best regards, imacat ^_*' ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc Woman's Voice News: http://www.wov.idv.tw/ Tavern IMACAT's http://www.imacat.idv.tw/ Woman in FOSS in Taiwan http://wofoss.blogspot.com/ OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/ EducOO/OOo4Kids Taiwan http://www.educoo.tw/ Greenfoot Taiwan http://greenfoot.westart.tw/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [proposal/question] wiki.openoffice.org future: mediaWiki or Apache JSPWiki.
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 3:43 PM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: Which tweaks? If I knew then I could include it in the new version, problem is that a.o. imicat tells that there have been made modifications, and none of it seems to be documented. There are 2 ways to find it out: 1. Ask Terry Ellison himself. He left his e-mail in the user database. http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/User:TerryE Terry wasn't so involved in the Wiki - that was my mess (at least when it was hosted at Sun/Oracle). TerryE was heavily involved with the User Forum rollout and sustaining maintenance. Tweaks/changes on the Solaris Zone were documented (changes outside of the standard Solaris Zone config that was in place at the Sun Data Centre in Hamburg). Server tweaks since moving to Ubuntu on Apache... no idea. I was not involved in that. 2. A more strict method: Untar a fresh-new MediaWiki 1.15, and run diff to find out what is changed. Applied the changes to MediaWiki 1.16 *on a test site* to see if they work. If they work, do the same on the live site and update the symbolic link to point to the patched MediaWiki 1.16. This is how I did when upgrading my lab's WordPress from its tweaked older version. Any updates I did were pretty basic. A new copy of MWiki was downloaded. The database was backed up. The standard OOoWikiSkin was copied over which included the footer tweaks (as documented at the time) included, and the Google Analytics (also documented). The Wiki was upgraded using the PHP scripting provided with MWiki and it was brought online on the testing domain. The extensions/content were tested and when all was working the new Wiki was brought online on the main domain. (the details were a bit more complex, but this covers most of the high level steps that I used to do with each MWiki engine update). No core functionality tweaks were made at any point in the core MWiki PHP code (none that I was ever aware of or can remember). Standing up a new Wiki on a new MWiki engine was primarily a task of making sure the old extensions still worked or were updated ot current versions compatible with the new MWiki core. Any obsolete extensions woudl be removed (happened once in a while but the impact was always small). There was a lot of discussion around doing work on the caching configurations on the webserver side, but nothing was ever really done there. Clayton
Re: WaE: sw/source/filter/ww8 compiler warnings
Hi Pavel,
I committed some changes to solve the found warnings...Please help to
verify again..And I will have a check to the whole sw module to see whether
any missed warning is still existing.thanks.
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 3:54 AM, Pavel Janík pa...@janik.cz wrote:
Hi,
current trunk issues few warnings in sw/source/filter/ww8:
cc1plus: warnings being treated as errors
/Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/sw/source/filter/ww8/ww8par3.cxx:
In member function ‘SwNumRule* WW8ListManager::GetNumRule(int)’:
/Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/sw/source/filter/ww8/ww8par3.cxx:1125:
warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions
make: *** [/Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/solver/350/
unxmacxi.pro/workdir/CxxObject/sw/source/filter/ww8/ww8par3.o] Error 1
cc1plus: warnings being treated as errors
/Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:
In member function ‘void WW8_WrtBookmarks::MoveFieldMarks(sal_uLong,
sal_uLong)’:
/Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:317:
warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions
/Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:
In member function ‘int WW8Export::CollectGrfsOfBullets() const’:
/Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:1452:
warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions
/Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:
In member function ‘int WW8Export::GetGrfIndex(const SvxBrushItem)’:
/Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:1535:
warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions
make: *** [/Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/solver/350/
unxmacxi.pro/workdir/CxxObject/sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.o] Error 1
The following patch fixes these issues, but I'd like to see author
committing the change:
===
--- wrtww8.cxx (revision 1415339)
+++ wrtww8.cxx (working copy)
@@ -314,7 +314,7 @@
{
if (aItr-second)
{
-if (aItr-second-first == nFrom)
+if (aItr-second-first == static_castlong(nFrom))
{
aItr-second-second.first = true;
aItr-second-first = nTo;
@@ -1449,7 +1449,7 @@
if ( pGrf )
{
bool bHas = false;
- for (int i = 0; i
m_vecBulletPic.size(); ++i)
+ for (unsigned int i = 0; i
m_vecBulletPic.size(); ++i)
{
if
(m_vecBulletPic[i]-GetChecksum() == pGrf-GetChecksum())
{
@@ -1532,7 +1532,7 @@
int nIndex = -1;
if ( rBrush.GetGraphic() )
{
- for (int i = 0; i m_vecBulletPic.size(); ++i)
+ for (unsigned int i = 0; i m_vecBulletPic.size(); ++i)
{
if (m_vecBulletPic[i]-GetChecksum() ==
rBrush.GetGraphic()-GetChecksum())
{
Index: ww8par3.cxx
===
--- ww8par3.cxx (revision 1415339)
+++ ww8par3.cxx (working copy)
@@ -1122,7 +1122,7 @@
SwNumRule* WW8ListManager::GetNumRule(int i)
{
- if ( i = 0 i maLSTInfos.size() )
+ if ( i = 0 static_castsal_Size(i) maLSTInfos.size() )
return maLSTInfos[i]-pNumRule;
else
return 0;
--
Pavel Janík
--
Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
[QA Report] Weekly QA Status Update
Hi all, I post QA status report for last week[1], please review. I'd thanks for following volunteer who help on defect verification and test execution QA task recently: *louqle* helped on task Issue 121359 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121359 and Issue 121365 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121365 *Rob Weir* helped on verify defect Issue 35763 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=35763 *gbolssens* helped on test cases execution [1] http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/QA/Report/WeeklyReport/201212 -- Thanks Best Regards, Yan Ji
Re: [proposal/question] wiki.openoffice.org future: mediaWiki or Apache JSPWiki.
Sorry to top post. Jspwiki has been in the incubator for a few years. There is no guarantee it will ever graduate. They have not switched completely to ASF infrastructure. Please look in the general@i.a.o archives and the incubator board reports. While this discussion is good lets not be hasty. Best Regards, Dave Sent from my iPhone On Dec 3, 2012, at 10:04 AM, C smau...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 3:43 PM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: Which tweaks? If I knew then I could include it in the new version, problem is that a.o. imicat tells that there have been made modifications, and none of it seems to be documented. There are 2 ways to find it out: 1. Ask Terry Ellison himself. He left his e-mail in the user database. http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/User:TerryE Terry wasn't so involved in the Wiki - that was my mess (at least when it was hosted at Sun/Oracle). TerryE was heavily involved with the User Forum rollout and sustaining maintenance. Tweaks/changes on the Solaris Zone were documented (changes outside of the standard Solaris Zone config that was in place at the Sun Data Centre in Hamburg). Server tweaks since moving to Ubuntu on Apache... no idea. I was not involved in that. 2. A more strict method: Untar a fresh-new MediaWiki 1.15, and run diff to find out what is changed. Applied the changes to MediaWiki 1.16 *on a test site* to see if they work. If they work, do the same on the live site and update the symbolic link to point to the patched MediaWiki 1.16. This is how I did when upgrading my lab's WordPress from its tweaked older version. Any updates I did were pretty basic. A new copy of MWiki was downloaded. The database was backed up. The standard OOoWikiSkin was copied over which included the footer tweaks (as documented at the time) included, and the Google Analytics (also documented). The Wiki was upgraded using the PHP scripting provided with MWiki and it was brought online on the testing domain. The extensions/content were tested and when all was working the new Wiki was brought online on the main domain. (the details were a bit more complex, but this covers most of the high level steps that I used to do with each MWiki engine update). No core functionality tweaks were made at any point in the core MWiki PHP code (none that I was ever aware of or can remember). Standing up a new Wiki on a new MWiki engine was primarily a task of making sure the old extensions still worked or were updated ot current versions compatible with the new MWiki core. Any obsolete extensions woudl be removed (happened once in a while but the impact was always small). There was a lot of discussion around doing work on the caching configurations on the webserver side, but nothing was ever really done there. Clayton
Re: Unprocessed solaris bugs
On 12/3/12 3:55 PM, Jean-Louis 'Hans' Fuchs wrote: Hello I have reported the following bugs in april: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120751 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119253 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119252 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119250 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119249 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119251 None of these have been processed, we still have to patch most of these. How can we proceed to complete these issues? I assume the reason is simply because they felt out of scope ;-) I will take a look on it asap and when they are all for Solaris only and don#t conflict on other platforms I see not problem to include them. Juergen Best, Jean-Louis
Re: Unprocessed solaris bugs
Hi; I went ahead and reviewed some of them... not all. Pedro. - Original Message - From: Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Sent: Monday, December 3, 2012 10:42 AM Subject: Re: Unprocessed solaris bugs On 12/3/12 3:55 PM, Jean-Louis 'Hans' Fuchs wrote: Hello I have reported the following bugs in april: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120751 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119253 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119252 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119250 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119249 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119251 None of these have been processed, we still have to patch most of these. How can we proceed to complete these issues? I assume the reason is simply because they felt out of scope ;-) I will take a look on it asap and when they are all for Solaris only and don#t conflict on other platforms I see not problem to include them. Juergen Best, Jean-Louis
Re: [User Docs] End of effort to get AOO v3.4 Getting Started Guide finished
Stan Helton wrote: I am disappointed to see this. I tried to volunteer for this kind of thing and did not receive a response a few months ago. It is a little frustrating to see the first comment one of ending the initiative. If I can help I would certainly like to. I am a part-time programmer and a writer. How can I help? What is the most pressing need? I believe I have the requisite technical and publishing skills to advance this part of the project. Stan Helton Trying to volunteer, but a little frustrated in finding the right position in the team. Stan; First off let me apologize for missing your message volunteering. I seem to remember having an e-mail forwarded to me from the ODFAuthors site on someone wanting to volunteer. Unfortunately it was caught up in in a problem on my system and got lost in the recovery. I you are still interested the state of the effort at this point is all but one or 2 chapters have been reviewed and need the touch of an experienced writer or editor to merge the proposed comments and changes; then polish them for possible publication or a second review effort. I would like nothing better than to get this back on track so that there is at least a Getting Started Guide available or the lateset 3.x version. If you are interested we can discuss this further in a separate thread. Regards Keith On 12/1/2012 10:12 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote: After 3 months of frustration it is time to end the effort to get The Getting Started Guide that had been started for AOO 3.4 completed. Despite repeated requests for help on the ODFAuthors list it is apparent that either the Authors that had been working on Open Office docs are either no longer interested or are working strictly on the LO books. Alexandro Colorado made an attempt at getting the Base Guide done but was not able to get any responses to his requests for comments on his markups and changes and decided to put it on hold until he did. As far as I know he is still waiting. One other volunteer stepped up from an inquiry on this list and gave valuable help. Prabha again thank you very much for your work and I hope that you will get involved with the defining of a new documentation project. With only 2 people actively working it is not possible to give the work the quality review and editing that it deserves to have the Open Office name attached to it. Reluctantly unless someone with the requisite skills in technical writing and publishing that I do not have can lend a hand I feel it is best to end the effort and not waste anymore of anyone's time. I will continue to contribute where I can, but that is difficult or someone who is not a developer. Regards Keith N. McKenna
Re: [User Docs] End of effort to get AOO v3.4 Getting Started Guide finished
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:53 AM, Guy Waterval waterval@gmail.com wrote: Why not publish the documentation directly on Wikipédia, with a double licence, ALv2.0 and GFDL, for instance? Is it impossible for questions of licences, organization, political reasons Wikipédia has a lot of good contributors in different languages, a big visibility, you can do documentation and marketing at the same time Wikipedia doesn't really like that sort of thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_manual.2C_guidebook.2C_textbook.2C_or_scientific_journal Is there maybe some other public venue for manuals? Don
Re: Gallery extension from Symphony ressources
Hi all, Armin Le Grand schrieb: Hi Kevin and Marcus, let's wait and see if Regina may know/find a place in the office where this is needed. I see that the folder htmlexpo is used in File Wizards Web Page.. But I do not see any of the selected pictures in the result of the Wizard. Does someone know, where these picture should appear in the result of the Wizard? Or has some function be removes from the wizard some time ago, without removing the selection? My suggestion is to remove the folder in the build, but provide a zipped version of the folder (=80KB) somewhere for download. So if someone really searches for it, we can give him a download link. Problem is that the gallery is used as kinda 'graphic ressource holder' from some office modules, so some themes *have* to stay. These are normally hidden, but as seen with the rulers - don't have to be... For example the bullets are used not only in numbering and outline but as data point pictures in charts too. Kind regards Regina
Re: [User Docs] End of effort to get AOO v3.4 Getting Started Guide finished
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 1:24 AM, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak and...@pitonyak.org wrote: On 12/02/2012 10:29 AM, Rob Weir wrote: I can help drive steps 1-4, but I cannot do 5 by myself. I'd need the commitment of 3-4 other project members to help mentor the new volunteers, to volunteer as list moderators, and to help encourage the relaunched documentation project to develop a documentation plan for AOO 4.0. Does anyone want to help with this? -Rob I am not currently a list moderator, but am willing to become one. What does it entail? Moderator responsibilities are: -Review messages that have been held for moderation, reject spam posts and allow the valid messages through. -Assist users who are having difficulties subscribing or unsubscribing from the list. -Provide reports to the PMC on request, on the number of current subscribers. -For private lists, approve subscription requests for authorized subscribers only. -When needed, escalate technical issues to Infra and privacy issues to the PMC. 95% of the time it is just the first item. -Rob -- Andrew Pitonyak My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
[CMS PATCH]
Clone URL (Committers only): https://cms.apache.org/redirect?new=bmcs;action=diff;uri=http://openofficeorg.apache.org/openofficeorg%2Fmailing-lists.mdtext Index: trunk/content/openofficeorg/mailing-lists.mdtext === --- trunk/content/openofficeorg/mailing-lists.mdtext(revision 1416599) +++ trunk/content/openofficeorg/mailing-lists.mdtext(working copy) @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ average of 10 posts/day. - Subscribe: [commits-subscr...@openoffice.apache.org][27] - - Unsubscribe: [commmits-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org][28] + - Unsubscribe: [commits-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org][28] - Archives - [Markmail][29] - [Apache][54] (posts before November 2012 are [archived here][30])
Re: Documentation Recruitment (was: Please add me to The OpenOffice.org Documentation Project list)
On 12/01/2012 12:52 PM, Guy Waterval wrote: Hi Rob, Hi all, 2012/12/1 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Guy Waterval waterval@gmail.com wrote: Hi Rob, Hi all, 2012/11/30 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org [...] That would be the point of a call for volunteers then, wouldn't it? Bring in more volunteers with the skills needed to create an outline, etc. There are independent books written on OpenOffice and certainly Microsoft Office all the time. There are many people who have the skills needed. All we need to do is ask. The goal should be (IMHO) to reach a critical mass of volunteers where the tasks are not only doable, but fun. My personal opinion is that the way proposed by Ricardo, with an Apache license, is actually the more innovative and realistic we have for an online documentation at this time. His approach has the merit of suggesting a sustainable solution for the project and which can grow with it. So, the reflexion should be more oriented in finding a way to help him to develop his game, if desired.. The nature of things will lead to either: 1) We define the documentation plan, at least to the level of a list of deliverables, a new d...@openoffice.apache.org mailing list, a workflow, a technological approach (what formats and templates, etc.) and a means of tracking status (page on the wiki) and *then* do a call for volunteers. If we do this then new volunteers will naturally adapt to the workflow and process that already is in-progress, I think that a d...@openoffice.apache.org mailing list and the acceptation of the Alv2.0 for the docs are absolutely necessary. +1 from me on this also... @Keith, I applaud the efforts you've undertaken. Off and on for months, I've tried to find a public archive for the ODF Authors list to see what's going on. Unfortunately, this search was in vain. Re your earlier comments about an outline. Yes, we need this but I'm not sure if you meant this literally. Don't we *have* and outline? I'm confused. maybe you meant something else -- some templates? So, again, we're back at licensing issues it would seem. It is time to bring this under this project's umbrella it would seem. #1 has my preference. It's not obligatory a totally fixed approach but it allows to create a basis and to begin something. We have already something on the table and Ricardo and collegues are competent, certainly opened and motivated. Why not to try the way they have began. Nobody is excluded. It allows to regroup all people who are interested in an apache documentation project and avoids to discourage others, who are investing their time and energy aside the group, to find finally a home where they could really get support and express their qualities. Why not to build a winning team with the people here in the group? or 2) We do a call for volunteers with nothing more than a new d...@openoffice.apache.org mailing list, and hash out the details on that list with the new volunteers. So if someone has strong views on how things should be done, then they really need to step up and define #1. Otherwise, a recruitment activity will lead to a larger group of documentation volunteers who will have a mind of their own and could take this in other directions. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, of course. @Rob -- I think defining #1 is a priority. I can't add much to this since I'm actually pretty content with the online Help. I don't know who uses the external documentation or what the expectations are. #2 is a little the big bang method. Difficult to make a choice in this case, only suggestions (probably one approach pro player), nothing concrete on the table. The risk is to stay blocked as it was the case up to now. Another consideration: It is easier to find (and engage with) volunteers who step into an ongoing activity like #1. But it is easier to attract an alpha documentation architect if things are not already defined. It's the loto game. You have to find a Zorro who accepts to work as volunteer (and freely). I don't think that you would have more chance with #2, which represents a big charge. Moreover, giving priority to this method could perhaps demotivate some members in this group. Of course, these are not hard rules, but are considerations and tendencies. There are no right answers. With QA we did a call for volunteers that was more like #1. With marketing it is more like #2. Translation is in the middle, with an existing workflow, but one that is being improved by new volunteers, In any case, I think that a new doc mailing list will be essential for any approach, since new doc volunteers would be deterred by the traffic on the dev list. A new doc mailing list is absolutely necessary. It could offer an alternative to the odf authors solution, as this group is the documentation area of LibreOffice. Even if people are totally correct there, we have to be realistic, the conditions are not
[Proposal] Create new mailing list: d...@openoffice.apache.org
This idea has come up on another thread, where we've been discussed the future of the documentation effort and a future call for volunteers. We'd like a dedicated list for these efforts. Name: d...@openoffice.apache.org OR d...@openoffice.apache.org (I don't have a strong preference for the name) Moderators: Please respond if you can volunteer as moderator. We should aim for 2 or 3 geographically dispersed. I'll wait 72 hours, and if no objections we can ask Andrea to submit the form for the new list creation. Regards, -Rob
www.apache.org/projects has no AOO ??
When I look in www.apache.org projects, take indexes, I cannot find: Apache OpenOffice OpenOffice or OOO The same goes for the JIRA issues system. Should it not be there ? (or does our project have another code) Jan.
Re: [Proposal] Create new mailing list: d...@openoffice.apache.org
Original Message From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 13:14:46 -0500 This idea has come up on another thread, where we've been discussed the future of the documentation effort and a future call for volunteers. We'd like a dedicated list for these efforts. Name: d...@openoffice.apache.org OR d...@openoffice.apache.org (I don't have a strong preference for the name) Moderators: Please respond if you can volunteer as moderator. We should aim for 2 or 3 geographically dispersed. I'll wait 72 hours, and if no objections we can ask Andrea to submit the form for the new list creation. Regards, -Rob Hi Rob, I am currently at UTC +1 if you want me to moderate the (long overdue) documentation list. For reasons I might explain at another time, moderation is all can contribute to the project for the time being. Although I will try to mentor/guide any newcomers who want to work on user documentation. Regards Dave
Re: AOO.Next IBM Priorities
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Steve Lee st...@opendirective.com wrote: Steve Lee OpenDirective - opendirective.com On Nov 2, 2012 7:59 AM, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 01.11.2012 17:45, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote: A quick note, wearing my IBM hat. We (IBM) have consulted with customers, internal users, other IBM product teams, on what our (IBM's) development priorities should be for the next AOO release. Obviously, we're not the only ones with priorities or interests or opinions. We don't make AOO decisions by ourselves. But we want to be transparent about what our own priorities are, for our employees participating in the AOO community, and what they will be focusing on. As we did with AOO 3.4.0 and 3.4.1, we'll be putting the details onto the wiki over the next couple of weeks. You'll hear more at ApacheCon, but I wanted you to hear it hear first. Our top priorities: -- Improve the install and deployment experience, especially by supporting digital signatures on installs, and introducing a new incremental update feature, so users are not required to download and install a full image for just a minor update. -- A major UI enhancement, a sidebar framework for the editors, ported over from Symphony, and including an API. If you recall, Symphony won quite a lot of praise for its UI, and much of this was due to the sidebar panel. I think we can make a good argument that this approach, say compared to the MS Office ribbon is a better use of screen real-estate, especially as we see more frequent use of wide screen displays. -- Improved Table of Contents in Writer -- Improved system integration on Windows and MacOS, including possible adoption of gestures. -- IAccessible2 bridge, ported over from Symphony, to improve accessibility. This is a major effort, but very important. I will be talking about IAccessible2 as stand in for Steve Yin at the ApacheCon. Please meet me there at 11:45am on Nov 6 (Level 1 Left). Andre, sorry to mid your talk but I will check the slides. I have 2 points of information regarding the usefulness of the IAccessible2 work. Neither are new but I thought worth restating now to support it being a priority.. 1: I just had a conversation with one of developers of NVDA, the popular screen reader for blind access on Windows. He said right now the Windows Accessibility story is terrible in OSS office solutions. To repeat a previous observation, there is a real demand for this from the Accessibility community. This need is also wider than the those using assistive technology who have visual impairments. Yes, I think we all violently agree that this gap needs to be addressed successfully in the AOO 4.x stream. I have consulted with our IBM Software Distinguished Engineer for Accessibility on this. He has excellent contact in university and at NVDA. I propose that we form an A11Y Working Group within our project here in order to give this dedicated focus. One of the challenges will be the need to finance some additional work. I doubt that we'll be able to close all our gaps with 100% volunteer effort. Do you support the concept of an A11Y WG? We can use the wiki that Steve Yin has already started as a base for our documents. Do you think it's overkill to request a mailing list dedicated to A11Y be set up? If we get more than one person doing accessibility then that might be something to consider. But right now creating a new list would only put this topic out of sight, out of mind. So I would not favor it. Our measure of importance on the topic should be how much we do, not how much we talk about it. Let's reserve dedicated lists for real efforts, and continue to socialize sub-critical-mass interests on the dev list. That is better for recruitment. -Rob 2: I also spotted Hubert Duerr's talk on automated testing in the ApacheCon programme and thought it worth mentioning that Accessibility APIs provides a powerful way to automate testing of and via the user interface. At least 2 Linux desktop testing frameworks take this approach using AT/API which is similar to IA2. I'm sure appealing to the testing market was the reason Microsoft named their updated Accessibility API User Interface Automation, UIA Steve Lee Open Directive -- Closer integration of clipart and template libraries with user experience. -- Update branding and visual styling, contemporary and compelling, fresh and relevant. -- Social integration, allow our users to quickly and easily share their thoughts in a way that compliment their commercial social behavior. Explore the integration of consumer service-specific capabilities as well as generic Share... actions. -- And many other smaller items Obviously the release date for this cannot be pinned down so early, and
Re: AOO.Next IBM Priorities
+1 On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 12:39 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Steve Lee st...@opendirective.com wrote: Steve Lee OpenDirective - opendirective.com On Nov 2, 2012 7:59 AM, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 01.11.2012 17:45, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote: A quick note, wearing my IBM hat. We (IBM) have consulted with customers, internal users, other IBM product teams, on what our (IBM's) development priorities should be for the next AOO release. Obviously, we're not the only ones with priorities or interests or opinions. We don't make AOO decisions by ourselves. But we want to be transparent about what our own priorities are, for our employees participating in the AOO community, and what they will be focusing on. As we did with AOO 3.4.0 and 3.4.1, we'll be putting the details onto the wiki over the next couple of weeks. You'll hear more at ApacheCon, but I wanted you to hear it hear first. Our top priorities: -- Improve the install and deployment experience, especially by supporting digital signatures on installs, and introducing a new incremental update feature, so users are not required to download and install a full image for just a minor update. -- A major UI enhancement, a sidebar framework for the editors, ported over from Symphony, and including an API. If you recall, Symphony won quite a lot of praise for its UI, and much of this was due to the sidebar panel. I think we can make a good argument that this approach, say compared to the MS Office ribbon is a better use of screen real-estate, especially as we see more frequent use of wide screen displays. -- Improved Table of Contents in Writer -- Improved system integration on Windows and MacOS, including possible adoption of gestures. -- IAccessible2 bridge, ported over from Symphony, to improve accessibility. This is a major effort, but very important. I will be talking about IAccessible2 as stand in for Steve Yin at the ApacheCon. Please meet me there at 11:45am on Nov 6 (Level 1 Left). Andre, sorry to mid your talk but I will check the slides. I have 2 points of information regarding the usefulness of the IAccessible2 work. Neither are new but I thought worth restating now to support it being a priority.. 1: I just had a conversation with one of developers of NVDA, the popular screen reader for blind access on Windows. He said right now the Windows Accessibility story is terrible in OSS office solutions. To repeat a previous observation, there is a real demand for this from the Accessibility community. This need is also wider than the those using assistive technology who have visual impairments. Yes, I think we all violently agree that this gap needs to be addressed successfully in the AOO 4.x stream. I have consulted with our IBM Software Distinguished Engineer for Accessibility on this. He has excellent contact in university and at NVDA. I propose that we form an A11Y Working Group within our project here in order to give this dedicated focus. One of the challenges will be the need to finance some additional work. I doubt that we'll be able to close all our gaps with 100% volunteer effort. Do you support the concept of an A11Y WG? We can use the wiki that Steve Yin has already started as a base for our documents. Do you think it's overkill to request a mailing list dedicated to A11Y be set up? If we get more than one person doing accessibility then that might be something to consider. But right now creating a new list would only put this topic out of sight, out of mind. So I would not favor it. Our measure of importance on the topic should be how much we do, not how much we talk about it. Let's reserve dedicated lists for real efforts, and continue to socialize sub-critical-mass interests on the dev list. That is better for recruitment. -Rob 2: I also spotted Hubert Duerr's talk on automated testing in the ApacheCon programme and thought it worth mentioning that Accessibility APIs provides a powerful way to automate testing of and via the user interface. At least 2 Linux desktop testing frameworks take this approach using AT/API which is similar to IA2. I'm sure appealing to the testing market was the reason Microsoft named their updated Accessibility API User Interface Automation, UIA Steve Lee Open Directive -- Closer integration of clipart and template libraries with user experience. -- Update branding and visual styling, contemporary and compelling, fresh and relevant. -- Social integration, allow our users to quickly and easily share their thoughts in a way that compliment their commercial social behavior. Explore the
Re: WaE: sw/source/filter/ww8 compiler warnings
Hi!
On Dec 3, 2012, at 4:18 PM, chengjh wrote:
I committed some changes to solve the found warnings...Please help to
verify again..And I will have a check to the whole sw module to see whether
any missed warning is still existing.thanks.
thanks. The module is almost clean now.
I only see:
sw/source/filter/ww8/ww8par3.cxx:1125: warning: comparison is always true due
to limited range of data type
SwNumRule* WW8ListManager::GetNumRule(sal_uInt16 i)
{
if ( i = 0 i maLSTInfos.size() )
surely i=0 when it is unsigned.
--
Pavel Janík
Re: www.apache.org/projects has no AOO ??
The transition to TLP is not complete. We do not use JIRA. We have our bugzilla instance Regards, Save Sent from my iPhone On Dec 3, 2012, at 1:19 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: When I look in www.apache.org projects, take indexes, I cannot find: Apache OpenOffice OpenOffice or OOO The same goes for the JIRA issues system. Should it not be there ? (or does our project have another code) Jan.
Re: www.apache.org/projects has no AOO ??
what is TLP ? I know we use bugzilla for our own bugs in AOO, but I thought I had to use AOO when I open a JIRA ticket, where I want Infra to make some changes for me. Jan I. On 3 December 2012 20:47, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: The transition to TLP is not complete. We do not use JIRA. We have our bugzilla instance Regards, Save Sent from my iPhone On Dec 3, 2012, at 1:19 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: When I look in www.apache.org projects, take indexes, I cannot find: Apache OpenOffice OpenOffice or OOO The same goes for the JIRA issues system. Should it not be there ? (or does our project have another code) Jan.
Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote: [Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ. I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an OpenOffice FAQ easily reachable by search engines at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know whether it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so). Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it from the current site? The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results. That is valuable and worth preserving. But the current FAQ contents are out of date. They would need a lot of work to update/correct them. Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to maintain. Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML definition lists (dl) would be easier and could be maintained via the CMS web interface. There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ These also appear to be unmaintained. But I think the wiki version would be easier to maintain. So one possible resolution could be: 1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on the wiki 2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki 3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question) 4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's. -Rob -Rob Regards, Andrea. Rob; I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged as needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way we decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it is already categorized with a toc on the main page. The other FAQ on the website is also categorized: http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and consolidate. In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here. But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers to do the work. So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a +1 from me. I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ for the project. Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs: http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html Maybe a simplifying assumption could be: 1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product and the project 2) We have the internal project-facing FAQ's on openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format. -Rob Regards Keith
Re: Gallery extension from Symphony ressources
Am 12/03/2012 10:34 AM, schrieb Armin Le Grand: Hi Kevin and Marcus, let's wait and see if Regina may know/find a place in the office where this is needed. Problem is that the gallery is used as kinda 'graphic ressource holder' from some office modules, so some themes *have* to stay. These are normally hidden, but as seen with the rulers - don't have to be... With Regina second answer I think, too, it will become more difficult than thought first, to redure/delete outdated stuff. ;-( Marcus On 03.12.2012 01:57, Kevin Grignon wrote: Agreed. Homepage elements are web 1.0. Let's remove them. Kevin On Dec 1, 2012, at 5:12 AM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 11/30/2012 01:50 PM, schrieb Armin Le Grand: Hi List, to keep you up-to date (also in #121407#): I have the first working version. Added themes are: arrows (merged with existing) bullets computers diagrams education environment finance gallery_sound gallery_system people sounds symbols transportation txtshapes Install set sizes (Windows): original: 122 MB (128.229.180 bytes) modified: 142 MB (149.436.536 bytes) Thus, it costs currently ca. 20 MB. I am right now using pngcrush to reduce all contained *.png's old and new ones. Lets see what we can do. It will get smaller. I also check if the ressources are available as vector format (this would be optimal), but it does not look good up to now. Let's see, I will report on reduced sizes when achieved... Suggested from Kevin: remove theme 'rulers'. Comments on that? Maybe they look really like from the past century. It's always somewhat a kind of taste. But then we should also look at the Homepage theme. When reducing the pictures in themes or deleting some completely would give some additional reducing. Marcus
Re: Unsubscribe in Commits
Albino Biasutti Neto wrote: 2012/12/3 Andrea Pescettipesce...@apache.org: There's a typo here: commmits - commits... You should edit the page AOO for mailing: http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/mailing-lists.html#commits-mailing-list Thanks, fixed in SVN. Will appear online when the site is published and moved out of the incubator. Regards, Andrea.
Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 3:04 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: When we change FAQ (and I really like the idea of using MDTEXT), we should make it easy to translate for all the local sites, and not only the first time, but more importantly to stay up to date with the translation. Do we currently have any tools to watch a mdtext file, so when the english version is changed the local translators are notified ? If not we should think of a mechanism, since especially FAQ are of interest in all languages. On Windows there is this CommitMonitor tool: http://tools.tortoisesvn.net/CommitMonitor.html Also, you can roll your own with email filters on messages sent to the commit list. -Rob Jan I. On 3 December 2012 20:54, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.netwrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote: [Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ. I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an OpenOffice FAQ easily reachable by search engines at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.**htmlhttp://www.openoffice.org/faq.htmland quite outdated (I don't know whether it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so). Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it from the current site? The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results. That is valuable and worth preserving. But the current FAQ contents are out of date. They would need a lot of work to update/correct them. Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to maintain. Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML definition lists (dl) would be easier and could be maintained via the CMS web interface. There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki: http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Documentation/FAQhttp://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ These also appear to be unmaintained. But I think the wiki version would be easier to maintain. So one possible resolution could be: 1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.**html http://www.openoffice.org/faq.htmland copy them into new FAQ items on the wiki 2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki 3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question) 4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's. -Rob -Rob Regards, Andrea. Rob; I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged as needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way we decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it is already categorized with a toc on the main page. Regards Keith
Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)
Am 12/03/2012 09:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescettipesce...@apache.org wrote: On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote: [Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ. I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an OpenOffice FAQ easily reachable by search engines at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know whether it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so). Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it from the current site? The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results. That is valuable and worth preserving. But the current FAQ contents are out of date. They would need a lot of work to update/correct them. Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to maintain. Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML definition lists (dl) would be easier and could be maintained via the CMS web interface. There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ These also appear to be unmaintained. But I think the wiki version would be easier to maintain. So one possible resolution could be: 1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on the wiki 2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki 3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question) 4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's. -Rob -Rob Regards, Andrea. Rob; I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged as needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way we decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it is already categorized with a toc on the main page. The other FAQ on the website is also categorized: http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and consolidate. In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here. But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers to do the work. So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a +1 from me. I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ for the project. Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs: http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html Maybe a simplifying assumption could be: 1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product and the project 2) We have the internal project-facing FAQ's on openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format. I also would like to see FAQs in the Wiki, for both parts. FAQs have the attribute that they are never complete, need to be updated regularily and nearly anybody has something to add. So, it should be the best if indeed anybody can do the update. That's best done within the Wiki. Mistakes can be corrected fast and bad changes reverted easily. My 2 ct. Marcus
Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)
Rob Weir wrote: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote: [Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ. I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an OpenOffice FAQ easily reachable by search engines at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know whether it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so). Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it from the current site? The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results. That is valuable and worth preserving. But the current FAQ contents are out of date. They would need a lot of work to update/correct them. Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to maintain. Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML definition lists (dl) would be easier and could be maintained via the CMS web interface. There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ These also appear to be unmaintained. But I think the wiki version would be easier to maintain. So one possible resolution could be: 1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on the wiki 2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki 3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question) 4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's. -Rob -Rob Regards, Andrea. Rob; I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged as needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way we decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it is already categorized with a toc on the main page. The other FAQ on the website is also categorized: http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and consolidate. In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here. But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers to do the work. So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a +1 from me. I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ for the project. Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs: http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html Maybe a simplifying assumption could be: 1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product and the project 2) We have the internal project-facing FAQ's on openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format. -Rob Regards Keith Rob; Though your simplifying assumption appears on the surface to be a good compromise the process engineer in me says I see a potential maintenance disaster looming. It creates essentially two different processes with different tools to accomplish the same basic task something that I prefer to avoid if possible. By using one or the other you cut down on the training necessary to bring new people up to speed and you centralize the maintenance and lessen the chance that something slips under the radar. I already know what kind of shape the documentation section of the wiki is in. Let me take a look at the FAQ's on the web site and see how far out of date they are. It may be that rewriting the user ones in dtet may make more sense. Regards Keith
Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 12/03/2012 09:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescettipesce...@apache.org wrote: On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote: [Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ. I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an OpenOffice FAQ easily reachable by search engines at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know whether it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so). Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it from the current site? The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results. That is valuable and worth preserving. But the current FAQ contents are out of date. They would need a lot of work to update/correct them. Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to maintain. Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML definition lists (dl) would be easier and could be maintained via the CMS web interface. There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ These also appear to be unmaintained. But I think the wiki version would be easier to maintain. So one possible resolution could be: 1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on the wiki 2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki 3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question) 4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's. -Rob -Rob Regards, Andrea. Rob; I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged as needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way we decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it is already categorized with a toc on the main page. The other FAQ on the website is also categorized: http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and consolidate. In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here. But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers to do the work. So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a +1 from me. I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ for the project. Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs: http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html Maybe a simplifying assumption could be: 1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product and the project 2) We have the internal project-facing FAQ's on openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format. I also would like to see FAQs in the Wiki, for both parts. FAQs have the attribute that they are never complete, need to be updated regularily and nearly anybody has something to add. A website in mdtext is also easy to update and anyone can update it. In some sense it is even easier than the wiki, since with the anonymous mode an account registration is not even needed, unlike the wiki, I'd also disagree with the belief that FAQs need to be frequently changed. They only need to be frequently *asked*. For example, the question about OpenOffice on iPad only needs to be answered once. it does not require frequent community enhancement. So, it should be the best if indeed anybody can do the update. That's best done within the Wiki. Mistakes can be corrected fast and bad changes reverted easily. The same is true of the website. But let's be honest: the FAQ's on the wiki have been neglected for a long time. Technological concerns are not the reason for this, since they are already on the wiki. Our problems are elsewhere. My preference for the mdtext is it is easier to style and looks better. Wikis are dog butt ugly, IMHO. Fine for collaborating on text, but for final publication they are ugly. IMHO. -Rob My 2 ct. Marcus
Re: www.apache.org/projects has no AOO ??
On 12/03/2012 11:51 AM, janI wrote: what is TLP ? == Top Level Project == We are still in moving/setup mode. As near as I can tell, the svn trees (source, web sites) have been moved but some of the underpinnings of the web sites are still not complete to use the CMS. The project website (incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg) for sure has not been moved where it needs to go yet. I know we use bugzilla for our own bugs in AOO, but I thought I had to use AOO when I open a JIRA ticket, where I want Infra to make some changes for me. correct...and what you say IS somewhat confusing. Normally, I just leave the JIRA ticket assigned to INFRA, i.e. use INFRA as the project. I think this means assigned to, i.e. who will do it, rather than who it's for. Maybe? Anyway, this is usually what I do. Jan I. On 3 December 2012 20:47, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: The transition to TLP is not complete. We do not use JIRA. We have our bugzilla instance Regards, Save Sent from my iPhone On Dec 3, 2012, at 1:19 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: When I look in www.apache.org projects, take indexes, I cannot find: Apache OpenOffice OpenOffice or OOO The same goes for the JIRA issues system. Should it not be there ? (or does our project have another code) Jan. -- MzK “How wrong is it for a woman to expect the man to build the world she wants, rather than to create it herself?” -- Anais Nin
Re: Unsubscribe in Commits
Hi 2012/12/3 Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org: http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/mailing-lists.html#commits-mailing-list Thanks, fixed in SVN. Will appear online when the site is published and moved out of the incubator. I try change in cms, but because some procedures that need to be made couldn 't. -- Albino
Re: [Proposal] Create new mailing list: d...@openoffice.apache.org
Hi. 2012/12/3 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org: Name: d...@openoffice.apache.org OR d...@openoffice.apache.org (I don't have a strong preference for the name) docs [at] openoffice.apache.org Moderators: Please respond if you can volunteer as moderator. We should aim for 2 or 3 geographically dispersed. Me. :-) -- Albino
Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote: [Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ. I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an OpenOffice FAQ easily reachable by search engines at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know whether it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so). Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it from the current site? The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results. That is valuable and worth preserving. But the current FAQ contents are out of date. They would need a lot of work to update/correct them. Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to maintain. Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML definition lists (dl) would be easier and could be maintained via the CMS web interface. There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ These also appear to be unmaintained. But I think the wiki version would be easier to maintain. So one possible resolution could be: 1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on the wiki 2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki 3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question) 4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's. -Rob -Rob Regards, Andrea. Rob; I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged as needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way we decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it is already categorized with a toc on the main page. The other FAQ on the website is also categorized: http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and consolidate. In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here. But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers to do the work. So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a +1 from me. I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ for the project. Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs: http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html Maybe a simplifying assumption could be: 1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product and the project 2) We have the internal project-facing FAQ's on openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format. -Rob Regards Keith Rob; Though your simplifying assumption appears on the surface to be a good compromise the process engineer in me says I see a potential maintenance disaster looming. It creates essentially two different processes with different tools to accomplish the same basic task something that I prefer to avoid if possible. By using one or the other you cut down on the training necessary to bring new people up to speed and you centralize the maintenance and lessen the chance that something slips under the radar. We already have different tools and different processes: static HTML, static mdtext and wiki. I'm proposing reducing it from 3 to 2. As far as process goes, I think the product-related questions will generally be updated by those interested in documentation and support. But the project-related questions -- the ones currently on openoffice.apache.org -- will probably be updated by the PMC. I think those questions, which deal with project membership, process definition, etc., are quasi-official in nature and it is not a bad thing if editing them is harder and more restricted than editing a public wiki. And let's not forget the harsh transition that some has navigating from an openoffice.apache.org web page to the wiki. The look is different and there is no context or reverse navigation. The user has been teleported into another galaxy. I sometimes wonder whether we should move *all* of the openoffice.apache.org website contents onto the www.openoffice.org website, and work to unify the look and feel of the other pieces, a larger reworking of: 1) Move openoffice.apache.org onto www.openoffice.org 2) Move all CWiki pages into MWiki 3) Setup redirect of blog from blogs.apache.org/ooo to
Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)
Am 12/03/2012 11:35 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 12/03/2012 09:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescettipesce...@apache.org wrote: On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote: [Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ. I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an OpenOffice FAQ easily reachable by search engines at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know whether it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so). Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it from the current site? The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results. That is valuable and worth preserving. But the current FAQ contents are out of date. They would need a lot of work to update/correct them. Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to maintain. Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML definition lists (dl) would be easier and could be maintained via the CMS web interface. There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ These also appear to be unmaintained. But I think the wiki version would be easier to maintain. So one possible resolution could be: 1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on the wiki 2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki 3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question) 4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's. -Rob -Rob Regards, Andrea. Rob; I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged as needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way we decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it is already categorized with a toc on the main page. The other FAQ on the website is also categorized: http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and consolidate. In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here. But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers to do the work. So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a +1 from me. I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ for the project. Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs: http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html Maybe a simplifying assumption could be: 1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product and the project 2) We have the internal project-facing FAQ's on openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format. I also would like to see FAQs in the Wiki, for both parts. FAQs have the attribute that they are never complete, need to be updated regularily and nearly anybody has something to add. A website in mdtext is also easy to update and anyone can update it. In some sense it is even easier than the wiki, since with the anonymous mode an account registration is not even needed, unlike the wiki, I'd also disagree with the belief that FAQs need to be frequently changed. They only need to be frequently *asked*. For example, the question about OpenOffice on iPad only needs to be answered once. it does not require frequent community enhancement. So, it should be the best if indeed anybody can do the update. That's best done within the Wiki. Mistakes can be corrected fast and bad changes reverted easily. The same is true of the website. But let's be honest: the FAQ's on the wiki have been neglected for a long time. Technological concerns are not the reason for this, since they are already on the wiki. Our problems are elsewhere. My preference for the mdtext is it is easier to style and looks better. Wikis are dog butt ugly, IMHO. Fine for collaborating on text, but for final publication they are ugly. IMHO. For reference and comparison, look at the support page that Firefox uses: http://support.mozilla.org/en-US/home Their hot topics is analogous to FAQs. This is a clean, attractive page, free of distractions, easy to use. I don't think we get there with a wiki. Indeed, it looks nice. But I don't think that we need that much of styling. Marcus
Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)
Am 12/03/2012 11:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescettipesce...@apache.org wrote: On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote: [Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ. I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an OpenOffice FAQ easily reachable by search engines at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know whether it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so). Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it from the current site? The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results. That is valuable and worth preserving. But the current FAQ contents are out of date. They would need a lot of work to update/correct them. Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to maintain. Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML definition lists (dl) would be easier and could be maintained via the CMS web interface. There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ These also appear to be unmaintained. But I think the wiki version would be easier to maintain. So one possible resolution could be: 1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on the wiki 2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki 3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question) 4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's. -Rob -Rob Regards, Andrea. Rob; I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged as needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way we decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it is already categorized with a toc on the main page. The other FAQ on the website is also categorized: http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and consolidate. In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here. But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers to do the work. So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a +1 from me. I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ for the project. Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs: http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html Maybe a simplifying assumption could be: 1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product and the project 2) We have the internal project-facing FAQ's on openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format. -Rob Regards Keith Rob; Though your simplifying assumption appears on the surface to be a good compromise the process engineer in me says I see a potential maintenance disaster looming. It creates essentially two different processes with different tools to accomplish the same basic task something that I prefer to avoid if possible. By using one or the other you cut down on the training necessary to bring new people up to speed and you centralize the maintenance and lessen the chance that something slips under the radar. We already have different tools and different processes: static HTML, static mdtext and wiki. I'm proposing reducing it from 3 to 2. As far as process goes, I think the product-related questions will generally be updated by those interested in documentation and support. But the project-related questions -- the ones currently on openoffice.apache.org -- will probably be updated by the PMC. I think those questions, which deal with project membership, process definition, etc., are quasi-official in nature and it is not a bad thing if editing them is harder and more restricted than editing a public wiki. And let's not forget the harsh transition that some has navigating from an openoffice.apache.org web page to the wiki. The look is different and there is no context or reverse navigation. The user has been teleported into another galaxy. I sometimes wonder whether we should move *all* of the openoffice.apache.org website contents onto the www.openoffice.org website, and work to unify the look and feel of the other pieces, a larger reworking of: 1) Move openoffice.apache.org onto www.openoffice.org 2) Move all CWiki pages into MWiki 3) Setup redirect of blog from blogs.apache.org/ooo to blog.openoffice.org What
Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)
Rob Weir wrote: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote: [Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ. I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an OpenOffice FAQ easily reachable by search engines at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know whether it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so). Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it from the current site? The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results. That is valuable and worth preserving. But the current FAQ contents are out of date. They would need a lot of work to update/correct them. Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to maintain. Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML definition lists (dl) would be easier and could be maintained via the CMS web interface. There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ These also appear to be unmaintained. But I think the wiki version would be easier to maintain. So one possible resolution could be: 1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on the wiki 2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki 3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question) 4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's. -Rob -Rob Regards, Andrea. Rob; I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged as needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way we decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it is already categorized with a toc on the main page. The other FAQ on the website is also categorized: http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and consolidate. In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here. But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers to do the work. So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a +1 from me. I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ for the project. Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs: http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html Maybe a simplifying assumption could be: 1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product and the project 2) We have the internal project-facing FAQ's on openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format. -Rob Regards Keith Rob; Though your simplifying assumption appears on the surface to be a good compromise the process engineer in me says I see a potential maintenance disaster looming. It creates essentially two different processes with different tools to accomplish the same basic task something that I prefer to avoid if possible. By using one or the other you cut down on the training necessary to bring new people up to speed and you centralize the maintenance and lessen the chance that something slips under the radar. We already have different tools and different processes: static HTML, static mdtext and wiki. I'm proposing reducing it from 3 to 2. Agreed, all I am saying is that the more ways there are to do the same thing the greater both the possibility and the probability of maintainability headaches. As far as process goes, I think the product-related questions will generally be updated by those interested in documentation and support. Agreed. One reason that I tend toward using the wiki for these is that it could attract volunteers to help update and even add new ones that may be hesitant about editing a web page. But the project-related questions -- the ones currently on openoffice.apache.org -- will probably be updated by the PMC. I think those questions, which deal with project membership, process definition, etc., are quasi-official in nature and it is not a bad thing if editing them is harder and more restricted than editing a public wiki. I agree here also. I do believe that there are ways to lock down sections of the wiki also. So either way is doable. And let's not forget the harsh transition that some has navigating from an openoffice.apache.org web page to the wiki. The look is different and there is no context or
Re: WaE: sw/source/filter/ww8 compiler warnings
Sure,Pavel, after I have a clean build for this module, I get this warning
too, and I have already committed the change and don't find any other
warning..From that,I think my environment on Mac OS X 10.5.8 can identify
the same warning set with yours, but level is still less than yours because
I didn't catch any compile errors caused by these warnings.Before that,for
there are many output logs during build, the warning messages are mixed
among the output info,easily ignored if not leading to compile error. Now,I
use this way $build out.txt to filter other output info and only
warnings left on the screen. Thus, I can get the compile warnings obviously.
I attach my configure parameter for your comparison. If you think this way
is valuable for other developers, could you please composite them and add
to the build guide as attention items when doing AOO build, especially
individual module build, to avoid the same issue in the future?Thanks.
./configure --with-dmake-url=
http://dmake.apache-extras.org.codespot.com/files/dmake-4.12.1.tar.bz2; \
--with-epm-url=
http://ftp.easysw.com/pub/epm/3.7/epm-3.7-source.tar.gz; \
--disable-mozilla --disable-build-mozilla
--enable-verbose --enable-category-b \
--enable-minimizer --enable-presenter-console
--enable-wiki-publisher --disable-odk
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 3:28 AM, Pavel Janík pa...@janik.cz wrote:
Hi!
On Dec 3, 2012, at 4:18 PM, chengjh wrote:
I committed some changes to solve the found warnings...Please help to
verify again..And I will have a check to the whole sw module to see
whether
any missed warning is still existing.thanks.
thanks. The module is almost clean now.
I only see:
sw/source/filter/ww8/ww8par3.cxx:1125: warning: comparison is always true
due to limited range of data type
SwNumRule* WW8ListManager::GetNumRule(sal_uInt16 i)
{
if ( i = 0 i maLSTInfos.size() )
surely i=0 when it is unsigned.
--
Pavel Janík
--
Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Re: [Proposal] Create new mailing list: d...@openoffice.apache.org
Rob, On 12/4/2012 2:55 AM, Dave Barton wrote: Original Message From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 13:14:46 -0500 This idea has come up on another thread, where we've been discussed the future of the documentation effort and a future call for volunteers. We'd like a dedicated list for these efforts. Name: d...@openoffice.apache.org OR d...@openoffice.apache.org (I don't have a strong preference for the name) Moderators: Please respond if you can volunteer as moderator. We should aim for 2 or 3 geographically dispersed. I can help with the geographical dispersion of the moderators. Peter I'll wait 72 hours, and if no objections we can ask Andrea to submit the form for the new list creation. Regards, -Rob Hi Rob, I am currently at UTC +1 if you want me to moderate the (long overdue) documentation list. For reasons I might explain at another time, moderation is all can contribute to the project for the time being. Although I will try to mentor/guide any newcomers who want to work on user documentation. Regards Dave
Re: Fisheye setup?
Am Montag, 3. Dezember 2012 um 23:34 schrieb Kay Schenk: I don't know who did the initial setup for our fisheye instance -- https://fisheye6.atlassian.com/browse/ooo The last activity on trunk/main via this interface seems to be Nov 24. Does the fisheye instance need editing do the recent svn move? Since I don't download the complete source, I use this a lot to find stuff. :/ I don't know, I have tested fisheye ones but do not use it. A much better tool to search the code is opengrok. You can find an instance under http://opengrok.adfinis-sygroup.org/source I hope adfinis is keeping this up-to-date. Juergen -- MzK “How wrong is it for a woman to expect the man to build the world she wants, rather than to create it herself?” -- Anais Nin
Re: Sidebar
On 04.12.2012 03:32, Dali Liu wrote: Hi Andre, I am planning to merger a extension to sidebar model, I would like to verify the implementation of the sidebar. Will I start from here: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Framework/Article/Tool_Panels? Hi Dali Liu, The sidebar is not yet finished. Actually we just started designing the API. Eventually we will probably use the functionality described in the Tool Panels wiki page, but there will be some additional interfaces and configuration entries. At the end of this week I can probably say more. -Andre 2012/12/3 Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com On 02.12.2012 19:11, Andrea Pescetti wrote: On 30/11/2012 Andre Fischer wrote: I will be working on the implementation of the sidebar. In the hope of motivating others (you) to join me, I have created a wiki page that gives a first and rough outline of the work that has to be done and the API and code that already exists and (hopefully) can be reused or adapted: http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Sidebarhttp://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Sidebar Thanks Andre, it seems that tasks are still very broad, so I guess that this call is mainly aimed at existing or full-time developers, but if you identify small self-contained tasks where new developers could be involved please advertise them, since they might be useful in a future call for developers or for FOSDEM. Good idea, I will do that. I just wanted to make sure that nobody feels not invited. By the way, I have activated the existing but unfinished sidebar implementation that was discontinued shortly before OpenOffice came to Apache. You can find developer builds for Linux, Mac and Windows. Please see the Status section on http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Sidebarhttp://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Sidebar(near the top). There you can also see screenshots of that sidebar implementation. Please do not use these developer snapshots for anything other than analysis of the sidebar. There appear to be some serious bugs. They are meant as living demos of an unfinished feature. Regards, Andre Regards, Andrea.
