Re: Introduction

[Alexandro Colorado]

Hello Camelia best way to start is to create an account on our bugzilla and
read some bug reports and direct your questions to the QA list at
q...@openoffice.apache.org

Check the wiki for information on the QA project in general here:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/QA


On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 11:03 PM, Camelia Brown wrote:

> Hello Everyone,
>
> My name is Camelia (I usually just go by C.C. for short), and I am a recent
> graduate from California looking for work. Unfortunately, I ended up
> realizing what I wanted to do a little too late in the college game to
> actually have taken any classes involved with my new goals, but I found out
> about OpenOffice and realized that it could be a place where I  hopefully
> learn some of the basic skills of QA specifically as well as general
> knowledge I would need to become a QA Tester for a company. I hope to be of
> help on this project as best as I can.
>
> --
> Camelia C. Brown
>



-- 
Alexandro Colorado
Apache OpenOffice Contributor
http://www.openoffice.org

Re: Wiki Page Addition and General Question

[Rory O'Farrell]

On Thu, 8 Aug 2013 21:54:40 -0700
Camelia Brown  wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> I'm informing you that I have added myself to the Wiki Page list of
> volunteers. Also, I am having trouble registering for the community forum.
> The area that requires a signature will not accept "OpenOffice 4.0 on
> Windows 7"  as a suitable signature. Is there some way to fix this or
> should I put something else? Please let me know.
> 
The admin with rights to change forum config is tied up with important exams, 
so cannot give time to changing the signature validation at present, for 
understandable reasons. I recommend that you sign on using 3.4.1  (or anything 
it will accept) and subsequently edit the sig using User Control Panel (top 
left in Forum window).

-- 
Rory O'Farrell 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Completed Modules

[Camelia Brown]

I have completed the Level 1 and 2 modules.

-- 
Camelia C. Brown

Wiki Page Addition and General Question

[Camelia Brown]

Hello,

I'm informing you that I have added myself to the Wiki Page list of
volunteers. Also, I am having trouble registering for the community forum.
The area that requires a signature will not accept "OpenOffice 4.0 on
Windows 7"  as a suitable signature. Is there some way to fix this or
should I put something else? Please let me know.

-- 
Camelia C. Brown

Introduction

[Camelia Brown]

Hello Everyone,

My name is Camelia (I usually just go by C.C. for short), and I am a recent
graduate from California looking for work. Unfortunately, I ended up
realizing what I wanted to do a little too late in the college game to
actually have taken any classes involved with my new goals, but I found out
about OpenOffice and realized that it could be a place where I  hopefully
learn some of the basic skills of QA specifically as well as general
knowledge I would need to become a QA Tester for a company. I hope to be of
help on this project as best as I can.

-- 
Camelia C. Brown

RE: Solaris Build

[Steele, Raymond]

dmake is failing on the line 43 of startup.mk. Anyone know why dmake would fail 
on the following:

.IMPORT .IGNORE : .EVERYTHING

From: Steele, Raymond
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 9:42 AM
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; a...@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Solaris Build

I am trying to build  OpenOffice 4.0 for Solaris x86. I finally go through 
installing all the pre-requisites, configure and bootstrap, but now I am having 
trouble with the build --all.  I am receiving the following error on execution:

Entering ../main/solenv
dmake: ../solenv/inc/startup.mk: line 43: Error: -- Expecting macro or rule 
defn, found neither

1 module(s):
solenv
need(s) to be rebuilt

Reason(s):

Error: error 65280 occurred while making ../main/solenv


I have seen that people recommended changing make='make' in the Config.pm file 
for perl to make='dmake'. I've tried, but that does not make a difference. Any 
help would be appreciated.


Raymond

Re: Possible broken link: from other.html

[Marcus (OOo)]

Am 08/07/2013 09:20 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):

Am 08/07/2013 02:21 PM, schrieb Jennings, Rory:

I am trying to download the AOO SDKs, but there is an error on this page
in your javascript when using IE8 (my company's policy, and I have no
admin rights to install an alternative). The error is in
download_other.js: Object doesn't support this property or method (line
96, character 2 which I believe is referring to PLATFORM.indexOf but I
don't have much experience with this sort of thing so I can't be sure).
I would appreciate it if this could be fixed ASAP as I need to evaluate
the use of these SDKs.


The alternative link that Rob provided you should solve the urgent need.

However, I would like to investigate this download issue. Please can you
give me the output of the following webpage (to copy & paste the data in
the table is enough):

http://www.openoffice.org/download/test/analyze.html

Furthermore, do you have any problems on
"http://www.openoffice.org/download/"; to start the download when
clicking into the big green box?


Thanks for your data.

Unfortunately, I cannot see any problems and as you said clicking the 
green box gives you the correct build, in general it should work fine.


Maybe it is possible for you to try to delete the browser cache to 
exclude any faulty data and then reload the webpage. Or also - if you 
know a colleague with a different browser - try to use this to see what 
is happening then.


I'm sorry but in this case I think your MS IE browser or some setting(s) 
is responsible to not rendering the webpage correctly but doing 
something strange.


Marcus


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: printing

[Rob Weir]

On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Lez Edwards
 wrote:
> Why has the new version of open office changed my printer setting and will 
> not let me change them back 
>

Lez,  could you give some more details on what you are seeing?  If you
have a set of steps that we can use to reproduce the bug, feel free to
enter them into our issue tracking database:

https://issues.apache.org/ooo/

Thanks!

-Rob

> Lez Edwards

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: New Features and Enhancements video

[Drew Jensen]

Well - two posts again...

I wasn't going to send this along today, but since I'm here and can..

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bx7ZNEXlmR0IVmxqNUR0VjlpUTg/edit?usp=sharing

It might make sense with the two documents above...don't get too lost in
the weeds with anything in that last collection of files - it WILL be
replaced on Monday.

//drew


On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Drew Jensen wrote:

> Howdy folks,
>
> Well, kind of a long 2-3 days..
>
> I've done some work on content creation, but right now wanted to look
> firstly at an overall focus and appropriate motif/themes for the project.
>
> Following are the beginning of that work - I have a free weekend coming up
> and plan to have the first real draft of the two documents finished by
> Monday - along with some examples of how to apply the motif and themes.
>
> So - if folks want to comment on what is here, great, but you may like to
> hold off till I post up the finished first draft and examples.
>
> Media Library Overview
> https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bx7ZNEXlmR0IaXRTUHpCQURGTEE
>
> Media Library Motif/themes
> https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bx7ZNEXlmR0Ia3VBQU9RUDJkdWs
>
>
> One of the over arching goals of this is to put in a place a defined set
> of artifacts and work process so that collaboration can easily take place,
> for example.
> Volunteers can focus on content creation, without much if any concern on
> branding as the content would then be 'wrapped' into the branding by
> applying a theme and defined final presentation layout.
>
> The motif should also work for content such as video from conference
> presentations, use with video conferencing systems such as Google Hangouts
> and in the examples on Monday it will address the Google Hangouts use
> directly.
>
> Final note, when you look at the second document don't get too wrapped up
> with the secondary graphics, mostly it's just working out layout rules and
> the like.
>
> I will be back on-line again then on Monday, or possibly Tuesday next
> week, but no later then that.
>
> //drew
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 5:57 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On 8/2/13 10:30 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>> > On 30/07/2013 Drew Jensen wrote:
>> >> I've been plowing ahead with my ideas here; not just as a single
>> activity
>> >> to produce one or two videos but rather to start a framework for a
>> >> project
>> >> multi-media resources library, from which multiple videos, for multiple
>> >> purposes, would be generated. It could also be used to generate themed
>> >> artifacts for fliers/presentations/artwork(wallpapers, etc) that tie in
>> >> with these videos.
>> >
>> > This is a great idea. The project can surely use better marketing
>> > materials, be it video chunks, screenshots, images, nice documents that
>> > show the new features...
>>
>> I agree it's a good idea and I had the same ... But I wasn't able to
>> finish my tests in time for the 4.0 release.
>>
>> But in general I think we should establish our own YouTube channel where
>> we provide screencasts and other media files on a regular basis.
>>
>> Important is that we use a common framework and Drew started in this
>> direction already.
>>
>> We need a common credit section for the end of all media files, with
>> some community info, links, donation info etc.
>>
>> A common intro section would also make sense, or maybe a collection of
>> 1-5 different including seasonal ones like a Christmas branded intro or
>> so.
>>
>> Screencast are better than a slideshow, at least if possible we should
>> trz to produce short screencast sections based on a script. And ideally
>> a native speaker with a good voice can provide a related spoken
>> explanation to the screencast (Drew's voice sounds well to me).
>>
>> >
>> >> For the 'community' category - These pieces:
>> >> CommunityBeforeCode_loop.mp4, suitable for use at a show table running
>> >> on a
>> >> laptop, voice over, no musical background - notice I did not tag this
>> >> with
>> >> a license.
>> >> AOO4_HotTamaleBaby.mp4 and hottamale.mp4 take that basic loop and add a
>> >> little party music.
>> >
>> > The result is nice, but the music covers the voice at times. Also, I
>> > would keep links very simple, so not openoffice.apache.org and not the
>> > full URL to the inner pages. I think it's "Community over code" and not
>> > "before code". For the rest, it's impressive to see how the single
>> > chunks can be rearranged to target different use cases. The voiceover is
>> > good and clear.
>>
>> we can have both music sections (with hopefully different music ;-)) and
>> voice over sections where a clear voice give explanations.
>>
>> >
>> >> So, my vision would be to at the end deliver, somehow, for the
>> >> projects use
>> >> an ISO with all the files used to produce the works, this would
>> >> include the
>> >> OpenShot and Pitivi (and other) project files, it would include some
>> >> instructions (which we would build as we do this) on how to make use
>> >> of the
>> >> mater

Re: New Features and Enhancements video

[Drew Jensen]

Howdy folks,

Well, kind of a long 2-3 days..

I've done some work on content creation, but right now wanted to look
firstly at an overall focus and appropriate motif/themes for the project.

Following are the beginning of that work - I have a free weekend coming up
and plan to have the first real draft of the two documents finished by
Monday - along with some examples of how to apply the motif and themes.

So - if folks want to comment on what is here, great, but you may like to
hold off till I post up the finished first draft and examples.

Media Library Overview
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bx7ZNEXlmR0IaXRTUHpCQURGTEE

Media Library Motif/themes
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bx7ZNEXlmR0Ia3VBQU9RUDJkdWs


One of the over arching goals of this is to put in a place a defined set of
artifacts and work process so that collaboration can easily take place, for
example.
Volunteers can focus on content creation, without much if any concern on
branding as the content would then be 'wrapped' into the branding by
applying a theme and defined final presentation layout.

The motif should also work for content such as video from conference
presentations, use with video conferencing systems such as Google Hangouts
and in the examples on Monday it will address the Google Hangouts use
directly.

Final note, when you look at the second document don't get too wrapped up
with the secondary graphics, mostly it's just working out layout rules and
the like.

I will be back on-line again then on Monday, or possibly Tuesday next week,
but no later then that.

//drew



On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 5:57 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

> On 8/2/13 10:30 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> > On 30/07/2013 Drew Jensen wrote:
> >> I've been plowing ahead with my ideas here; not just as a single
> activity
> >> to produce one or two videos but rather to start a framework for a
> >> project
> >> multi-media resources library, from which multiple videos, for multiple
> >> purposes, would be generated. It could also be used to generate themed
> >> artifacts for fliers/presentations/artwork(wallpapers, etc) that tie in
> >> with these videos.
> >
> > This is a great idea. The project can surely use better marketing
> > materials, be it video chunks, screenshots, images, nice documents that
> > show the new features...
>
> I agree it's a good idea and I had the same ... But I wasn't able to
> finish my tests in time for the 4.0 release.
>
> But in general I think we should establish our own YouTube channel where
> we provide screencasts and other media files on a regular basis.
>
> Important is that we use a common framework and Drew started in this
> direction already.
>
> We need a common credit section for the end of all media files, with
> some community info, links, donation info etc.
>
> A common intro section would also make sense, or maybe a collection of
> 1-5 different including seasonal ones like a Christmas branded intro or so.
>
> Screencast are better than a slideshow, at least if possible we should
> trz to produce short screencast sections based on a script. And ideally
> a native speaker with a good voice can provide a related spoken
> explanation to the screencast (Drew's voice sounds well to me).
>
> >
> >> For the 'community' category - These pieces:
> >> CommunityBeforeCode_loop.mp4, suitable for use at a show table running
> >> on a
> >> laptop, voice over, no musical background - notice I did not tag this
> >> with
> >> a license.
> >> AOO4_HotTamaleBaby.mp4 and hottamale.mp4 take that basic loop and add a
> >> little party music.
> >
> > The result is nice, but the music covers the voice at times. Also, I
> > would keep links very simple, so not openoffice.apache.org and not the
> > full URL to the inner pages. I think it's "Community over code" and not
> > "before code". For the rest, it's impressive to see how the single
> > chunks can be rearranged to target different use cases. The voiceover is
> > good and clear.
>
> we can have both music sections (with hopefully different music ;-)) and
> voice over sections where a clear voice give explanations.
>
> >
> >> So, my vision would be to at the end deliver, somehow, for the
> >> projects use
> >> an ISO with all the files used to produce the works, this would
> >> include the
> >> OpenShot and Pitivi (and other) project files, it would include some
> >> instructions (which we would build as we do this) on how to make use
> >> of the
> >> material.
> >
> > This would be perfect. At the moment we don't have many OpenOffice 4
> > specific materials, so any well-done videos/graphics are welcome.
>
> yes and with some more experience it should be really fun to produce
> stuff like this ... I tried to play with iMovie on my Mac (see my very
> first attempts http://people.apache.org/~jsc/test/AOO40_Test.mov) and I
> just played around a bit...
>
> Juergen
>
>
>
> >> What I would hope could be done, if the good folks at source forge are
> >> willing which I expect hey would be, is to 

Re: Synonym Issue

[Rory O'Farrell]

On Thu, 8 Aug 2013 10:49:37 -0700
Trenor  wrote:

> Hello.
> Just thought you guys needed to know that I found a problem with synonym
> function. The Open Office definition for "secular" comes up as "profane"
> "commoner".
> Secular actually means non religious. It appears that the person who
> programmed your synonyms was a religious person trying to make a statement.
> It would be nice if this could be fixed. Thanks.

This is a non-issue: Roget lists

Synonyms for secular

civil
materialistic
worldly
lay
material
profane
temporal
earthly
laic
laical
nonclerical
nonreligious

of this world
unsacred



-- 
Rory O'Farrell 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Synonym Issue

[Rob Weir]

On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Trenor  wrote:
> Hello.
> Just thought you guys needed to know that I found a problem with synonym
> function. The Open Office definition for "secular" comes up as "profane"
> "commoner".
> Secular actually means non religious. It appears that the person who
> programmed your synonyms was a religious person trying to make a statement.
> It would be nice if this could be fixed. Thanks.

With AOO 4.0, with the en-US dictionaries, I see these synonyms
listed:  laic, lay, profane, layman, layperson, commoner, common man.

"Secular" has several meanings and all of the above are correct,
according to the Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd Edition.  Not every
meaning is applicable to every use, but none of these are irrelevant.
In any case I don't think anyone is trying to make a statement here,
at least not in the dictionary.

Regards,

-Rob

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Synonym Issue

[Trenor]

Hello.
Just thought you guys needed to know that I found a problem with synonym
function. The Open Office definition for "secular" comes up as "profane"
"commoner".
Secular actually means non religious. It appears that the person who
programmed your synonyms was a religious person trying to make a statement.
It would be nice if this could be fixed. Thanks.

Re: Coverage of 4.0 Release

[Rob Weir]

On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Andrea Pescetti 
>>> wrote:
>>> > A quick selection of articles in Italian that went beyond the simple
>>> copy
>>> > and paste:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> http://www.melablog.it/post/108539/apache-rilascia-openoffice-4-0-barra-laterale-e-migliore-interoperabilita-con-ms-office
>>> >
>>> >
>>> http://www.tuxjournal.net/rilasciato-openoffice-4-0-novita-link-al-download/
>>> >
>>> >
>>> http://www.oneopensource.it/26/07/2013/apache-openoffice-4-0-disponibile-per-il-download/
>>> >
>>> > http://news.softonic.it/openoffice-versione-4-0-windows-mac
>>> >
>>> > Still, note that virtually all articles (including those in English)
>>> > massively reuse screenshots from the Release Notes. It was a very good
>>> idea
>>> > to provide those materials.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Yes.  It worked out well.  Note though that we have received a note
>>> from a print journalist looking for a high-resolution screenshot.  So
>>> we might consider the needs of print media in the next release also.
>>>
>>> So what next?  One idea is to have a follow up blog post with download
>>> numbers and highlights from the media coverage of the 4.0 release.  Of
>>> course, we could list all of the articles, which would be impressive.
>>> But it would be good to have a shorter list of the best coverage also
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>
>> one more today...
>>
>> http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/News/Apache-Releases-OpenOffice-4.0
>>
>>
>>
>
> Not coverage but an interesting overview comparison of LO 4.1 and AOO 4.0.
> AOO seems to comes out ahead for actually providing "major" release
> components. :)
>
> http://www.itworld.com/software/368184/apache-openoffice-4-vs-libreoffice-41
>

Nice article.  The summary at the end is:

"The choice boils down to how they're implemented and how well their
features and development cycles match user needs. LibreOffice has the
edge in terms of regular updates, but OpenOffice releases feel
meticulously polished. If you want cutting-edge feature sets, go with
LibreOffice. If you want the most refined versions of the features
available, go with OpenOffice. Both are free, so at least you don't
have to choose based on price."

The interesting thing to remember here is that it is not possible to
"cherry pick" quality.  Quality is not something you get from taking
patches and applying them to LO.  Quality comes from the totality of
what we do.  It is holistic.  It comes from the process as much as the
code.So although we hear claims that LO can just take whatever
they want from AOO (which they are welcome to do, from my perspective)
they will never achieve the same level of quality unless they work
closely with us.

Regards,

-Rob

>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > Regards,
>>> >   Andrea.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 25/07/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/07/25/open_office_40_debuts_with_ibm_code_side_and_centre/
>>> >>
>>> >> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> http://www.techradar.com/news/software/applications/apache-bolts-sidebar-onto-new-openoffice-1168196
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Rob Weir
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/07/openoffice-4-0-overhauls-user-interface-boosts-microsoft-compatibility/
>>> 
>>>  On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Rob Weir
>>>  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > http://www.muylinux.com/2013/07/24/apache-openoffice-4/
>>> >
>>> > (Interesting choice of a logo, one of the other nice ones from the
>>> > contest)
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Rob Weir
>>>  wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Important Japanese website:
>>> >>
>>> >> http://www.forest.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20130724_608941.html
>>> >>
>>> >> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:35 AM, Rob Weir
>>>  wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> http://www.datamation.com/applications/apache-releases-open-source-openoffice-4.html
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Ricardo Berlasso<
>>> rgb.m...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>  http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTQxODQ
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  2013/7/23 Rob Weir
>>> 
>>> >
>>> http://www.linuxbsdos.com/2013/07/23/apache-openoffice-4-is-here/
>>> >
>>> > http://www.zdnet.com/openoffice-4-0-arrives-718456/
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Rob Weir
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> http://office.about.com/b/2013/07/23/the-new-openoffice-available-today-new-side-bar-and-more.htm
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> http://amanz.my/2013/07/openoffice-4-0-dilancarkan-untuk-pengguna-windows-

Solaris Build

[Steele, Raymond]

I am trying to build  OpenOffice 4.0 for Solaris x86. I finally go through 
installing all the pre-requisites, configure and bootstrap, but now I am having 
trouble with the build --all.  I am receiving the following error on execution:

Entering ../main/solenv
dmake: ../solenv/inc/startup.mk: line 43: Error: -- Expecting macro or rule 
defn, found neither

1 module(s):
solenv
need(s) to be rebuilt

Reason(s):

Error: error 65280 occurred while making ../main/solenv


I have seen that people recommended changing make='make' in the Config.pm file 
for perl to make='dmake'. I've tried, but that does not make a difference. Any 
help would be appreciated.


Raymond

Re: Spanish language in OpenOffice Writer

[Ricardo Berlasso]

¡Hola, Alfredo!

Because you are not subscribed to the list (your message was moderated) I'm
adding you  CC. Please, do not answer directly to me but to the list instead


2013/8/8 Alfredo García 

> Hello,
> I downloaded OpenOffice recently and I'm happy with it. However, I want
> you to know that in the Spanish language version of OpenOffice Writer
> there´s a mistake: in the toolbar,Herramientas - Opciones de
> autocorrección, in the upper left corner there's a checkbox that says:
> Activar la compleción de palabras. The word "compleción" does not exist in
> the Spanish language. The correct word in that case would be
> "completamiento" (Activar el completamiento de palabras).
>
> Maybe in some Spanish speaking Caribbean country you may find people who
> use "completación", but it's still a mistake.
>


According to the Real Academia Española, "compleción" is a perfectly valid
word:

http://buscon.rae.es/drae/?type=3&val=compleci%C3%B3n&val_aux=&origen=REDRAE

while "completamiento" does not exists on the dictionary.

If you want to join us on the task of making the best possible ES version,
you can subscribe to the Spanish mailing list:

general...@openoffice.apache.org

by sending an empty mail to

general-es-subscr...@openoffice.apache.org

Regards
Ricardo



>
>
> Thanks again for OpenOffice.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Alfredo García
>
>
>
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00DGKMSK6

Re: Coverage of 4.0 Release

[Kay Schenk]

On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Kay Schenk  wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Rob Weir  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Andrea Pescetti 
>> wrote:
>> > A quick selection of articles in Italian that went beyond the simple
>> copy
>> > and paste:
>> >
>> >
>> http://www.melablog.it/post/108539/apache-rilascia-openoffice-4-0-barra-laterale-e-migliore-interoperabilita-con-ms-office
>> >
>> >
>> http://www.tuxjournal.net/rilasciato-openoffice-4-0-novita-link-al-download/
>> >
>> >
>> http://www.oneopensource.it/26/07/2013/apache-openoffice-4-0-disponibile-per-il-download/
>> >
>> > http://news.softonic.it/openoffice-versione-4-0-windows-mac
>> >
>> > Still, note that virtually all articles (including those in English)
>> > massively reuse screenshots from the Release Notes. It was a very good
>> idea
>> > to provide those materials.
>> >
>>
>> Yes.  It worked out well.  Note though that we have received a note
>> from a print journalist looking for a high-resolution screenshot.  So
>> we might consider the needs of print media in the next release also.
>>
>> So what next?  One idea is to have a follow up blog post with download
>> numbers and highlights from the media coverage of the 4.0 release.  Of
>> course, we could list all of the articles, which would be impressive.
>> But it would be good to have a shorter list of the best coverage also
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>
> one more today...
>
> http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/News/Apache-Releases-OpenOffice-4.0
>
>
>

Not coverage but an interesting overview comparison of LO 4.1 and AOO 4.0.
AOO seems to comes out ahead for actually providing "major" release
components. :)

http://www.itworld.com/software/368184/apache-openoffice-4-vs-libreoffice-41


>
>>
>>
>> > Regards,
>> >   Andrea.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 25/07/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/07/25/open_office_40_debuts_with_ibm_code_side_and_centre/
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> http://www.techradar.com/news/software/applications/apache-bolts-sidebar-onto-new-openoffice-1168196
>> >>>
>> >>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Rob Weir
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/07/openoffice-4-0-overhauls-user-interface-boosts-microsoft-compatibility/
>> 
>>  On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Rob Weir
>>  wrote:
>> >
>> > http://www.muylinux.com/2013/07/24/apache-openoffice-4/
>> >
>> > (Interesting choice of a logo, one of the other nice ones from the
>> > contest)
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Rob Weir
>>  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Important Japanese website:
>> >>
>> >> http://www.forest.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20130724_608941.html
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:35 AM, Rob Weir
>>  wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> http://www.datamation.com/applications/apache-releases-open-source-openoffice-4.html
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Ricardo Berlasso<
>> rgb.m...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> 
>>  http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTQxODQ
>> 
>> 
>>  2013/7/23 Rob Weir
>> 
>> >
>> http://www.linuxbsdos.com/2013/07/23/apache-openoffice-4-is-here/
>> >
>> > http://www.zdnet.com/openoffice-4-0-arrives-718456/
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Rob Weir
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> http://office.about.com/b/2013/07/23/the-new-openoffice-available-today-new-side-bar-and-more.htm
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> http://amanz.my/2013/07/openoffice-4-0-dilancarkan-untuk-pengguna-windows-mac-dan-linux/
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/07/23/1643204/apache-openoffice-40-released-with-major-new-features
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:23 PM, Rob Weir
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> This is a nice one:
>> >>> http://betanews.com/2013/07/23/apache-releases-openoffice-4/
>> >>>
>> >>> -Rob
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Rob Weir> >
>> >>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> >
>> >
>> http://www.chip.de/news/OpenOffice-4.0-Gross-Update-mit-neuen-Funktionen_63245985.html
>> 
>> 
>>  (They have a nice gallery of screen shots as well:
>> 
>> >
>> >
>> http://www.chip.de/bildergalerie/Alle-Neuheiten-von-Apache-OpenOffice-4.0-Galerie_63246075.html
>> > )
>> 
>> 
>>  On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Rob Weir<
>> robw...@apache.org>
>>  wrote:
>> >
>> > http://lwn.net/Articles/560203/  (All of three sentences.
>>

printing

[Lez Edwards]

Why has the new version of open office changed my printer setting and will not 
let me change them back 

Lez Edwards

Re: epm location?

[Kay Schenk]

On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 12:45 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

> On 07/08/2013 Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>> never mind on this. It seems only the msweet.org epm url is currently
>> working correctly for building at the moment.
>>
>
> I've experienced download problems too. I think the best option is to only
> use URLs that are under our control (Apache Extras for dependencies, the
> Extensions site for dictionaries).
>
> In this case, the "canonical" URL to use would be
> http://ooo-extras.apache-**extras.org.codespot.com/files/**
> 3ade8cfe7e59ca8e65052644fed9fc**a4-epm-3.7-source.tar.gz
>
> (others can be mentioned, but this is the only one that we actually
> control; I've checked the MD5 checksum and it is identical).
>
> Regards,
>   Andrea.
>

Well, this is certainly an option. Just don't mention it *at all* for user
configuration options. The latest from msweet seems to be 4.2 by the way. I
suppose we could test with that and bypass the patch we have.


>
> --**--**-
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>


-- 
-
MzK

Success is falling nine times and getting up ten."
 -- Jon Bon Jovi

Re: [discuss] drop support for Java 5 and Java 6 for Windows

[Kay Schenk]

On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 2:56 AM, janI  wrote:

> On 8 August 2013 11:43, sebb  wrote:
>
> > On 8 August 2013 02:26, Rob Weir  wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Kay Schenk 
> wrote:
> > >> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:24 AM, janI  wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> On 7 August 2013 18:55, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> > Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> >> Important note for discussion: it is all about platform Windows.
> > >>> >> On my work to update the AOO build environment for Windows I
> > recognized
> > >>> >> that it is hard to get an official JDK 1.5 (Java 5) or JDK 1.6
> > (Java 6)
> > >>> >> for Windows. Thus, I decided to go with JDK 1.7. The resulting AOO
> > >>> >> installation on Windows no longer works together with an JRE 6. It
> > does
> > >>> >> not recognize an installed JRE 6 as an valid Java runtime
> > environment.
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >
> > >>> > May we frame the problem in more technical terms, just to know what
> > is
> > >>> > broken? For example, why is this affecting only Windows and why is
> > Java 6
> > >>> > not recognized in your build? Could the problem be in detection
> > rather
> > >>> than
> > >>> > in the actual compatibility?
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Java issues were extensively discussed in earlier times, so here's
> a
> > >>> quick
> > >>> > summary that also answers most of the questions in this thread:
> > >>> > - As of 4.0, OpenOffice can be built with Java 5, 6 or 7
> > >>> > - Whatever you use for building, the resulting binary has a "Java
> > >>> > baseline" of 1.5 as per http://wiki.openoffice.org/**
> > >>> > wiki/Policies/Java_Usage<
> > >>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Policies/Java_Usage>(means: runs
> with
> > >>> Java 5, 6 or 7)
> > >>> > - We built 4.0 with Java 6 (on Linux at least; not 100% sure about
> > other
> > >>> > platforms)
> > >>> >
> > >>> > In general, I agree that we should build on the most secure
> platform
> > >>> > available. But, based on the above, what is the relationship
> between
> > >>> > "building on Java 7" and "running on Java 6"? To reuse Rob's
> Windows
> > XP
> > >>> > argument, sure we should build on a supported (by Microsoft)
> Windows
> > >>> > version, but, if at all possible/reasonable, we shouldn't break
> > >>> > compatibility with Windows XP.
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> > >>> I am sorry if this posting is obvious to everyone, but reading the
> > remarks,
> > >>> make me think there are some confusion about what we mean with using
> > java
> > >>> for development and runtime.
> > >>>
> > >>> One of the strength of java is "program once, run everywhere" . This
> is
> > >>> accomplished by by 2 magic trix (compared to eg. C++).
> > >>> 1) Java does not compile to machine code but to pcode (a virtual
> > machine),
> > >>> therefore you can build the program on linux, and run the build on
> > window
> > >>> (or even one of the big mainframes).
> > >>> 2) Java also does late binding (think of a very smart dll), so
> > libraries
> > >>> are not part of your build.
> > >>>
> > >>> This means you can use a java development 1.7 on any platform, to
> make
> > a
> > >>> build that runs on any platform and (nearly) any java runtime
> version.
> > As
> > >>> an example I use areca backup, its a java program, the exact same jar
> > files
> > >>> run on vista,xp,win7,ubuntu and even android, areca is programm
> towards
> > >>> java 1.4, and I have 1.6 and 1.7 installed depending on platform.
> > >>>
> > >>> The problem is the classes and the API. If our code use just a single
> > java
> > >>> 1.7 specific call, the runtime must be at least 1.7. This is however
> no
> > >>> problem today, our code is build for the classes and api available in
> > java
> > >>> runtime 1.5, so it will run there.
> > >>>
> > >>> Oracle have promised to keep the API and classes for 1.4 and forwards
> > >>> stable, and available in new versions. They are pretty good at living
> > up to
> > >>> the promise
> > >>>
> > >>> So in theory we can change build environment to java 1.7 and not tell
> > user,
> > >>> as long as we only use 1.5 API and classes. As part of a release
> > cycle, we
> > >>> should of course test once with runtime 1.5.
> > >>>
> > >>> I wrote "in theory" because in the real world, we might want to (in
> > future
> > >>> releases) use the 1.7 api for e.g. performance reasons, when that
> time
> > >>> comes we would have to make a wrapper class, just like we have in C++
> > to
> > >>> cover differences Linux/windows.
> > >>>
> > >>> Sorry again, if I misread the postings, but this is very much
> different
> > >>> from the XP scenario.
> > >>>
> > >>> rgds
> > >>> jan I.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> Thank you for this great explanation! So basically, review the AOO
> java
> > API.
> > >>
> > >
> > > It is a bit more complicated than that.   The Java language itself has
> > > evolved, not just the libraries. There are bytecode changes as well.
> > > The difference between Java 1.7/1.6 is not very big, but there are
> > > more signif

Spanish language in OpenOffice Writer

[Alfredo García]

Hello,
I downloaded OpenOffice recently and I'm happy with it. However, I want you to 
know that in the Spanish language version of OpenOffice Writer there´s a 
mistake: in the toolbar,Herramientas - Opciones de autocorrección, in the upper 
left corner there's a checkbox that says: Activar la compleción de palabras. 
The word "compleción" does not exist in the Spanish language. The correct word 
in that case would be "completamiento" (Activar el completamiento de palabras). 

Maybe in some Spanish speaking Caribbean country you may find people who use 
"completación", but it's still a mistake. 

 
Thanks again for OpenOffice. 


Best regards,
Alfredo García



http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00DGKMSK6

Re: ERROR when build AOO

[Rob Weir]

On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 11:38 AM, 張仁瀚  wrote:
> Yeah! I built AOO and installed successfully on my linux system after
> removed LibO!

Good job, Yohey!

If you are interested in trying some coding, we have a list of "easy
hacks" in Bugzilla.  These are bugs that are easy for new volunteers
to help with:

https://issues.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?f1=cf_fix_difficulty&o1=equals&resolution=---&query_format=advanced&v1=easy&list_id=79404

Regards,

-Rob


> Thanks for your help.
>
>
> 2013/8/8 edward 
>
>> Thanks. Removing libreoffice did the job.
>>
>>
>> On 08/07/2013 11:13 AM, Rory O'Farrell wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 11:00:16 -0700
>>> Edward Kuang  wrote:
>>>
>>>  I can confirm the same error

 $ sudo dpkg -i
 unxlngx6.pro/Apache_**OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/**
 DEBS/desktop-integration/**openoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.**0-9702_all.deb

 Selecting previously unselected package openoffice-debian-menus.
 (Reading database ... 193152 files and directories currently installed.)
 Unpacking openoffice-debian-menus (from
 .../openoffice4.0-debian-**menus_4.0-9702_all.deb) ...
 dpkg: error processing
 unxlngx6.pro/Apache_**OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/**
 DEBS/desktop-integration/**openoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.**
 0-9702_all.deb(--install)
 :
   trying to overwrite '/usr/bin/soffice', which is also in package
 libreoffice-common 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu4
 /usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache
 gtk-update-icon-cache: Cache file created successfully.
 /usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache
 gtk-update-icon-cache: Cache file created successfully.
 Processing triggers for shared-mime-info ...
 Processing triggers for hicolor-icon-theme ...
 Processing triggers for gnome-icon-theme ...
 Processing triggers for bamfdaemon ...
 Rebuilding /usr/share/applications/bamf.**index...
 Processing triggers for desktop-file-utils ...
 Processing triggers for gnome-menus ...
 Errors were encountered while processing:

 unxlngx6.pro/Apache_**OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/**
 DEBS/desktop-integration/**openoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.**0-9702_all.deb


 On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 9:44 AM, 張仁瀚  wrote:

  Thanks for your help! It seems that I have build it successfully by
> following
> the same steps you used. And thanks Kay for telling me to check this url
> again so I could fix the epm error.
> Although I can build AOO without errors, I can't install it
> successfully.
> Nothing wrong happened when processing the step:
> (cd to instsetoo_natives)
> $ sudo dpkg -i unxlngx6.pro/Apache_**OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/**
> DEBS/*.deb
>
> But in this step, something heppened:
> $ sudo dpkg -i
>
> unxlngx6.pro/Apache_**OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/**
> DEBS/desktop-integration/**openoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.**
> 0-9702_all.deb
>
> (Reading database ... 214450 files and directories currently installed.)
> Unpacking openoffice-debian-menus (from
> .../openoffice4.0-debian-**menus_4.0-9702_all.deb) ...
> dpkg: error processing
>
> unxlngx6.pro/Apache_**OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/**
> DEBS/desktop-integration/**openoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.**
> 0-9702_all.deb(--install)
> :
>   trying to overwrite '/usr/bin/soffice', which is also in package
> libreoffice-common 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu4
> /usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache
> gtk-update-icon-cache: Cache file created successfully.
> /usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache
> gtk-update-icon-cache: Cache file created successfully.
> Processing triggers for bamfdaemon ...
> Rebuilding /usr/share/applications/bamf.**index...
> Processing triggers for desktop-file-utils ...
> Processing triggers for gnome-menus ...
> Processing triggers for shared-mime-info ...
> Processing triggers for gnome-icon-theme ...
> Processing triggers for hicolor-icon-theme ...
> Errors were encountered while processing:
>
>
> unxlngx6.pro/Apache_**OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/**
> DEBS/desktop-integration/**openoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.**
> 0-9702_all.deb

Re: ERROR when build AOO

[張仁瀚]

Yeah! I built AOO and installed successfully on my linux system after
removed LibO!
Thanks for your help.


2013/8/8 edward 

> Thanks. Removing libreoffice did the job.
>
>
> On 08/07/2013 11:13 AM, Rory O'Farrell wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 11:00:16 -0700
>> Edward Kuang  wrote:
>>
>>  I can confirm the same error
>>>
>>> $ sudo dpkg -i
>>> unxlngx6.pro/Apache_**OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/**
>>> DEBS/desktop-integration/**openoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.**0-9702_all.deb
>>>
>>> Selecting previously unselected package openoffice-debian-menus.
>>> (Reading database ... 193152 files and directories currently installed.)
>>> Unpacking openoffice-debian-menus (from
>>> .../openoffice4.0-debian-**menus_4.0-9702_all.deb) ...
>>> dpkg: error processing
>>> unxlngx6.pro/Apache_**OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/**
>>> DEBS/desktop-integration/**openoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.**
>>> 0-9702_all.deb(--install)
>>> :
>>>   trying to overwrite '/usr/bin/soffice', which is also in package
>>> libreoffice-common 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu4
>>> /usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache
>>> gtk-update-icon-cache: Cache file created successfully.
>>> /usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache
>>> gtk-update-icon-cache: Cache file created successfully.
>>> Processing triggers for shared-mime-info ...
>>> Processing triggers for hicolor-icon-theme ...
>>> Processing triggers for gnome-icon-theme ...
>>> Processing triggers for bamfdaemon ...
>>> Rebuilding /usr/share/applications/bamf.**index...
>>> Processing triggers for desktop-file-utils ...
>>> Processing triggers for gnome-menus ...
>>> Errors were encountered while processing:
>>>
>>> unxlngx6.pro/Apache_**OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/**
>>> DEBS/desktop-integration/**openoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.**0-9702_all.deb
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 9:44 AM, 張仁瀚  wrote:
>>>
>>>  Thanks for your help! It seems that I have build it successfully by
 following
 the same steps you used. And thanks Kay for telling me to check this url
 again so I could fix the epm error.
 Although I can build AOO without errors, I can't install it
 successfully.
 Nothing wrong happened when processing the step:
 (cd to instsetoo_natives)
 $ sudo dpkg -i unxlngx6.pro/Apache_**OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/**
 DEBS/*.deb

 But in this step, something heppened:
 $ sudo dpkg -i

 unxlngx6.pro/Apache_**OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/**
 DEBS/desktop-integration/**openoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.**
 0-9702_all.deb

 (Reading database ... 214450 files and directories currently installed.)
 Unpacking openoffice-debian-menus (from
 .../openoffice4.0-debian-**menus_4.0-9702_all.deb) ...
 dpkg: error processing

 unxlngx6.pro/Apache_**OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/**
 DEBS/desktop-integration/**openoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.**
 0-9702_all.deb(--install)
 :
   trying to overwrite '/usr/bin/soffice', which is also in package
 libreoffice-common 1:3.5.7-0ubuntu4
 /usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache
 gtk-update-icon-cache: Cache file created successfully.
 /usr/bin/gtk-update-icon-cache
 gtk-update-icon-cache: Cache file created successfully.
 Processing triggers for bamfdaemon ...
 Rebuilding /usr/share/applications/bamf.**index...
 Processing triggers for desktop-file-utils ...
 Processing triggers for gnome-menus ...
 Processing triggers for shared-mime-info ...
 Processing triggers for gnome-icon-theme ...
 Processing triggers for hicolor-icon-theme ...
 Errors were encountered while processing:


 unxlngx6.pro/Apache_**OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US/**
 DEBS/desktop-integration/**openoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.**
 0-9702_all.deb

 $
 --**---
 It seems that I failed to install it. Also, installing terminaled even
 if I
 went to
 the route where "openoffice4.0-debian-menus_4.**0-9702_all.deb" is and
 then click it twice to open it.
 How can I fix it?
 Thanks again for your read and help.
 Thanks!

 Regards,
Yohey


 2013/8/7 Edward Kuang 

  

Re: Forums down (SQL error: Too many connections [1040])

[Rory O'Farrell]

On Thu, 8 Aug 2013 16:39:04 +0200
janI  wrote:

> On 8 August 2013 16:25, Rory O'Farrell  wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 8 Aug 2013 15:59:36 +0200 (CEST)
> > FR web forum  wrote:
> >
> > > >Seems fixed but very slow response.
> > > No, error still occurs this afternoon.
> > > Very annoying for end-users.
> > > And we are on august (low traffic with vacations).
> > > I'm afraid about september, forums will be completly unavailable.
> > >
> > I have asked on the en-Forum if there might be someone with phpBB/SQL
> > admin experience who would like to give a hand, but no responses.
> >
> 
> We already have a admin, and I hope that the admin soon will be active.
> 
> I have access to the server and have offered to help the admin, but got no
> response. I know the general setup (mysql, httpd and ubuntu) quite well,
> since I maintain a couple of other servers. But I do not know the phpBB
> software (which is not needed for the current problems).
> 
> rgds
> jan I.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > --
> > Rory O'Farrell 
> >

I realise you did offer, but you do so much this is another burden. I don't 
fault Imacat, who is involved with examinations which are more important.

Having another Administrator would avoid the problem that has arisen with the 
long term unavailability of a single admin.  

-- 
Rory O'Farrell 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Forums down (SQL error: Too many connections [1040])

[janI]

On 8 August 2013 17:13, FR web forum  wrote:

> >We already have a admin, and I hope that the admin soon will be active.
>
> >I have access to the server and have offered to help the admin, but got no
> >response. I know the general setup (mysql, httpd and ubuntu) quite well,
>
> From beginning, I asked to check the MySQL max_connections parameter.
> Increase this value can fix the error
>

It will help quite a lot (and I did and agreed with you in the beginning),
but not totally solve the problem. We also need to control the number of
httpd workers. If these changes are not done carefully we get swap/virtual
mem problems instead. The goal is (as with any server) to strike a balance
not overheating any of the available resources.

rgds
jan I.

>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

Re: Forums down (SQL error: Too many connections [1040])

[FR web forum]

>We already have a admin, and I hope that the admin soon will be active.

>I have access to the server and have offered to help the admin, but got no
>response. I know the general setup (mysql, httpd and ubuntu) quite well,

>From beginning, I asked to check the MySQL max_connections parameter. 
Increase this value can fix the error

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Forums down (SQL error: Too many connections [1040])

[janI]

On 8 August 2013 16:25, Rory O'Farrell  wrote:

> On Thu, 8 Aug 2013 15:59:36 +0200 (CEST)
> FR web forum  wrote:
>
> > >Seems fixed but very slow response.
> > No, error still occurs this afternoon.
> > Very annoying for end-users.
> > And we are on august (low traffic with vacations).
> > I'm afraid about september, forums will be completly unavailable.
> >
> I have asked on the en-Forum if there might be someone with phpBB/SQL
> admin experience who would like to give a hand, but no responses.
>

We already have a admin, and I hope that the admin soon will be active.

I have access to the server and have offered to help the admin, but got no
response. I know the general setup (mysql, httpd and ubuntu) quite well,
since I maintain a couple of other servers. But I do not know the phpBB
software (which is not needed for the current problems).

rgds
jan I.




>
> --
> Rory O'Farrell 
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

Re: Pootle setup for 4.0.1 (Re: Proposal -- AOO 4.0.1 Release)

[janI]

On 8 August 2013 15:28, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:

> On 8/8/13 3:06 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> > On 07/08/2013 janI wrote:
> >> On 7 August 2013 13:07, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> >>> We have to convert them all in po, merge
> >>> against the latest templates from 4.0 and safe them in a secure
> >>> place/project and use new languages on demand
> >> No problem, I would have preferred another way, but this is less work
> >> now.
> >
> > I'm renaming this subthread, since we all agree on the 4.0.1 proposal in
> > itself and discussions are only on the Pootle update now.
> >
> > I see in Pootle that the project names, after the discussion here, now
> > follow the same pattern of 4.0.0: "aoo401" and "aoo401help": perfect.
> >
> > The point where I and Juergen disagree is how many languages should be
> > available in Pootle.
> >
> > My deepest concern is that we don't waste the translators' time and that
> > we are prepared to receive help immediately. So, for me, now is the time
> > for importing everything from SDF to Pootle: we still have at least
> > three languages (sr, sh, bg) where volunteers have been waiting for more
> > than one week for us to put 4.0.0 in Pootle.
> >
> > Juergen, how can we guarantee that this is not the bottleneck if we
> > don't import everything now? As for creating Pootle accounts, I usually
> > create them within 24 hours, which is fine. But creating a Pootle
> > project (a new language) looks more complex and more critical.
>
> by simply having a few more people having the necessary rights to access
> the machine and doing the work directly.
>

These people would also need to understand the pootle setup, since root
access is needed. I will not recommend have extra root people on the vm,
but if really needed we could change ownership of the po files so the
vm-team can do the po commands.


> Having all languages there requires even more maintenance work over time
> that I am not willing to spend if there is no active community
>

You see something that I overlook, please enlighten me.

Apart from the initial work (which have to be done at some point anyhow), I
see our running maintenance as:
- Maintain mysql, httpd and pootle (that is done by me alone today, and I
dont need extra help)
- Restart pootle in case of problems (that is done by vm-team, in total 5
people, that should be enough)
- Run "pootle refresh_stat" regulary (done by me, and with my current
experience I will put it in crontab)
- Run  "pootle sync" to update the po files for backup (currently only done
by you, but I will be happy to put that in crontab as well, and btw 1 cmd,
not 1 pr language).

When we want to build for a release, there are a couple of extra issues:
- Convert po files back to sdf (currently done by you, but that would only
affect the languages we actually build, so no difference from today).

The only real extra work is when there are new strings:
- Convert sdf files with templates to po files for each language.

This is real extra work, but I have proposed to do it this time, and I hope
to have genLang ready for 4.1, so we can skip the conversion.

What extra work am I missing ?



>
> I stopped to add languages more or less when we started the 4.0.1
> discussion ...
>
> You will notice that initial 4.x projects use of course 4.x and not 4.0.
> My understanding is that only the sdf files in svn count and Pootle is
> just a tool. And in future the po files in svn counts instead of. I
> don't think they have to be in sync. But anyway if people want to have
> the overhead I am fine as long as I don't have to do the work.
>
I agree that svn is the source, and pootle is only a tool, but in the
future the po directory will be direcly couple to svn (whether we allow
pootle users to commit is a different discussion).

In the future (genLang and already tested) the idea is:
- have the po directory made as a checkout from svn (main/languages)
- after a pootle sync command, manually commit to svn (or if  agreed upon,
let the pootle user do that).

so in the (hopefully) near future, only real maintenance needs to access
the server.


>
> Juergen
>
> >
> > As for the rest, see http://markmail.org/message/4oxacrviktdbmbcv but
> > some important remarks are:
> >
> > 1) Languages that have 3.4.1 but not 4.0.0 in Pootle: preserve their
> > work in the "aoo401" project (I don't know what this entails, but I
> > assume that Jan's remarks about merging with the 4.0 templates apply
> here)
>
that was my intention, of course first after we agree on it. The offer
still stands, but I need to agree on the commands with jsc.



> >
> > 2) Languages that have 4.0.0 in Pootle: preserve their work in the
> > "aoo401" project (so, Jan, I believe that cloning aoo400->aoo401 is OK
> > for this).
>

correct

> >
> > 3) Make "aoo401" the only active/writable/actionable/visible project,
> > whatever options Pootle offers: volunteers should not be able to work on
> > 3.4.1 or 4.0.0 on Pootle any longer, it would be wasted time.
>

Th

Re: Forums down (SQL error: Too many connections [1040])

[Rory O'Farrell]

On Thu, 8 Aug 2013 15:59:36 +0200 (CEST)
FR web forum  wrote:

> >Seems fixed but very slow response.
> No, error still occurs this afternoon.
> Very annoying for end-users.
> And we are on august (low traffic with vacations).
> I'm afraid about september, forums will be completly unavailable.
> 
I have asked on the en-Forum if there might be someone with phpBB/SQL admin 
experience who would like to give a hand, but no responses.

-- 
Rory O'Farrell 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Drop support for OSX 10.4 and 10.5 for AOO 4.1

[O.Felka]

Am 08.08.2013 10:08, schrieb Herbert Duerr:


This is very true also in other areas. I suggest we drop support for OSX
10.4 and 10.5 for Apache OpenOffice 4.1.

There are some good points for the proposal:
- the latest update of OSX 10.4 was in 2007 and Apple dropped support
for it in May 2011
- the latest update of OSX 10.5 was in 2009 and Apple dropped support
for it in July 2012
- Mozilla stopped releasing for them after FireFox 16
- Google stopped releasing for them after Chrome 22
- Microsoft stopped releasing for them after MSO 2011
- Adobe stopped releasing for them in 2012
- Oracle only provides Java for OSX 10.6 and up
- Adium stopped releasing for them after Adium 1.4.5
- etc.


It sounds reasonable to drop these OSXs for AOO 4.1 and I would second 
the proposal.

But it's not a good style to drop an OS within a minor update.
What are the big changes in AOO 4.1 compared to 4.0 that we can't 
support these OSXs any longer?

We should have done that for AOO 4.0.

Regards,
Olaf


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Drop support for OSX 10.4 and 10.5 for AOO 4.1

[Peter Junge]

On 8/8/2013 4:08 PM, Herbert Duerr wrote:

In the "[discuss] drop support for Java 5 and Java 6 for Windows" thread
Rob wrote:

And remember, the "cost" of supporting old platforms is not just the
dev work.  It also involves QA and support..  If we say we "support"
something then we really ought to be testing in, not just saying that
we not aware of any problems.  The OpenOffice brand should mean that
users can run on any supported platform and have a good experience.
IMHO we should not say we "support" a platform unless we're willing
and able to meet that kind of expectation.


This is very true also in other areas. I suggest we drop support for OSX
10.4 and 10.5 for Apache OpenOffice 4.1.

There are some good points for the proposal:
- the latest update of OSX 10.4 was in 2007 and Apple dropped support
for it in May 2011
- the latest update of OSX 10.5 was in 2009 and Apple dropped support
for it in July 2012
- Mozilla stopped releasing for them after FireFox 16
- Google stopped releasing for them after Chrome 22
- Microsoft stopped releasing for them after MSO 2011
- Adobe stopped releasing for them in 2012
- Oracle only provides Java for OSX 10.6 and up
- Adium stopped releasing for them after Adium 1.4.5
- etc.


Makes sense: +1



Of course one could say that our development and testing community is
way bigger than their counterparts in the above projects and companies
even if were to combine their teams. From that supposition we'd have
resources to spare to keep releasing for these unsupported platforms. On
the other hand the assumption is a bit on the optimistic side and so we
have keep reevaluating our target platforms.

Herbert

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Forums down (SQL error: Too many connections [1040])

[FR web forum]

>Seems fixed but very slow response.
No, error still occurs this afternoon.
Very annoying for end-users.
And we are on august (low traffic with vacations).
I'm afraid about september, forums will be completly unavailable.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Pootle setup for 4.0.1 (Re: Proposal -- AOO 4.0.1 Release)

[Jürgen Schmidt]

On 8/8/13 3:06 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> On 07/08/2013 janI wrote:
>> On 7 August 2013 13:07, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>> We have to convert them all in po, merge
>>> against the latest templates from 4.0 and safe them in a secure
>>> place/project and use new languages on demand
>> No problem, I would have preferred another way, but this is less work
>> now.
> 
> I'm renaming this subthread, since we all agree on the 4.0.1 proposal in
> itself and discussions are only on the Pootle update now.
> 
> I see in Pootle that the project names, after the discussion here, now
> follow the same pattern of 4.0.0: "aoo401" and "aoo401help": perfect.
> 
> The point where I and Juergen disagree is how many languages should be
> available in Pootle.
> 
> My deepest concern is that we don't waste the translators' time and that
> we are prepared to receive help immediately. So, for me, now is the time
> for importing everything from SDF to Pootle: we still have at least
> three languages (sr, sh, bg) where volunteers have been waiting for more
> than one week for us to put 4.0.0 in Pootle.
> 
> Juergen, how can we guarantee that this is not the bottleneck if we
> don't import everything now? As for creating Pootle accounts, I usually
> create them within 24 hours, which is fine. But creating a Pootle
> project (a new language) looks more complex and more critical.

by simply having a few more people having the necessary rights to access
the machine and doing the work directly.

Having all languages there requires even more maintenance work over time
that I am not willing to spend if there is no active community

I stopped to add languages more or less when we started the 4.0.1
discussion ...

You will notice that initial 4.x projects use of course 4.x and not 4.0.
My understanding is that only the sdf files in svn count and Pootle is
just a tool. And in future the po files in svn counts instead of. I
don't think they have to be in sync. But anyway if people want to have
the overhead I am fine as long as I don't have to do the work.

Juergen

> 
> As for the rest, see http://markmail.org/message/4oxacrviktdbmbcv but
> some important remarks are:
> 
> 1) Languages that have 3.4.1 but not 4.0.0 in Pootle: preserve their
> work in the "aoo401" project (I don't know what this entails, but I
> assume that Jan's remarks about merging with the 4.0 templates apply here)
> 
> 2) Languages that have 4.0.0 in Pootle: preserve their work in the
> "aoo401" project (so, Jan, I believe that cloning aoo400->aoo401 is OK
> for this).
> 
> 3) Make "aoo401" the only active/writable/actionable/visible project,
> whatever options Pootle offers: volunteers should not be able to work on
> 3.4.1 or 4.0.0 on Pootle any longer, it would be wasted time.
> 
> (Obviously, the same holds for "aoo401help")
> 
> Regards,
>   Andrea.
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Pootle setup for 4.0.1 (Re: Proposal -- AOO 4.0.1 Release)

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 07/08/2013 janI wrote:

On 7 August 2013 13:07, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

We have to convert them all in po, merge
against the latest templates from 4.0 and safe them in a secure
place/project and use new languages on demand

No problem, I would have preferred another way, but this is less work now.


I'm renaming this subthread, since we all agree on the 4.0.1 proposal in 
itself and discussions are only on the Pootle update now.


I see in Pootle that the project names, after the discussion here, now 
follow the same pattern of 4.0.0: "aoo401" and "aoo401help": perfect.


The point where I and Juergen disagree is how many languages should be 
available in Pootle.


My deepest concern is that we don't waste the translators' time and that 
we are prepared to receive help immediately. So, for me, now is the time 
for importing everything from SDF to Pootle: we still have at least 
three languages (sr, sh, bg) where volunteers have been waiting for more 
than one week for us to put 4.0.0 in Pootle.


Juergen, how can we guarantee that this is not the bottleneck if we 
don't import everything now? As for creating Pootle accounts, I usually 
create them within 24 hours, which is fine. But creating a Pootle 
project (a new language) looks more complex and more critical.


As for the rest, see http://markmail.org/message/4oxacrviktdbmbcv but 
some important remarks are:


1) Languages that have 3.4.1 but not 4.0.0 in Pootle: preserve their 
work in the "aoo401" project (I don't know what this entails, but I 
assume that Jan's remarks about merging with the 4.0 templates apply here)


2) Languages that have 4.0.0 in Pootle: preserve their work in the 
"aoo401" project (so, Jan, I believe that cloning aoo400->aoo401 is OK 
for this).


3) Make "aoo401" the only active/writable/actionable/visible project, 
whatever options Pootle offers: volunteers should not be able to work on 
3.4.1 or 4.0.0 on Pootle any longer, it would be wasted time.


(Obviously, the same holds for "aoo401help")

Regards,
  Andrea.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Forums down (SQL error: Too many connections [1040])

[Kazunari Hirano]

Hi,

Seems fixed but very slow response.

Thanks,
khirano


On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Kazunari Hirano  wrote:

> Hi,
> http://forum.openoffice.org/ja/forum/ is still getting the error.
> Not fixed yet?
>
> Thanks,
> khirano
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 4:35 AM, janI  wrote:
>
>> On 7 August 2013 21:14, Raphael Bircher  wrote:
>>
>> > Am 07.08.13 21:04, schrieb Rory O'Farrell:
>> >
>> >  On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 20:35:30 +0200
>> >> janI  wrote:
>> >>
>> >>  On 7 August 2013 17:28, Ricardo Berlasso  wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>  2013/8/7 FR web forum 
>> 
>>   I pull up this issue.
>> > The error occurs again since two weeks.
>> >
>> >
>> >  Today, forums alternate between error 1040 and being slower than a
>>  snail.
>>  It is not possible to access them right now.
>> 
>>   I think you have some fast snails in your area :-)
>> >>>
>> >>> At least the vm itself seems relative ok now.
>> >>>
>> >>> However, I can see that there has been mysql problems earlier, seems
>> to
>> >>> be
>> >>> the old problem, that httpd tries to grap more connections than
>> >>> available.
>> >>>
>> >>> This time I could also see that the mysql buffer spaces had been
>> pretty
>> >>> full, without knowing the forum software, I would say that some of the
>> >>> tables should be converted to innodb. We did that on mwiki, and that
>> >>> change
>> >>> alone allowed mysql to handle a lot more parallel select statements
>> >>> (60-70%
>> >>> of the total).
>> >>>
>> >>> In general the configs are ok for normal daily traffic but cannot
>> handle
>> >>> peak situations.
>> >>>
>> >>> Rgds
>> >>> jan I.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>  Regards
>>  Ricardo
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>   For interested look at:
>> >> INFRA-6097 which request mysql optimization and
>> >> INFRA-6098 which request httpd/ats/php optimization
>> >> They are assigned to me, but when I do it, I need somebody to help
>> >> test...any volunteers ?
>> >>
>> > Just before one outage of the forum today there were 150 users
>> online,
>> >> which is a long way short of the maximum logged of 294. An interesting
>> >> thing I have noted is that it is often slow, leading to an error 10040
>> at
>> >> about 0930 UTC+1; this happens quite regularly.
>> >>
>> >>  Maybe this is the backup. Bugzilla has the same behavure at the same
>> > time. Or ASF Server simply don't like morning ;-)
>> >
>>
>> good tip to the forum adminidtrator, backup script start at 6:46 UTC, with
>> a sqldump, then generating/encrypting backup files and finally rsync to
>> the
>> backup server. This costs some cpu cycles and takes memory. This can cause
>> a simualted peak situation, when some users (30-40) at the same time are
>> quite active then the vm will have a problem.
>>
>>
>> rgds
>> jan I.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Greetings Raphael
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> --**--**-
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
>> dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> khir...@apache.org
> Apache OpenOffice
> http://openoffice.apache.org
>



-- 
khir...@apache.org
Apache OpenOffice
http://openoffice.apache.org

Re: [discuss] drop support for Java 5 and Java 6 for Windows

[sebb]

On 8 August 2013 12:23, Rob Weir  wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 5:43 AM, sebb  wrote:
>> On 8 August 2013 02:26, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
 On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:24 AM, janI  wrote:

> On 7 August 2013 18:55, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
>
> > Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> >
> >> Important note for discussion: it is all about platform Windows.
> >> On my work to update the AOO build environment for Windows I recognized
> >> that it is hard to get an official JDK 1.5 (Java 5) or JDK 1.6 (Java 6)
> >> for Windows. Thus, I decided to go with JDK 1.7. The resulting AOO
> >> installation on Windows no longer works together with an JRE 6. It does
> >> not recognize an installed JRE 6 as an valid Java runtime environment.
> >>
> >
> > May we frame the problem in more technical terms, just to know what is
> > broken? For example, why is this affecting only Windows and why is Java 
> > 6
> > not recognized in your build? Could the problem be in detection rather
> than
> > in the actual compatibility?
> >
> > Java issues were extensively discussed in earlier times, so here's a
> quick
> > summary that also answers most of the questions in this thread:
> > - As of 4.0, OpenOffice can be built with Java 5, 6 or 7
> > - Whatever you use for building, the resulting binary has a "Java
> > baseline" of 1.5 as per http://wiki.openoffice.org/**
> > wiki/Policies/Java_Usage<
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Policies/Java_Usage>(means: runs with
> Java 5, 6 or 7)
> > - We built 4.0 with Java 6 (on Linux at least; not 100% sure about other
> > platforms)
> >
> > In general, I agree that we should build on the most secure platform
> > available. But, based on the above, what is the relationship between
> > "building on Java 7" and "running on Java 6"? To reuse Rob's Windows XP
> > argument, sure we should build on a supported (by Microsoft) Windows
> > version, but, if at all possible/reasonable, we shouldn't break
> > compatibility with Windows XP.
> >
>
> I am sorry if this posting is obvious to everyone, but reading the 
> remarks,
> make me think there are some confusion about what we mean with using java
> for development and runtime.
>
> One of the strength of java is "program once, run everywhere" . This is
> accomplished by by 2 magic trix (compared to eg. C++).
> 1) Java does not compile to machine code but to pcode (a virtual machine),
> therefore you can build the program on linux, and run the build on window
> (or even one of the big mainframes).
> 2) Java also does late binding (think of a very smart dll), so libraries
> are not part of your build.
>
> This means you can use a java development 1.7 on any platform, to make a
> build that runs on any platform and (nearly) any java runtime version. As
> an example I use areca backup, its a java program, the exact same jar 
> files
> run on vista,xp,win7,ubuntu and even android, areca is programm towards
> java 1.4, and I have 1.6 and 1.7 installed depending on platform.
>
> The problem is the classes and the API. If our code use just a single java
> 1.7 specific call, the runtime must be at least 1.7. This is however no
> problem today, our code is build for the classes and api available in java
> runtime 1.5, so it will run there.
>
> Oracle have promised to keep the API and classes for 1.4 and forwards
> stable, and available in new versions. They are pretty good at living up 
> to
> the promise
>
> So in theory we can change build environment to java 1.7 and not tell 
> user,
> as long as we only use 1.5 API and classes. As part of a release cycle, we
> should of course test once with runtime 1.5.
>
> I wrote "in theory" because in the real world, we might want to (in future
> releases) use the 1.7 api for e.g. performance reasons, when that time
> comes we would have to make a wrapper class, just like we have in C++ to
> cover differences Linux/windows.
>
> Sorry again, if I misread the postings, but this is very much different
> from the XP scenario.
>
> rgds
> jan I.
>
>
>
 Thank you for this great explanation! So basically, review the AOO java 
 API.

>>>
>>> It is a bit more complicated than that.   The Java language itself has
>>> evolved, not just the libraries. There are bytecode changes as well.
>>> The difference between Java 1.7/1.6 is not very big, but there are
>>> more significant differences if you need to maintain compatibility
>>> with Java 1.5.  Not impossible, but it would be extra effort.
>>
>> AIUI the compiler just has to be told to generate the appropriate code:
>>
>> javac -source 1.5 -target 1.5
>>
>> The source will of course hav

Re: [discuss] drop support for Java 5 and Java 6 for Windows

[Rob Weir]

On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 5:43 AM, sebb  wrote:
> On 8 August 2013 02:26, Rob Weir  wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:24 AM, janI  wrote:
>>>
 On 7 August 2013 18:55, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:

 > Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
 >
 >> Important note for discussion: it is all about platform Windows.
 >> On my work to update the AOO build environment for Windows I recognized
 >> that it is hard to get an official JDK 1.5 (Java 5) or JDK 1.6 (Java 6)
 >> for Windows. Thus, I decided to go with JDK 1.7. The resulting AOO
 >> installation on Windows no longer works together with an JRE 6. It does
 >> not recognize an installed JRE 6 as an valid Java runtime environment.
 >>
 >
 > May we frame the problem in more technical terms, just to know what is
 > broken? For example, why is this affecting only Windows and why is Java 6
 > not recognized in your build? Could the problem be in detection rather
 than
 > in the actual compatibility?
 >
 > Java issues were extensively discussed in earlier times, so here's a
 quick
 > summary that also answers most of the questions in this thread:
 > - As of 4.0, OpenOffice can be built with Java 5, 6 or 7
 > - Whatever you use for building, the resulting binary has a "Java
 > baseline" of 1.5 as per http://wiki.openoffice.org/**
 > wiki/Policies/Java_Usage<
 http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Policies/Java_Usage>(means: runs with
 Java 5, 6 or 7)
 > - We built 4.0 with Java 6 (on Linux at least; not 100% sure about other
 > platforms)
 >
 > In general, I agree that we should build on the most secure platform
 > available. But, based on the above, what is the relationship between
 > "building on Java 7" and "running on Java 6"? To reuse Rob's Windows XP
 > argument, sure we should build on a supported (by Microsoft) Windows
 > version, but, if at all possible/reasonable, we shouldn't break
 > compatibility with Windows XP.
 >

 I am sorry if this posting is obvious to everyone, but reading the remarks,
 make me think there are some confusion about what we mean with using java
 for development and runtime.

 One of the strength of java is "program once, run everywhere" . This is
 accomplished by by 2 magic trix (compared to eg. C++).
 1) Java does not compile to machine code but to pcode (a virtual machine),
 therefore you can build the program on linux, and run the build on window
 (or even one of the big mainframes).
 2) Java also does late binding (think of a very smart dll), so libraries
 are not part of your build.

 This means you can use a java development 1.7 on any platform, to make a
 build that runs on any platform and (nearly) any java runtime version. As
 an example I use areca backup, its a java program, the exact same jar files
 run on vista,xp,win7,ubuntu and even android, areca is programm towards
 java 1.4, and I have 1.6 and 1.7 installed depending on platform.

 The problem is the classes and the API. If our code use just a single java
 1.7 specific call, the runtime must be at least 1.7. This is however no
 problem today, our code is build for the classes and api available in java
 runtime 1.5, so it will run there.

 Oracle have promised to keep the API and classes for 1.4 and forwards
 stable, and available in new versions. They are pretty good at living up to
 the promise

 So in theory we can change build environment to java 1.7 and not tell user,
 as long as we only use 1.5 API and classes. As part of a release cycle, we
 should of course test once with runtime 1.5.

 I wrote "in theory" because in the real world, we might want to (in future
 releases) use the 1.7 api for e.g. performance reasons, when that time
 comes we would have to make a wrapper class, just like we have in C++ to
 cover differences Linux/windows.

 Sorry again, if I misread the postings, but this is very much different
 from the XP scenario.

 rgds
 jan I.



>>> Thank you for this great explanation! So basically, review the AOO java API.
>>>
>>
>> It is a bit more complicated than that.   The Java language itself has
>> evolved, not just the libraries. There are bytecode changes as well.
>> The difference between Java 1.7/1.6 is not very big, but there are
>> more significant differences if you need to maintain compatibility
>> with Java 1.5.  Not impossible, but it would be extra effort.
>
> AIUI the compiler just has to be told to generate the appropriate code:
>
> javac -source 1.5 -target 1.5
>
> The source will of course have to be 1.5 compatible.
> But is there very much Java code?
>
>> And remember, the "cost" of supporting old platforms is not just the
>> dev work.  It also involves QA and support..  If 

Re: Forums down (SQL error: Too many connections [1040])

[Kazunari Hirano]

Hi,
http://forum.openoffice.org/ja/forum/ is still getting the error.
Not fixed yet?

Thanks,
khirano


On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 4:35 AM, janI  wrote:

> On 7 August 2013 21:14, Raphael Bircher  wrote:
>
> > Am 07.08.13 21:04, schrieb Rory O'Farrell:
> >
> >  On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 20:35:30 +0200
> >> janI  wrote:
> >>
> >>  On 7 August 2013 17:28, Ricardo Berlasso  wrote:
> >>>
> >>>  2013/8/7 FR web forum 
> 
>   I pull up this issue.
> > The error occurs again since two weeks.
> >
> >
> >  Today, forums alternate between error 1040 and being slower than a
>  snail.
>  It is not possible to access them right now.
> 
>   I think you have some fast snails in your area :-)
> >>>
> >>> At least the vm itself seems relative ok now.
> >>>
> >>> However, I can see that there has been mysql problems earlier, seems to
> >>> be
> >>> the old problem, that httpd tries to grap more connections than
> >>> available.
> >>>
> >>> This time I could also see that the mysql buffer spaces had been pretty
> >>> full, without knowing the forum software, I would say that some of the
> >>> tables should be converted to innodb. We did that on mwiki, and that
> >>> change
> >>> alone allowed mysql to handle a lot more parallel select statements
> >>> (60-70%
> >>> of the total).
> >>>
> >>> In general the configs are ok for normal daily traffic but cannot
> handle
> >>> peak situations.
> >>>
> >>> Rgds
> >>> jan I.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>  Regards
>  Ricardo
> 
> 
> 
>   For interested look at:
> >> INFRA-6097 which request mysql optimization and
> >> INFRA-6098 which request httpd/ats/php optimization
> >> They are assigned to me, but when I do it, I need somebody to help
> >> test...any volunteers ?
> >>
> > Just before one outage of the forum today there were 150 users
> online,
> >> which is a long way short of the maximum logged of 294. An interesting
> >> thing I have noted is that it is often slow, leading to an error 10040
> at
> >> about 0930 UTC+1; this happens quite regularly.
> >>
> >>  Maybe this is the backup. Bugzilla has the same behavure at the same
> > time. Or ASF Server simply don't like morning ;-)
> >
>
> good tip to the forum adminidtrator, backup script start at 6:46 UTC, with
> a sqldump, then generating/encrypting backup files and finally rsync to the
> backup server. This costs some cpu cycles and takes memory. This can cause
> a simualted peak situation, when some users (30-40) at the same time are
> quite active then the vm will have a problem.
>
>
> rgds
> jan I.
>
>
> >
> > Greetings Raphael
> >
> >
> > --**--**-
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
> dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
>



-- 
khir...@apache.org
Apache OpenOffice
http://openoffice.apache.org

Re: [Website]

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 07/08/2013 candidcactus wrote:

Without the screenshot it is harder to describe. But here goes
I cannot sign up for the forums. I get the error message "Invalid
signature, ...".
The signature is not invalid. What to do?


Use "OpenOffice 3.4.1" as signature when you register. You can update it 
later.


@imacat: "OpenOffice 4.0" is not a valid signature on the Forum. Can it 
be fixed?


Thanks,
  Andrea.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [discuss] drop support for Java 5 and Java 6 for Windows

[janI]

On 8 August 2013 11:43, sebb  wrote:

> On 8 August 2013 02:26, Rob Weir  wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
> >> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:24 AM, janI  wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 7 August 2013 18:55, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Important note for discussion: it is all about platform Windows.
> >>> >> On my work to update the AOO build environment for Windows I
> recognized
> >>> >> that it is hard to get an official JDK 1.5 (Java 5) or JDK 1.6
> (Java 6)
> >>> >> for Windows. Thus, I decided to go with JDK 1.7. The resulting AOO
> >>> >> installation on Windows no longer works together with an JRE 6. It
> does
> >>> >> not recognize an installed JRE 6 as an valid Java runtime
> environment.
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> > May we frame the problem in more technical terms, just to know what
> is
> >>> > broken? For example, why is this affecting only Windows and why is
> Java 6
> >>> > not recognized in your build? Could the problem be in detection
> rather
> >>> than
> >>> > in the actual compatibility?
> >>> >
> >>> > Java issues were extensively discussed in earlier times, so here's a
> >>> quick
> >>> > summary that also answers most of the questions in this thread:
> >>> > - As of 4.0, OpenOffice can be built with Java 5, 6 or 7
> >>> > - Whatever you use for building, the resulting binary has a "Java
> >>> > baseline" of 1.5 as per http://wiki.openoffice.org/**
> >>> > wiki/Policies/Java_Usage<
> >>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Policies/Java_Usage>(means: runs with
> >>> Java 5, 6 or 7)
> >>> > - We built 4.0 with Java 6 (on Linux at least; not 100% sure about
> other
> >>> > platforms)
> >>> >
> >>> > In general, I agree that we should build on the most secure platform
> >>> > available. But, based on the above, what is the relationship between
> >>> > "building on Java 7" and "running on Java 6"? To reuse Rob's Windows
> XP
> >>> > argument, sure we should build on a supported (by Microsoft) Windows
> >>> > version, but, if at all possible/reasonable, we shouldn't break
> >>> > compatibility with Windows XP.
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> I am sorry if this posting is obvious to everyone, but reading the
> remarks,
> >>> make me think there are some confusion about what we mean with using
> java
> >>> for development and runtime.
> >>>
> >>> One of the strength of java is "program once, run everywhere" . This is
> >>> accomplished by by 2 magic trix (compared to eg. C++).
> >>> 1) Java does not compile to machine code but to pcode (a virtual
> machine),
> >>> therefore you can build the program on linux, and run the build on
> window
> >>> (or even one of the big mainframes).
> >>> 2) Java also does late binding (think of a very smart dll), so
> libraries
> >>> are not part of your build.
> >>>
> >>> This means you can use a java development 1.7 on any platform, to make
> a
> >>> build that runs on any platform and (nearly) any java runtime version.
> As
> >>> an example I use areca backup, its a java program, the exact same jar
> files
> >>> run on vista,xp,win7,ubuntu and even android, areca is programm towards
> >>> java 1.4, and I have 1.6 and 1.7 installed depending on platform.
> >>>
> >>> The problem is the classes and the API. If our code use just a single
> java
> >>> 1.7 specific call, the runtime must be at least 1.7. This is however no
> >>> problem today, our code is build for the classes and api available in
> java
> >>> runtime 1.5, so it will run there.
> >>>
> >>> Oracle have promised to keep the API and classes for 1.4 and forwards
> >>> stable, and available in new versions. They are pretty good at living
> up to
> >>> the promise
> >>>
> >>> So in theory we can change build environment to java 1.7 and not tell
> user,
> >>> as long as we only use 1.5 API and classes. As part of a release
> cycle, we
> >>> should of course test once with runtime 1.5.
> >>>
> >>> I wrote "in theory" because in the real world, we might want to (in
> future
> >>> releases) use the 1.7 api for e.g. performance reasons, when that time
> >>> comes we would have to make a wrapper class, just like we have in C++
> to
> >>> cover differences Linux/windows.
> >>>
> >>> Sorry again, if I misread the postings, but this is very much different
> >>> from the XP scenario.
> >>>
> >>> rgds
> >>> jan I.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Thank you for this great explanation! So basically, review the AOO java
> API.
> >>
> >
> > It is a bit more complicated than that.   The Java language itself has
> > evolved, not just the libraries. There are bytecode changes as well.
> > The difference between Java 1.7/1.6 is not very big, but there are
> > more significant differences if you need to maintain compatibility
> > with Java 1.5.  Not impossible, but it would be extra effort.
>
> AIUI the compiler just has to be told to generate the appropriate code:
>
> javac -source 1.5 -target 1.5
>
> The source will of course have to be 1.5 compatible.
> But is there very much J

Re: [discuss] drop support for Java 5 and Java 6 for Windows

[Jürgen Schmidt]

On 8/8/13 5:21 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> 
> On Aug 7, 2013, at 6:26 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:24 AM, janI  wrote:
>>>
 On 7 August 2013 18:55, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:

> Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>
>> Important note for discussion: it is all about platform Windows.
>> On my work to update the AOO build environment for Windows I recognized
>> that it is hard to get an official JDK 1.5 (Java 5) or JDK 1.6 (Java 6)
>> for Windows. Thus, I decided to go with JDK 1.7. The resulting AOO
>> installation on Windows no longer works together with an JRE 6. It does
>> not recognize an installed JRE 6 as an valid Java runtime environment.
>>
>
> May we frame the problem in more technical terms, just to know what is
> broken? For example, why is this affecting only Windows and why is Java 6
> not recognized in your build? Could the problem be in detection rather
 than
> in the actual compatibility?
>
> Java issues were extensively discussed in earlier times, so here's a
 quick
> summary that also answers most of the questions in this thread:
> - As of 4.0, OpenOffice can be built with Java 5, 6 or 7
> - Whatever you use for building, the resulting binary has a "Java
> baseline" of 1.5 as per http://wiki.openoffice.org/**
> wiki/Policies/Java_Usage<
 http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Policies/Java_Usage>(means: runs with
 Java 5, 6 or 7)
> - We built 4.0 with Java 6 (on Linux at least; not 100% sure about other
> platforms)
>
> In general, I agree that we should build on the most secure platform
> available. But, based on the above, what is the relationship between
> "building on Java 7" and "running on Java 6"? To reuse Rob's Windows XP
> argument, sure we should build on a supported (by Microsoft) Windows
> version, but, if at all possible/reasonable, we shouldn't break
> compatibility with Windows XP.
>

 I am sorry if this posting is obvious to everyone, but reading the remarks,
 make me think there are some confusion about what we mean with using java
 for development and runtime.

 One of the strength of java is "program once, run everywhere" . This is
 accomplished by by 2 magic trix (compared to eg. C++).
 1) Java does not compile to machine code but to pcode (a virtual machine),
 therefore you can build the program on linux, and run the build on window
 (or even one of the big mainframes).
 2) Java also does late binding (think of a very smart dll), so libraries
 are not part of your build.

 This means you can use a java development 1.7 on any platform, to make a
 build that runs on any platform and (nearly) any java runtime version. As
 an example I use areca backup, its a java program, the exact same jar files
 run on vista,xp,win7,ubuntu and even android, areca is programm towards
 java 1.4, and I have 1.6 and 1.7 installed depending on platform.

 The problem is the classes and the API. If our code use just a single java
 1.7 specific call, the runtime must be at least 1.7. This is however no
 problem today, our code is build for the classes and api available in java
 runtime 1.5, so it will run there.

 Oracle have promised to keep the API and classes for 1.4 and forwards
 stable, and available in new versions. They are pretty good at living up to
 the promise

 So in theory we can change build environment to java 1.7 and not tell user,
 as long as we only use 1.5 API and classes. As part of a release cycle, we
 should of course test once with runtime 1.5.

 I wrote "in theory" because in the real world, we might want to (in future
 releases) use the 1.7 api for e.g. performance reasons, when that time
 comes we would have to make a wrapper class, just like we have in C++ to
 cover differences Linux/windows.

 Sorry again, if I misread the postings, but this is very much different
 from the XP scenario.

 rgds
 jan I.



>>> Thank you for this great explanation! So basically, review the AOO java API.
>>>
>>
>> It is a bit more complicated than that.   The Java language itself has
>> evolved, not just the libraries. There are bytecode changes as well.
>> The difference between Java 1.7/1.6 is not very big, but there are
>> more significant differences if you need to maintain compatibility
>> with Java 1.5.  Not impossible, but it would be extra effort.
>>
>> And remember, the "cost" of supporting old platforms is not just the
>> dev work.  It also involves QA and support..  If we say we "support"
>> something then we really ought to be testing in, not just saying that
>> we not aware of any problems.  The OpenOffice brand should mean that
>> users can run on any supported platform and have a good experie

Re: [discuss] drop support for Java 5 and Java 6 for Windows

[sebb]

On 8 August 2013 02:26, Rob Weir  wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:24 AM, janI  wrote:
>>
>>> On 7 August 2013 18:55, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
>>>
>>> > Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Important note for discussion: it is all about platform Windows.
>>> >> On my work to update the AOO build environment for Windows I recognized
>>> >> that it is hard to get an official JDK 1.5 (Java 5) or JDK 1.6 (Java 6)
>>> >> for Windows. Thus, I decided to go with JDK 1.7. The resulting AOO
>>> >> installation on Windows no longer works together with an JRE 6. It does
>>> >> not recognize an installed JRE 6 as an valid Java runtime environment.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > May we frame the problem in more technical terms, just to know what is
>>> > broken? For example, why is this affecting only Windows and why is Java 6
>>> > not recognized in your build? Could the problem be in detection rather
>>> than
>>> > in the actual compatibility?
>>> >
>>> > Java issues were extensively discussed in earlier times, so here's a
>>> quick
>>> > summary that also answers most of the questions in this thread:
>>> > - As of 4.0, OpenOffice can be built with Java 5, 6 or 7
>>> > - Whatever you use for building, the resulting binary has a "Java
>>> > baseline" of 1.5 as per http://wiki.openoffice.org/**
>>> > wiki/Policies/Java_Usage<
>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Policies/Java_Usage>(means: runs with
>>> Java 5, 6 or 7)
>>> > - We built 4.0 with Java 6 (on Linux at least; not 100% sure about other
>>> > platforms)
>>> >
>>> > In general, I agree that we should build on the most secure platform
>>> > available. But, based on the above, what is the relationship between
>>> > "building on Java 7" and "running on Java 6"? To reuse Rob's Windows XP
>>> > argument, sure we should build on a supported (by Microsoft) Windows
>>> > version, but, if at all possible/reasonable, we shouldn't break
>>> > compatibility with Windows XP.
>>> >
>>>
>>> I am sorry if this posting is obvious to everyone, but reading the remarks,
>>> make me think there are some confusion about what we mean with using java
>>> for development and runtime.
>>>
>>> One of the strength of java is "program once, run everywhere" . This is
>>> accomplished by by 2 magic trix (compared to eg. C++).
>>> 1) Java does not compile to machine code but to pcode (a virtual machine),
>>> therefore you can build the program on linux, and run the build on window
>>> (or even one of the big mainframes).
>>> 2) Java also does late binding (think of a very smart dll), so libraries
>>> are not part of your build.
>>>
>>> This means you can use a java development 1.7 on any platform, to make a
>>> build that runs on any platform and (nearly) any java runtime version. As
>>> an example I use areca backup, its a java program, the exact same jar files
>>> run on vista,xp,win7,ubuntu and even android, areca is programm towards
>>> java 1.4, and I have 1.6 and 1.7 installed depending on platform.
>>>
>>> The problem is the classes and the API. If our code use just a single java
>>> 1.7 specific call, the runtime must be at least 1.7. This is however no
>>> problem today, our code is build for the classes and api available in java
>>> runtime 1.5, so it will run there.
>>>
>>> Oracle have promised to keep the API and classes for 1.4 and forwards
>>> stable, and available in new versions. They are pretty good at living up to
>>> the promise
>>>
>>> So in theory we can change build environment to java 1.7 and not tell user,
>>> as long as we only use 1.5 API and classes. As part of a release cycle, we
>>> should of course test once with runtime 1.5.
>>>
>>> I wrote "in theory" because in the real world, we might want to (in future
>>> releases) use the 1.7 api for e.g. performance reasons, when that time
>>> comes we would have to make a wrapper class, just like we have in C++ to
>>> cover differences Linux/windows.
>>>
>>> Sorry again, if I misread the postings, but this is very much different
>>> from the XP scenario.
>>>
>>> rgds
>>> jan I.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Thank you for this great explanation! So basically, review the AOO java API.
>>
>
> It is a bit more complicated than that.   The Java language itself has
> evolved, not just the libraries. There are bytecode changes as well.
> The difference between Java 1.7/1.6 is not very big, but there are
> more significant differences if you need to maintain compatibility
> with Java 1.5.  Not impossible, but it would be extra effort.

AIUI the compiler just has to be told to generate the appropriate code:

javac -source 1.5 -target 1.5

The source will of course have to be 1.5 compatible.
But is there very much Java code?

> And remember, the "cost" of supporting old platforms is not just the
> dev work.  It also involves QA and support..  If we say we "support"
> something then we really ought to be testing in, not just saying that
> we not aware of any problems.  The OpenOffice brand should m

Re: Proposal -- AOO 4.0.1 Release

[Jürgen Schmidt]

On 8/8/13 10:15 AM, janI wrote:
> On 8 August 2013 08:06, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:
> 
>> On 8/7/13 8:44 PM, janI wrote:
>>> On 7 August 2013 16:44, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:
>>>
 On 8/7/13 2:09 PM, janI wrote:
> On 7 August 2013 14:04, sebb  wrote:
>
>> On 7 August 2013 12:55, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:
>>> On 8/7/13 1:51 PM, janI wrote:
 On 7 August 2013 13:07, Jürgen Schmidt 
>> wrote:

> On 8/7/13 11:47 AM, janI wrote:
>> On 7 August 2013 11:28, Jürgen Schmidt 
 wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/6/13 6:42 PM, janI wrote:
 On 6 August 2013 17:15, Andrea Pescetti 
>> wrote:

> Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On 8/6/13 3:05 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>>
>>> It is important that we don't fall in the "release and
>> forget"
>> trap,
>>> i.e., "this bug was already known when 4.0 was released, so
>> it
> doesn't
>>> need to be evaluated again for 4.0.1". At least, we should
> re-evaluate
>>> the old proposed blockers: some of them might have become
>> more
>>> relevant.
>>>
>> in theory and with an idealistic view I would agree but for
>> practical
>> reason I don't. You should not forget that issues have to be
>> fixed as
>> well.
>> We should really be careful here and should focus on the most
>> serious
>> issues only. From my point of view many proposed showstoppers
 for
>> 4.0
>> were no showstopper and why should we prioritize them now.
>>
>
> We shouldn't prioritize them, just look at them again. My
>> suggestion
> was
> to have regressions and old nominated blockers as PROPOSED
 blockers
> (status: ?), not as blockers (status: +). Some will have to be
> rejected
> again, obviously; but it is very bad, as a user and a community
> member,
>>> to
> get an answer like my (made up) example above. Of course,
>> anybody
>> who
> is
> concerned can propose an issue as a blocker, but a quick review
>> makes
>>> sense
> in my opinion.
>
>
>  we have volunteers who are ready to
>>> work and Pootle is not ready yet for their language, or it
>> only
> offers
>>> 3.4.1. See http://markmail.org/message/**4oxacrviktdbmbcv<
>>> http://markmail.org/message/4oxacrviktdbmbcv>for more.
>>>
>> where are the issues? Where are the volunteers to work on
>> this?
> Nobody
>> should plan with other peoples time and willingness
>>
>
> One issue:
 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=122910<
>>> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122910>
>
> As for the volunteers, I understand that the Pootle update is a
>> lot of
> work, as I wrote. Fact is, this lot of work is instrumental in
>>> attracting
> volunteers successfully and will remain the same amount of work
> whether
> done now or after 4.0.1. And doing it now (or soon) is a nice
>>> opportunity
> for the project for a combination of reasons: OpenOffice 4.0
>> had
>> great
> exposure, volunteers want to translate it into their language,
>> Summer
> is
> the best period for people to contribute in their spare time,
>> telling
> someone that his efforts will be turned into an official
>> release
>> next
>>> month
> is very motivating... But indeed so far you are the only one
>> who
>>> actually
> did this Pootle administration work.


 I can give a hand, with this work, but reading through the mails
 it
> seems
 we have quite a few open issues (mainly raised by jsc):
 - Should we make 4.01 in pootle or as suggested continue working
 on
> 4.0 ?
>>>
>>> if we create a new project I would use 4.0.1
>>>
>>> I see you have created new project names and used again a new
 naming
>>> scheme, why?
>>>
>>> old aoo40
>>>
>>> new a00401
>>>
>>> This makes it not easier to get an overview
>>>
>> I know, but this was just an experiment to test if I could copy
>> the
 db
>> easily. That did not work, so its the old way, as described below.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
 - Do we want to add languages where we have no translation
>> teams ?
>>>
>>> I would only add languages where we have an active translating

Re: Proposal -- AOO 4.0.1 Release

[janI]

On 8 August 2013 08:06, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:

> On 8/7/13 8:44 PM, janI wrote:
> > On 7 August 2013 16:44, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:
> >
> >> On 8/7/13 2:09 PM, janI wrote:
> >>> On 7 August 2013 14:04, sebb  wrote:
> >>>
>  On 7 August 2013 12:55, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:
> > On 8/7/13 1:51 PM, janI wrote:
> >> On 7 August 2013 13:07, Jürgen Schmidt 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 8/7/13 11:47 AM, janI wrote:
>  On 7 August 2013 11:28, Jürgen Schmidt 
> >> wrote:
> 
> > On 8/6/13 6:42 PM, janI wrote:
> >> On 6 August 2013 17:15, Andrea Pescetti 
>  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> >>>
>  On 8/6/13 3:05 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> 
> > It is important that we don't fall in the "release and
> forget"
>  trap,
> > i.e., "this bug was already known when 4.0 was released, so
> it
> >>> doesn't
> > need to be evaluated again for 4.0.1". At least, we should
> >>> re-evaluate
> > the old proposed blockers: some of them might have become
> more
> > relevant.
> >
>  in theory and with an idealistic view I would agree but for
>  practical
>  reason I don't. You should not forget that issues have to be
>  fixed as
>  well.
>  We should really be careful here and should focus on the most
>  serious
>  issues only. From my point of view many proposed showstoppers
> >> for
>  4.0
>  were no showstopper and why should we prioritize them now.
> 
> >>>
> >>> We shouldn't prioritize them, just look at them again. My
>  suggestion
> >>> was
> >>> to have regressions and old nominated blockers as PROPOSED
> >> blockers
> >>> (status: ?), not as blockers (status: +). Some will have to be
> >>> rejected
> >>> again, obviously; but it is very bad, as a user and a community
> >>> member,
> > to
> >>> get an answer like my (made up) example above. Of course,
> anybody
>  who
> >>> is
> >>> concerned can propose an issue as a blocker, but a quick review
>  makes
> > sense
> >>> in my opinion.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>  we have volunteers who are ready to
> > work and Pootle is not ready yet for their language, or it
> only
> >>> offers
> > 3.4.1. See http://markmail.org/message/**4oxacrviktdbmbcv<
> > http://markmail.org/message/4oxacrviktdbmbcv>for more.
> >
>  where are the issues? Where are the volunteers to work on
> this?
> >>> Nobody
>  should plan with other peoples time and willingness
> 
> >>>
> >>> One issue:
> >> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=122910<
> > https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122910>
> >>>
> >>> As for the volunteers, I understand that the Pootle update is a
>  lot of
> >>> work, as I wrote. Fact is, this lot of work is instrumental in
> > attracting
> >>> volunteers successfully and will remain the same amount of work
> >>> whether
> >>> done now or after 4.0.1. And doing it now (or soon) is a nice
> > opportunity
> >>> for the project for a combination of reasons: OpenOffice 4.0
> had
>  great
> >>> exposure, volunteers want to translate it into their language,
>  Summer
> >>> is
> >>> the best period for people to contribute in their spare time,
>  telling
> >>> someone that his efforts will be turned into an official
> release
>  next
> > month
> >>> is very motivating... But indeed so far you are the only one
> who
> > actually
> >>> did this Pootle administration work.
> >>
> >>
> >> I can give a hand, with this work, but reading through the mails
> >> it
> >>> seems
> >> we have quite a few open issues (mainly raised by jsc):
> >> - Should we make 4.01 in pootle or as suggested continue working
> >> on
> >>> 4.0 ?
> >
> > if we create a new project I would use 4.0.1
> >
> > I see you have created new project names and used again a new
> >> naming
> > scheme, why?
> >
> > old aoo40
> >
> > new a00401
> >
> > This makes it not easier to get an overview
> >
>  I know, but this was just an experiment to test if I could copy
> the
> >> db
>  easily. That did not work, so its the old way, as described below.
> 
> 
> >
> >
> >> - Do we want to add languages where we have no translation
> teams ?
> >
> > I would only add languages where we have an active translating
> > community. We should save all other l

Re: Drop support for OSX 10.4 and 10.5 for AOO 4.1

[Pavel Janík]

> This is very true also in other areas. I suggest we drop support for OSX 10.4 
> and 10.5 for Apache OpenOffice 4.1.

+1
-- 
Pavel Janík




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Drop support for OSX 10.4 and 10.5 for AOO 4.1

[Herbert Duerr]

In the "[discuss] drop support for Java 5 and Java 6 for Windows" thread 
Rob wrote:

And remember, the "cost" of supporting old platforms is not just the
dev work.  It also involves QA and support..  If we say we "support"
something then we really ought to be testing in, not just saying that
we not aware of any problems.  The OpenOffice brand should mean that
users can run on any supported platform and have a good experience.
IMHO we should not say we "support" a platform unless we're willing
and able to meet that kind of expectation.


This is very true also in other areas. I suggest we drop support for OSX 
10.4 and 10.5 for Apache OpenOffice 4.1.


There are some good points for the proposal:
- the latest update of OSX 10.4 was in 2007 and Apple dropped support 
for it in May 2011
- the latest update of OSX 10.5 was in 2009 and Apple dropped support 
for it in July 2012

- Mozilla stopped releasing for them after FireFox 16
- Google stopped releasing for them after Chrome 22
- Microsoft stopped releasing for them after MSO 2011
- Adobe stopped releasing for them in 2012
- Oracle only provides Java for OSX 10.6 and up
- Adium stopped releasing for them after Adium 1.4.5
- etc.

Of course one could say that our development and testing community is 
way bigger than their counterparts in the above projects and companies 
even if were to combine their teams. From that supposition we'd have 
resources to spare to keep releasing for these unsupported platforms. On 
the other hand the assumption is a bit on the optimistic side and so we 
have keep reevaluating our target platforms.


Herbert

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: OO Android

[janI]

For our English reader, question about android and AOO.


2013/8/8 simonezelder 

> Hallo zusammen
>
>
>  arbeitet ihr an einer Version für Android? Wenn ja - wann können wir
> damit rechnen?
>
> Ich und vele weitere würden Sinnvolles wie OO gern auf unseren Tablets
> nutzen
>

Ich genauso, und Ich hab sogar ein par varianten ausprobiert. Ubuntu gibst
schon für den tablet, und Ich hab ein version dafür gebaut, leider muss ich
feststellen das der Oberfläche der AOO ist nicht geeignet für ein
touchscreen.

Wir benötigen ein neue oberfläche und um das zu erreichen mehrere
entwickler, so es kommt nicht schnell.

mfg
jan I.


>
> Sonnige Grüße
>
> Simone

Re: epm location?

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 07/08/2013 Kay Schenk wrote:

never mind on this. It seems only the msweet.org epm url is currently
working correctly for building at the moment.


I've experienced download problems too. I think the best option is to 
only use URLs that are under our control (Apache Extras for 
dependencies, the Extensions site for dictionaries).


In this case, the "canonical" URL to use would be
http://ooo-extras.apache-extras.org.codespot.com/files/3ade8cfe7e59ca8e65052644fed9fca4-epm-3.7-source.tar.gz

(others can be mentioned, but this is the only one that we actually 
control; I've checked the MD5 checksum and it is identical).


Regards,
  Andrea.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

OO Android

[simonezelder]

Hallo zusammen


 arbeitet ihr an einer Version für Android? Wenn ja - wann können wir damit 
rechnen?

Ich und vele weitere würden Sinnvolles wie OO gern auf unseren Tablets 
nutzen 


Sonnige Grüße

Simone

Re: open office 4

[Rory O'Farrell]

On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 14:30:53 -0700
ian burnby  wrote:

> i did the update from 3 and now i can't find any of my files,,what
> can i do to get them back?

Your files are still on your computer. Do a system wide search for *.od?, then 
using /File /Open within OpenOffice navigate to them. As you use each fie it 
will reappear in /File /Recent Documents.

-- 
Rory O'Farrell 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Usability: dictionary updates and profile migration

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 03/08/2013 Andrea Pescetti wrote:

I've just uploaded an updated version of the English dictionary. It is
kept unpublished because of the usability issues below, but you can
download it from http://extensions.openoffice.org/download/17415 ...
Instead, if one is using 3.4.1 and decides to update the dictionary
BEFORE updating OpenOffice, there are some usability issues. Everything
will work, no matter what the user chooses, but is the following
scenario acceptable to avoid too many support requests?


Not seeing comments, I'll publish the updated dictionary in a couple of 
days. In the end this is not breaking anything, it just produces a Fatal 
Error (that is actually not fatal, and solved by simply restarting 
OpenOffice) during profile migration.



Of course, 2.B looks like a profile migration bug to me: I've already
chosen to keep my (newer) dictionary and OpenOffice insists on
installing the old one.


Reported as https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122976

Regards,
  Andrea.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org