Compiler warnings
I am currently working on some bug in the sc module and find that it is really hard to even find compiler errors among the many warning messages. Some of these warnings are caused directly by code in sc but the majority of the warnings originate in header files. Platform is Windows. The most annoying warnings are warning C4530: C++ exception handler used, but unwind semantics are not enabled. Specify /EHsc and even more (because of the warning text that is repeated again and again) warning C4555: expression has no effect; expected expression with side-effect (see full text below) Any ideas how to silence these two? re C4530: One option would be to compile all sc code with exceptions enabled. Does anyone know of a reason not to do that? Best regards, Andre PS: here is the complete output for one instance of the C4555 warning: C:\PROGRA~2\MICROS~1.0\VC\include\../../VC/include/list(1137) : warning C4555: expression has no effect; expected expression with side-effect C:\PROGRA~2\MICROS~1.0\VC\include\../../VC/include/list(1126) : while compiling class template member function 'void std::list_Ty,_Ax::_Splice(std::list_Ty,_Ax::_Const_iterator_Secure_validation,std::list_Ty,_Ax ,std::list_Ty,_Ax::_Const_iterator_Secure_validation,std::list_Ty,_Ax::_Const_iterator_Secure_validation,unsigned int,bool)' with [ _Ty=std::pairconst String,OpCode, _Ax=std::allocatorstd::pairconst String,OpCode, _Secure_validation=true ] C:\PROGRA~2\MICROS~1.0\VC\include\xhash(205) : see reference to class template instantiation 'std::list_Ty,_Ax' being compiled with [ _Ty=std::pairconst String,OpCode, _Ax=std::allocatorstd::pairconst String,OpCode ] C:\PROGRA~2\MICROS~1.0\VC\include\../../VC/include/unordered_map(86) : see reference to class template instantiation 'stdext::_Hash_Traits' being compiled with [ _Traits=std::tr1::_Umap_traitsString,OpCode,stdext::_Hash_compareString,formula::StringHashCode,std::equal_toString,std::allocatorstd::pairString,OpCode,false ] C:\source\trunk\git\main\solver\410\wntmsci12.pro\inc\stl\hash_map(59) : see reference to class template instantiation 'std::tr1::unordered_map_Kty,_Ty,_Hasher,_Keyeq,_Alloc' being compiled with [ _Kty=String, _Ty=OpCode, _Hasher=formula::StringHashCode, _Keyeq=std::equal_toString, _Alloc=std::allocatorstd::pairString,OpCode ] C:\source\trunk\git\main\solver\410\wntmsci12.pro\inc\formula/FormulaCompiler.hxx(109) : see reference to class template instantiation 'std::hash_map__K,__T,__H,__E' being compiled with [ __K=String, __T=OpCode, __H=formula::StringHashCode, __E=std::equal_toString ] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [RELEASE]: first Beta RC ... Bug 124272 - Error message Truetype error 2704 when install language pack on en_US snapshot
On 3/3/14 3:34 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: of course this is a showstopper, means we will definitely make a new build. to keep you all informed the upload of the rebuild Beta RC is ongoing and we expect to have all the bits in place later tonight. We will inform you... I plan to start the vote for the AOO 4.1 Beta tomorrow morning and it will run until Sunday evening. If everything goes well we can publish the Beta on Monday. Thanks to all who make this happen, QA volunteers, translators and developers. Juergen PS: Samer, if you can provide the icons I will prepare a test build asap that we can verify how they work and look in real life. Juergen On 3/3/14 1:50 PM, Rainer Bielefeld wrote: Hi, I still can't install Language packs because of https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124272 CU Rainer - 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: Compiler warnings
On 05.03.2014 09:30, Andre Fischer wrote: I am currently working on some bug in the sc module and find that it is really hard to even find compiler errors among the many warning messages. Some of these warnings are caused directly by code in sc but the majority of the warnings originate in header files. Platform is Windows. The most annoying warnings are warning C4530: C++ exception handler used, but unwind semantics are not enabled. Specify /EHsc and even more (because of the warning text that is repeated again and again) warning C4555: expression has no effect; expected expression with side-effect The problem is in MSVC2008's list header. They probably fixed that in their newer versions. Another reason to update our build environment on that platform to something newer. The warning expression has no effect itself is interesting enough, just not in in list header. Fortunately terms like list(1137) can be filtered out easily. Any ideas how to silence these two? We could disable such warnings altogether by adding e.g. the -wd4555 option to CFLAGSWARNCXX in main/solenv/inc/wntmsci11.mk and main/solenv/gbuild/platform/windows.mk re C4530: One option would be to compile all sc code with exceptions enabled. That sounds reasonable. Does anyone know of a reason not to do that? Not that I'm aware of. Herbert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Compiler warnings
On 05.03.2014 10:01, Herbert Duerr wrote: On 05.03.2014 09:30, Andre Fischer wrote: I am currently working on some bug in the sc module and find that it is really hard to even find compiler errors among the many warning messages. Some of these warnings are caused directly by code in sc but the majority of the warnings originate in header files. Platform is Windows. The most annoying warnings are warning C4530: C++ exception handler used, but unwind semantics are not enabled. Specify /EHsc and even more (because of the warning text that is repeated again and again) warning C4555: expression has no effect; expected expression with side-effect The problem is in MSVC2008's list header. They probably fixed that in their newer versions. Another reason to update our build environment on that platform to something newer. The warning expression has no effect itself is interesting enough, just not in in list header. Fortunately terms like list(1137) can be filtered out easily. Please explain how that can be filtered out easily. Any ideas how to silence these two? We could disable such warnings altogether by adding e.g. the -wd4555 option to CFLAGSWARNCXX in main/solenv/inc/wntmsci11.mk and main/solenv/gbuild/platform/windows.mk How do we do that only for the system headers? -Andre - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Compiler warnings
On 05.03.2014 10:28, Andre Fischer wrote: On 05.03.2014 10:01, Herbert Duerr wrote: The warning expression has no effect itself is interesting enough, just not in in list header. Fortunately terms like list(1137) can be filtered out easily. Please explain how that can be filtered out easily. e.g. by piping the output through the command perl -ne 'print if not /^.*list.1137/../^\S/' It removes all list.1137 lines and their indented followup lines. Unfortunately also one more line but perl experts can probably fix that easily. Herbert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Compiler warnings
On 05.03.2014 11:28, Herbert Duerr wrote: On 05.03.2014 10:28, Andre Fischer wrote: On 05.03.2014 10:01, Herbert Duerr wrote: The warning expression has no effect itself is interesting enough, just not in in list header. Fortunately terms like list(1137) can be filtered out easily. Please explain how that can be filtered out easily. e.g. by piping the output through the command perl -ne 'print if not /^.*list.1137/../^\S/' It removes all list.1137 lines and their indented followup lines. Unfortunately also one more line but perl experts can probably fix that easily. Of course, on the command line this is easy, but I am building inside emacs. Any idea how to do it there? -Andre 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: Compiler warnings
On 05.03.2014 11:45, Andre Fischer wrote: On 05.03.2014 11:28, Herbert Duerr wrote: On 05.03.2014 10:28, Andre Fischer wrote: On 05.03.2014 10:01, Herbert Duerr wrote: The warning expression has no effect itself is interesting enough, just not in in list header. Fortunately terms like list(1137) can be filtered out easily. Please explain how that can be filtered out easily. e.g. by piping the output through the command perl -ne 'print if not /^.*list.1137/../^\S/' It removes all list.1137 lines and their indented followup lines. Unfortunately also one more line but perl experts can probably fix that easily. Of course, on the command line this is easy, but I am building inside emacs. Any idea how to do it there? As I don't use emacs I had to rely on my googling skills instead and found [1] that looks relevant. Does it help? [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/206806/filtering-text-through-a-shell-command-in-emacs Herbert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Compiler warnings
Use MSVC's WD flag to disable the warning. You'll probably need to hack wntmsci11.mk... On 5 Mar 2014 08:31, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: I am currently working on some bug in the sc module and find that it is really hard to even find compiler errors among the many warning messages. Some of these warnings are caused directly by code in sc but the majority of the warnings originate in header files. Platform is Windows. The most annoying warnings are warning C4530: C++ exception handler used, but unwind semantics are not enabled. Specify /EHsc and even more (because of the warning text that is repeated again and again) warning C4555: expression has no effect; expected expression with side-effect (see full text below) Any ideas how to silence these two? re C4530: One option would be to compile all sc code with exceptions enabled. Does anyone know of a reason not to do that? Best regards, Andre PS: here is the complete output for one instance of the C4555 warning: C:\PROGRA~2\MICROS~1.0\VC\include\../../VC/include/list(1137) : warning C4555: expression has no effect; expected expression with side-effect C:\PROGRA~2\MICROS~1.0\VC\include\../../VC/include/list(1126) : while compiling class template member function 'void std::list_Ty,_Ax::_Splice( std::list_Ty,_Ax::_Const_iterator_Secure_validation,std::list_Ty,_Ax ,std::list_Ty,_Ax::_Const_iterator_Secure_validation, std::list_Ty,_Ax::_Const_iterator_Secure_validation,unsigned int,bool)' with [ _Ty=std::pairconst String,OpCode, _Ax=std::allocatorstd::pairconst String,OpCode, _Secure_validation=true ] C:\PROGRA~2\MICROS~1.0\VC\include\xhash(205) : see reference to class template instantiation 'std::list_Ty,_Ax' being compiled with [ _Ty=std::pairconst String,OpCode, _Ax=std::allocatorstd::pairconst String,OpCode ] C:\PROGRA~2\MICROS~1.0\VC\include\../../VC/include/unordered_map(86) : see reference to class template instantiation 'stdext::_Hash_Traits' being compiled with [ _Traits=std::tr1::_Umap_traitsString,OpCode,stdext::_ Hash_compareString,formula::StringHashCode,std::equal_to String,std::allocatorstd::pairString,OpCode,false ] C:\source\trunk\git\main\solver\410\wntmsci12.pro\inc\stl\hash_map(59) : see reference to class template instantiation 'std::tr1::unordered_map_Kty,_Ty,_Hasher,_Keyeq,_Alloc' being compiled with [ _Kty=String, _Ty=OpCode, _Hasher=formula::StringHashCode, _Keyeq=std::equal_toString, _Alloc=std::allocatorstd::pairString,OpCode ] C:\source\trunk\git\main\solver\410\wntmsci12.pro\inc\ formula/FormulaCompiler.hxx(109) : see reference to class template instantiation 'std::hash_map__K,__T,__H,__E' being compiled with [ __K=String, __T=OpCode, __H=formula::StringHashCode, __E=std::equal_toString ] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Compiler warnings
On 05.03.2014 12:38, John O'Sullivan wrote: Use MSVC's WD flag to disable the warning. You'll probably need to hack wntmsci11.mk... I wouldn't like to turn off this warning globally. I only don't want to see it for system headers that I can't change anyway. -Andre - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Compiler warnings
On 5 March 2014 12:46, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 05.03.2014 12:38, John O'Sullivan wrote: Use MSVC's WD flag to disable the warning. You'll probably need to hack wntmsci11.mk... I wouldn't like to turn off this warning globally. I only don't want to see it for system headers that I can't change anyway. Use #pragma to disable/enable the warnings. Put the #pragma around the include statement. rgds jan I. -Andre - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Compiler warnings
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 7:32 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: On 5 March 2014 12:46, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 05.03.2014 12:38, John O'Sullivan wrote: Use MSVC's WD flag to disable the warning. You'll probably need to hack wntmsci11.mk... I wouldn't like to turn off this warning globally. I only don't want to see it for system headers that I can't change anyway. Use #pragma to disable/enable the warnings. Put the #pragma around the include statement. Or use a push/pop set of pragmas, which handles nested inclusion scenarios safer: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/2c8f766e%28v=vs.90%29.aspx -Rob rgds jan I. -Andre - 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: Compiler warnings
On 5 March 2014 14:18, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 7:32 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: On 5 March 2014 12:46, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 05.03.2014 12:38, John O'Sullivan wrote: Use MSVC's WD flag to disable the warning. You'll probably need to hack wntmsci11.mk... I wouldn't like to turn off this warning globally. I only don't want to see it for system headers that I can't change anyway. Use #pragma to disable/enable the warnings. Put the #pragma around the include statement. Or use a push/pop set of pragmas, which handles nested inclusion scenarios safer: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/2c8f766e%28v=vs.90%29.aspx If you use push/pop please check for platform, since this is not supported by all C++ compilers, whereas #pragma alone is. rgds jan I. -Rob rgds jan I. -Andre - 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
[BUGZILLA] proposal for new entry in field Target Milestone
Hi, as we have created branch AOO410 for our coming AOO 4.1.0 release I would like to propose a new entry for Bugzilla field 'Target Milestone'. Something like 'AOO.next'. It shall be used for the solved issues which won't be part of the AOO 4.1.0 release, but be part of the next following one. Once we had agreed on the version number for this release this new entry shall be renamed accordingly. Any objections? Best regards, Oliver. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Compiler warnings
On 05.03.2014 10:01, Herbert Duerr wrote: On 05.03.2014 09:30, Andre Fischer wrote: re C4530: One option would be to compile all sc code with exceptions enabled. That sounds reasonable. Does anyone know of a reason not to do that? Not that I'm aware of. I am neither, that's why I ask :-) Exception support does make object files larger and possibly a bit slower. The question is, is that significant? Module sw nowadays has exception support for all its files. And not changing at least the files in sc/ for which there are warnings might lead to memory leaks when there are exceptions. So it is probably best to activate support for exceptions module wide. -Andre 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: Compiler warnings
On 05.03.2014 11:53, Herbert Duerr wrote: On 05.03.2014 11:45, Andre Fischer wrote: On 05.03.2014 11:28, Herbert Duerr wrote: On 05.03.2014 10:28, Andre Fischer wrote: On 05.03.2014 10:01, Herbert Duerr wrote: The warning expression has no effect itself is interesting enough, just not in in list header. Fortunately terms like list(1137) can be filtered out easily. Please explain how that can be filtered out easily. e.g. by piping the output through the command perl -ne 'print if not /^.*list.1137/../^\S/' It removes all list.1137 lines and their indented followup lines. Unfortunately also one more line but perl experts can probably fix that easily. Of course, on the command line this is easy, but I am building inside emacs. Any idea how to do it there? As I don't use emacs I had to rely on my googling skills instead and found [1] that looks relevant. Does it help? No, building in emacs works a little different. But keep trying :-) -Andre [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/206806/filtering-text-through-a-shell-command-in-emacs 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: Compiler warnings
On 5 March 2014 14:42, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 05.03.2014 10:01, Herbert Duerr wrote: On 05.03.2014 09:30, Andre Fischer wrote: re C4530: One option would be to compile all sc code with exceptions enabled. That sounds reasonable. Does anyone know of a reason not to do that? Not that I'm aware of. I am neither, that's why I ask :-) Exception support does make object files larger and possibly a bit slower. The question is, is that significant? Module sw nowadays has exception support for all its files. And not changing at least the files in sc/ for which there are warnings might lead to memory leaks when there are exceptions. So it is probably best to activate support for exceptions module wide. On ubuntu, the slower is not measureable. It is basically to extra function calls, and a word extra on heap, I assume it is identical on windows. On ubuntu object files seems to be 5-10% bigger, but the final exe (I use this in e.g. genLang) in my case is less than 1% bigger. I had problems with exceptions in modules where java is called (just a warning). rgds jan I. -Andre 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: Compiler warnings
On 05.03.2014 14:49, jan i wrote: On 5 March 2014 14:42, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 05.03.2014 10:01, Herbert Duerr wrote: On 05.03.2014 09:30, Andre Fischer wrote: re C4530: One option would be to compile all sc code with exceptions enabled. That sounds reasonable. Does anyone know of a reason not to do that? Not that I'm aware of. I am neither, that's why I ask :-) Exception support does make object files larger and possibly a bit slower. The question is, is that significant? Module sw nowadays has exception support for all its files. And not changing at least the files in sc/ for which there are warnings might lead to memory leaks when there are exceptions. So it is probably best to activate support for exceptions module wide. On ubuntu, the slower is not measureable. It is basically to extra function calls, and a word extra on heap, I assume it is identical on windows. On ubuntu object files seems to be 5-10% bigger, but the final exe (I use this in e.g. genLang) in my case is less than 1% bigger. Thanks, that is good to know. I remember vaguely that the size increase on Solaris was more noticeable. But that was years ago. -Andre I had problems with exceptions in modules where java is called (just a warning). rgds jan I. -Andre 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 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [BUGZILLA] proposal for new entry in field Target Milestone
Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: propose a new entry for Bugzilla field 'Target Milestone'. Something like 'AOO.next'. It shall be used for the solved issues which won't be part of the AOO 4.1.0 release Good idea. I would actually use it also for issues that are not solved yet but that we agree to target for that milestone (so, a significant bug emerging after the 4.1 release can have that target set to mean give priority to this bug and aim at fixing it in the next version). Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Compiler warnings
On 05.03.2014 14:18, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 7:32 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: On 5 March 2014 12:46, Andre Fischer awf@gmail.com wrote: On 05.03.2014 12:38, John O'Sullivan wrote: Use MSVC's WD flag to disable the warning. You'll probably need to hack wntmsci11.mk... I wouldn't like to turn off this warning globally. I only don't want to see it for system headers that I can't change anyway. Use #pragma to disable/enable the warnings. Put the #pragma around the include statement. Or use a push/pop set of pragmas, which handles nested inclusion scenarios safer: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/2c8f766e%28v=vs.90%29.aspx -Rob Thanks John, Rob, Jan, I think I have this warning under control now. As suggested I use #if defined(_MSC_VER) #pragma warning(push) #pragma warning(disable:4555) #include ... #pragma warning(pop) #endif After putting this in hash_map and still seeing warnings 4555 I thought that maybe not only the definition of the list template had to be treated this way but also the template instantiation, which would have required a lot more work. Luckily I just had to do the same fix for the list template. No more 4555. -Andre rgds jan I. -Andre - 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 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
[Website] Files missing
Hello list, I would to update some outdated pages from french website: http://www.openoffice.org/fr/Mac/ I don't find it on SVN: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/fr - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [BUGZILLA] proposal for new entry in field Target Milestone
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, as we have created branch AOO410 for our coming AOO 4.1.0 release I would like to propose a new entry for Bugzilla field 'Target Milestone'. Something like 'AOO.next'. It shall be used for the solved issues which won't be part of the AOO 4.1.0 release, but be part of the next following one. Once we had agreed on the version number for this release this new entry shall be renamed accordingly. Would it make sense to have two, like: AOO.next.micro AOO.next.minor That would map to things targeted for 4.1.1 (work done in the branch) versus 4.2.0 (work done in the trunk). -Rob Any objections? Best regards, Oliver. - 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: [Website] Files missing
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 9:23 AM, FR web forum ooofo...@free.fr wrote: Hello list, I would to update some outdated pages from french website: http://www.openoffice.org/fr/Mac/ I don't find it on SVN: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/fr Is this it here: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/fr/archives/Mac/index.htm If so, this is weird. Why is it in the archives directory? Do we have a redirect set up? -Rob - 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: [BUGZILLA] proposal for new entry in field Target Milestone
Hi, On 05.03.2014 14:59, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: propose a new entry for Bugzilla field 'Target Milestone'. Something like 'AOO.next'. It shall be used for the solved issues which won't be part of the AOO 4.1.0 release Good idea. I would actually use it also for issues that are not solved yet but that we agree to target for that milestone (so, a significant bug emerging after the 4.1 release can have that target set to mean give priority to this bug and aim at fixing it in the next version). My view on using field 'Target Milestone' is different. I am using it only for issues where it is 100% clear that they are or will be solved for the given 'Target Milestone'. If we have a critical issue which needs to be solved in the next release, I think it is needed to find somebody who works on it and is committed to solve it for the next release. In this case the field 'Target Milestone' could be used. Just, expressing the 'aim to fix it in the next release' without having a corresponding commitment does not make sense in my point of view. Best regards, Oliver. 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
Re: [BUGZILLA] proposal for new entry in field Target Milestone
Hi, On 05.03.2014 15:35, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, as we have created branch AOO410 for our coming AOO 4.1.0 release I would like to propose a new entry for Bugzilla field 'Target Milestone'. Something like 'AOO.next'. It shall be used for the solved issues which won't be part of the AOO 4.1.0 release, but be part of the next following one. Once we had agreed on the version number for this release this new entry shall be renamed accordingly. Would it make sense to have two, like: AOO.next.micro AOO.next.minor That would map to things targeted for 4.1.1 (work done in the branch) versus 4.2.0 (work done in the trunk). It might make sense, but I think in this case we can name 'AOO.next.micro' directly '4.1.1' (we also know, what the next micro release will be) and it should be introduced right after our 4.1.0 release, when a corresponding issue comes to life. BTW, is it possible to rename an existing entry of 'Target Milestone' as I had propose above? Just my 2 cents. Best regards, Oliver. -Rob Any objections? Best regards, Oliver. - 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 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Reporting a problem with the OpenOffice website
my spell check doesn't work, am I supposed to download a dictionary? Sent from Windows Mail
Re: [BUGZILLA] proposal for new entry in field Target Milestone
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, On 05.03.2014 14:59, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: propose a new entry for Bugzilla field 'Target Milestone'. Something like 'AOO.next'. It shall be used for the solved issues which won't be part of the AOO 4.1.0 release Good idea. I would actually use it also for issues that are not solved yet but that we agree to target for that milestone (so, a significant bug emerging after the 4.1 release can have that target set to mean give priority to this bug and aim at fixing it in the next version). My view on using field 'Target Milestone' is different. I am using it only for issues where it is 100% clear that they are or will be solved for the given 'Target Milestone'. If we have a critical issue which needs to be solved in the next release, I think it is needed to find somebody who works on it and is committed to solve it for the next release. In this case the field 'Target Milestone' could be used. Just, expressing the 'aim to fix it in the next release' without having a corresponding commitment does not make sense in my point of view. A simple rule might me: Only the 'owner' of an issue can set the Target Milestone. Of course, that implies that the field is set only for issues where someone has taken ownership is is committed to fixing it. -Rob Best regards, Oliver. 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 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [BUGZILLA] proposal for new entry in field Target Milestone
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, On 05.03.2014 15:35, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, as we have created branch AOO410 for our coming AOO 4.1.0 release I would like to propose a new entry for Bugzilla field 'Target Milestone'. Something like 'AOO.next'. It shall be used for the solved issues which won't be part of the AOO 4.1.0 release, but be part of the next following one. Once we had agreed on the version number for this release this new entry shall be renamed accordingly. Would it make sense to have two, like: AOO.next.micro AOO.next.minor That would map to things targeted for 4.1.1 (work done in the branch) versus 4.2.0 (work done in the trunk). It might make sense, but I think in this case we can name 'AOO.next.micro' directly '4.1.1' (we also know, what the next micro release will be) and it should be introduced right after our 4.1.0 release, when a corresponding issue comes to life. BTW, is it possible to rename an existing entry of 'Target Milestone' as I had propose above? The display strings for the milestones can be changed, in one place in the admin UI. This is a painless operation since the individual issues are not touched, they just have a reference to milestone ID. -Rob Just my 2 cents. Best regards, Oliver. -Rob Any objections? Best regards, Oliver. - 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 - 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: [BUGZILLA] proposal for new entry in field Target Milestone
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 8:23 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, On 05.03.2014 15:35, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, as we have created branch AOO410 for our coming AOO 4.1.0 release I would like to propose a new entry for Bugzilla field 'Target Milestone'. Something like 'AOO.next'. It shall be used for the solved issues which won't be part of the AOO 4.1.0 release, but be part of the next following one. Once we had agreed on the version number for this release this new entry shall be renamed accordingly. Would it make sense to have two, like: AOO.next.micro AOO.next.minor That would map to things targeted for 4.1.1 (work done in the branch) versus 4.2.0 (work done in the trunk). It might make sense, but I think in this case we can name 'AOO.next.micro' directly '4.1.1' (we also know, what the next micro release will be) and it should be introduced right after our 4.1.0 release, when a corresponding issue comes to life. BTW, is it possible to rename an existing entry of 'Target Milestone' as I had propose above? Just my 2 cents. Best regards, Oliver. We seem to already have some similar terms in Target Milestone: AOO Later next build milestone 1 milestone 2 I think the idea of AOO.next is useful but next after what? Would it be useful to have an additional field used in conjunction with AOO.next? -Rob Any objections? Best regards, Oliver. - 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 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- - MzK Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect. -- James Mason
Close, but not quite 100 million...
If you look at the SourceForge page you'll see that shows 99.7 million downloads: http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/stats/timeline?dates=2011-11-29+to+2014-03-18 But that number includes the downloads of Language Packs. The more conservative number that we report on the blog has always been the number of full product downloads. So if someone downloads AOO and also downloaded a Language Pack it would be counted as only a single download. The number of full-product downloads is around 95 million. So we still have a little more to go before we pop the champagne. Maybe around ApacheCon next month we'll hit 1 million. Sooner if we count beta downloads, but I'd recommend against counting beta downloads. In any case, it is not too early to start thinking about what we want to do to publicize the 100 million number, when we do hit it. We'll do a blog post, of course. It would be awesome if we could design a special 100,000,000 downloads logo that we could use on the website. Also, some better looking infographics would be nice. You can see what I typically produce, rather bland charts more suitable for a scientific report: https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/75_million_downloads_of_apache I'm sure someone with more design sense could make something much better with the data. (and of course I can provide the updated data) Any other ideas? -Rob - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Close, but not quite 100 million...
On 5 March 2014 20:47, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: If you look at the SourceForge page you'll see that shows 99.7 million downloads: http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/stats/timeline?dates=2011-11-29+to+2014-03-18 But that number includes the downloads of Language Packs. The more conservative number that we report on the blog has always been the number of full product downloads. So if someone downloads AOO and also downloaded a Language Pack it would be counted as only a single download. The number of full-product downloads is around 95 million. So we still have a little more to go before we pop the champagne. Maybe around ApacheCon next month we'll hit 1 million. Sooner if we count beta downloads, but I'd recommend against counting beta downloads. In any case, it is not too early to start thinking about what we want to do to publicize the 100 million number, when we do hit it. We'll do a blog post, of course. It would be awesome if we could design a special 100,000,000 downloads logo that we could use on the website. Also, some better looking infographics would be nice. You can see what I typically produce, rather bland charts more suitable for a scientific report: https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/75_million_downloads_of_apache I'm sure someone with more design sense could make something much better with the data. (and of course I can provide the updated data) Any other ideas? If we reach 100 before april 7, I suggest all the openoffice speakers mention this in the prelude to their talks. Even 95 million is a factor more than any other ASF project (to my best knowledge). If somebody with drawing skills, could make a near 100 million logo before march 24, I will for sure add it to my first slide. rgds jan I. -Rob - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [RELEASE][DISCUSS] How to download AOO 4.1.0 Beta?
Am 03/04/2014 07:31 AM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt: On 3/3/14 9:24 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 02/14/2014 09:53 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo): As this is our first beta release at Apache, I would like to clarify some things before it's maybe too late to change the facts and to prepare webpages: 3. File names: Of course the file names of the install files have to show a difference compared to the general release files. Suggestion: Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.0_Beta_Win_x86_install.exe *If* there is a need to publish another round, it could be extended with a number like: Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.0_Beta2_Win_x86_install.exe OK, I've learned that this won't be possible and the names will be slightly different - but only as long as they are not uploaded to Sourceforge. Therefore I suggest to rename them to the synxtax that was used before (see above). I've created already a little shell script to do the work but won't attach here. @Juergen: Is this something for you? no and I am not in favor or changing the names. I would like to use the names as they came out of the build. Please point me to the scripts that build the name for the download. It should be easy to put the beta string in the correct position. You want to edit the download scripting but not doing a 1 minute file renaming? Hm ;-) We have already said why the naming scheme is different and that it requires more time to analyze and tweak the build process for a proper naming. We hope that we can cleanup and improve this for the next release. I have not asked to change the names in the build system but what comes out of it. But for now I would like to avoid any extra step and the change in the download script is one place. Otherwise I have to change several places where I automate some pre-release steps. So, it seems you or me have to change something in order to get working download. OK, don't worry I'll take care of it. Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [BUGZILLA] proposal for new entry in field Target Milestone
Am 03/05/2014 05:23 PM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer Wittmann: Hi, On 05.03.2014 15:35, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, as we have created branch AOO410 for our coming AOO 4.1.0 release I would like to propose a new entry for Bugzilla field 'Target Milestone'. Something like 'AOO.next'. It shall be used for the solved issues which won't be part of the AOO 4.1.0 release, but be part of the next following one. Once we had agreed on the version number for this release this new entry shall be renamed accordingly. Would it make sense to have two, like: AOO.next.micro AOO.next.minor That would map to things targeted for 4.1.1 (work done in the branch) versus 4.2.0 (work done in the trunk). It might make sense, but I think in this case we can name 'AOO.next.micro' directly '4.1.1' (we also know, what the next micro release will be) and it should be introduced right after our 4.1.0 release, when a corresponding issue comes to life. +1 I also think that we can name the things directly. For issues that should be fixed/resolved in the mid-term future, we can use the already existing AOO Later. And if there is no idea how and when to fix it, then simply don#t set any target version. Marcus BTW, is it possible to rename an existing entry of 'Target Milestone' as I had propose above? Just my 2 cents. Best regards, Oliver. -Rob Any objections? Best regards, Oliver. - 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 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- Ciao Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice
On 04/03/2014 Daniel Roberts wrote: To complete this upgrade process we need to understand the compatibility of the software supplied by yourselves. To assist with this, we have detailed the tables below Dear Daniel, OpenOffice is developed by volunteers, so we are not a traditional software vendor and we can't fill in forms. We publish compatibility information in our release notes: http://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/source/sys_reqs.html (OpenOffice is compatible with Windows 8.1 too, but Windows 8.1 was made available after our latest release, so it is not listed). If you need more detailed information you can ask one of the consultants listed at http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: ApacheCon Denver schedule
On 02/03/2014 Andrea Pescetti wrote: The ApacheCon Denver Schedule has been published. Some of the talks relevant to OpenOffice are at http://apacheconnorthamerica2014.sched.org/overview/type/openoffice and there are more in the community tracks. Quick update: - If you are considering to attend please register soon, as prices go up on March 14th. http://na.apachecon.com/ - All speakers are invited to promote their talk, the OpenOffice track and the conference in general via social media, blogs and other channels. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: ApacheCon Denver schedule
On 6 March 2014 00:03, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: On 02/03/2014 Andrea Pescetti wrote: The ApacheCon Denver Schedule has been published. Some of the talks relevant to OpenOffice are at http://apacheconnorthamerica2014.sched.org/overview/type/openoffice and there are more in the community tracks. Quick update: - If you are considering to attend please register soon, as prices go up on March 14th. http://na.apachecon.com/ - All speakers are invited to promote their talk, the OpenOffice track and the conference in general via social media, blogs and other channels. Should we make 1 blog on our blog telling that we have a whole track monday april 7, and we (the speakers) will be around for discussions ? rgds jan I. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Reporting a problem with the OpenOffice website
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 9:17 AM, brwbuildersand...@gmail.com wrote: my spell check doesn't work, am I supposed to download a dictionary? Sent from Windows Mail Please try the steps in the spell check troubleshooting tutorial on the user forum https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=74t=16512 You do not need to register to view the tutorial. Best regards, Francis
