Re: New committer
2015-08-06 16:50 GMT-03:00 jan i j...@apache.org: Welcome to Manik Malhotra who just accepting being openoffice committer. Congratulations! -- Albino B Neto twitter.com/b1n0anb Debian. Freedom to code. Code to freedom! faw - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Read Only
Am 08/07/2015 09:43 PM, schrieb Janet Monk: Since installing Windows 10 all my Open Office files have become “read only” and can not be edited or saved in Documents and my databases seem to be blocked. How can I resolve this problem? thanks for your report. Currently we cannot reproduce reports about read-only documents or other problems after the PC was upgraded to or installed with Windows 10. Therefore please can you answer some questions? Maybe it's then easier to come to the root cause: 1) What version of Windows did you upgrade from? 2) Is it 32 bit or 64 bit? 3) Which of the three Windows 10 upgrade options did you do? a) Fresh install b) Preserve Data and Programs c) Preserve data only 4) Where were the documents stored that AOO sees as read-only? a) Local HD b) USB stick c) Network drive d) Cloud storage 5) Do you see this problem with other applications and their documents, or only with AOO? Thanks in advance for your help. Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: New committer
Welcome on board. :-) Marcus Am 08/06/2015 09:50 PM, schrieb jan i: Welcome to Manik Malhotra who just accepting being openoffice committer. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [NOTICE] Windows build machine setted up
On 07/08/15 09:50, Michal Hriň wrote: Thanks for providing a binary, but I am a bit concerned that a version is made public, before the PMC have even spoken about being ready to make a release candidate or started voting on a release candidate. Is this coordinated with the release manager for 4.1.2 ? Please do not misunderstand me, I think it is great that work is being done, I am just surprised we are ready to go public with 4.1.2 even as a pre-view. hrin OK. Binary is deleted. This was not coordinated, that was only snapshot .. not release candidate. All in all Linux 32bit builds from AOO410 branch are on buildbots, so everybody can downlaod it, this is not secret. Sorry, that I was excited and want to show it publically. no problem you did a good job and I don't see any problem, you did not publish anything official and just provided a new fresh binary for preview and testing if your build env is working as expected and can be used for a Windows release build. Please continue your tests and keep us informed. I'm would be happy if I don't have to prepare windows builds. Juergen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: STATE OF AOO: Overall Bugzilla Activity through July 2015
Am 08/06/2015 09:11 PM, schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton: Marcus, the queries I did for identification of open issues found only issues with no resolution of any kind. That automatically excluded issues with any of DUPLICATE, ..., WON'T FIX, and CLOSED status. OK Older open issues, some from long before Apache OpenOffice was established, continue to receive discussion and comments and, even in 2015, sometimes become resolved, including with fixes. I think it is good to hold onto the history simply to be able to reflect that. Nevertheless I would like to see them closed. It's possible to reopen an issue when one has the impression it's worth it. IMHO Sometimes is not enough to justify to leave billions (may feeling) of issue open. I agree that immediate concerns are best explored by looking more deeply into the 2015 issues and discussions to gain better perspective. I suspect the older open issues to look more closely at first are ones that are still being discussed, including being duplicated by new issue reports. OK, maybe older issues with newer comments should be left open. But duplicates are coming even when issues are already closed. People setting themselves at CC in the old, closed issue and then open a new issue. The summary at the end is not seldom I've the same problem. Let's cleanup our issue base. For this we don't need a (new) volunteer. We can discuss about the criteria and then just close them. Marcus -Original Message- From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de] Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2015 05:18 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: STATE OF AOO: Overall Bugzilla Activity through July 2015 Thanks for generating the numbers. Even when it is no surprise that we have many unsolved issues, it's always good to know the current values. In general I agree with Juergen and Roberto, we should focus on the newer times of AOO. Suggestion: To get rid of old issues we need to close all issues that are already in a state short before closure [*]: Duplicate, Irreproducible, Obsolete, Not_an_issue, Verified, Wont_fix As second step we can close all issues that are in status Resolved and last updated months/years ago. Then we have a much lower base of open issues and can filter better about age, importantance and severity. Finally it's then easier to decide what to do with the remaining open issues. [*] This makes it necessary to stop all BZ notification mails. Otherwise we get flooded by billions of mails and get hit by the Infra team all summer long. ;-) Marcus [ ... ] - 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: [NOTICE] Windows build machine setted up
jan i wrote: Is this coordinated with the release manager for 4.1.2 ? No. It doesn't need to be. Maybe some confusion arose because Michal wrote 4.1.2 Early Preview here and somebody may find the name confusing, but this is clearly Michal's build of the current state of 4.1.2 and it is OK (and actually great, Michal!) to have it. It is like the buildbots output (or anything on people.apache.org): a public, totally unofficial, development version. I didn't download it. I'm collecting information for answering the important part of this discussion (digital signing and access to the system), but this requires digging into the archives more than I had anticipated so it will take a while. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
[NOTICE] Windows build machine setted up
Thanks for providing a binary, but I am a bit concerned that a version is made public, before the PMC have even spoken about being ready to make a release candidate or started voting on a release candidate. Is this coordinated with the release manager for 4.1.2 ? Please do not misunderstand me, I think it is great that work is being done, I am just surprised we are ready to go public with 4.1.2 even as a pre-view. hrin OK. Binary is deleted. This was not coordinated, that was only snapshot .. not release candidate. All in all Linux 32bit builds from AOO410 branch are on buildbots, so everybody can downlaod it, this is not secret. Sorry, that I was excited and want to show it publically. /hrin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [NOTICE] Windows build machine setted up
Am 08/07/2015 10:20 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti: jan i wrote: Is this coordinated with the release manager for 4.1.2 ? No. It doesn't need to be. Maybe some confusion arose because Michal wrote 4.1.2 Early Preview here and somebody may find the name confusing, but this is clearly Michal's build of the current state of 4.1.2 and it is OK (and actually great, Michal!) to have it. +1 @Michael: When you make sure that the file name like now always contain Early Preview or Early Access or anything far away from a Beta or Release version, then it cannot be mixed-up. So, keep up the good work. :-) Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
[NOTICE] Windows build machine setted up
On Friday, August 7, 2015, Rich Bowen rbo...@rcbowen.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','rbo...@rcbowen.com'); wrote: On 08/07/2015 04:00 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 07/08/15 09:50, Michal Hriň wrote: Thanks for providing a binary, but I am a bit concerned that a version is made public, before the PMC have even spoken about being ready to make a release candidate or started voting on a release candidate. Is this coordinated with the release manager for 4.1.2 ? Please do not misunderstand me, I think it is great that work is being done, I am just surprised we are ready to go public with 4.1.2 even as a pre-view. hrin OK. Binary is deleted. This was not coordinated, that was only snapshot .. not release candidate. All in all Linux 32bit builds from AOO410 branch are on buildbots, so everybody can downlaod it, this is not secret. Sorry, that I was excited and want to show it publically. no problem you did a good job and I don't see any problem, you did not publish anything official and just provided a new fresh binary for preview and testing if your build env is working as expected and can be used for a Windows release build. Please continue your tests and keep us informed. I'm would be happy if I don't have to prepare windows builds. I'm finding this conversation perplexing, and, no doubt, I lack some back-story. Surely it's wonderful that someone is producing binaries for folks to try out, right? Why would we want them to be deleted, and not publicized? Binaries are not (as has been discussed DOZENS of times) official releases. And anyone is free to take our code and push out binaries. Can someone explain to me what the problem is here? We should be encouraging the work that Michal is doing, celebrating it, tweeting it, and encouraging everyone and their grandmothers to try out this new build. What am I missing? Since I was the cause, let me explain what I tried to write, I think the work done is very good, and wrote so, and I do not think anybody asked for it to be deleted. My concern was the naming 4.1.2 early preview. Thats sounds official (not as an apache release, but you know that for AOO the binary is downloaded factors more than the release source tar ball) and I do not want a confusion to arise between what the release manager does and what individual committers does. I think Michael is doing a very important job with preparing builds for the upcomming release, his work is known here, so much more reason to be carefull when naming intermidiate builds. Andrea wrote it more direct, this is a michael build based on the 4.1.0 branch, this is totally correct and something a lot of people should test. So I do not think you missed a lot, but as always it is real difficult to write something without getting misinterpreted or misunderstood. rgds jan i. -- Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.
Re: [NOTICE] Windows build machine setted up
Am 08/07/2015 09:50 AM, schrieb Michal Hriň: Thanks for providing a binary, but I am a bit concerned that a version is made public, before the PMC have even spoken about being ready to make a release candidate or started voting on a release candidate. Is this coordinated with the release manager for 4.1.2 ? Please do not misunderstand me, I think it is great that work is being done, I am just surprised we are ready to go public with 4.1.2 even as a pre-view. hrin OK. Binary is deleted. This was not coordinated, that was only snapshot .. not release candidate. All in all Linux 32bit builds from AOO410 branch are on buildbots, so everybody can downlaod it, this is not secret. Sorry, that I was excited and want to show it publically. /hrin please don't put too much negative interpretion into some answers. Of course, it's great that you create builds from the new branch. It's also OK to publish this as download offer. Unfortunately, I haven't seen the file name structure you have used. But please make sure that you always add a term like Early Preview, Early Access, Dev-Snapshot or something else that cannot be mixed-up with a Beta or Release version. BTW: Do you still have the access problem with your people@a.o account? If so, we (maybe together with Infra) should solve this. Then you can save the binaries there to indicate that the work comes from an AOO committer and not from somewhere else. As said before, please keep up the good work. :-) Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [NOTICE] Windows build machine setted up
On 08/07/2015 04:00 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 07/08/15 09:50, Michal Hriň wrote: Thanks for providing a binary, but I am a bit concerned that a version is made public, before the PMC have even spoken about being ready to make a release candidate or started voting on a release candidate. Is this coordinated with the release manager for 4.1.2 ? Please do not misunderstand me, I think it is great that work is being done, I am just surprised we are ready to go public with 4.1.2 even as a pre-view. hrin OK. Binary is deleted. This was not coordinated, that was only snapshot .. not release candidate. All in all Linux 32bit builds from AOO410 branch are on buildbots, so everybody can downlaod it, this is not secret. Sorry, that I was excited and want to show it publically. no problem you did a good job and I don't see any problem, you did not publish anything official and just provided a new fresh binary for preview and testing if your build env is working as expected and can be used for a Windows release build. Please continue your tests and keep us informed. I'm would be happy if I don't have to prepare windows builds. I'm finding this conversation perplexing, and, no doubt, I lack some back-story. Surely it's wonderful that someone is producing binaries for folks to try out, right? Why would we want them to be deleted, and not publicized? Binaries are not (as has been discussed DOZENS of times) official releases. And anyone is free to take our code and push out binaries. Can someone explain to me what the problem is here? We should be encouraging the work that Michal is doing, celebrating it, tweeting it, and encouraging everyone and their grandmothers to try out this new build. What am I missing? -- Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [NOTICE] Windows build machine setted up
On Aug 7, 2015 12:04 PM, Marcus marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Maybe Jan was afraid that a new version could come into the public too early, others can see it as new release - and then the problem is just starting: we have to deny this, discussions here and there, and nobody wants to have this mess. I would think we would welcome the publicity. However, all the problems can be easily solved with coordination and communication (e.g., offering binaries only from Apache infra systems like people@a.o, agreeing on file nameing to differentiate clearly from release builds, etc.). Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: 4.1.2_release_blocker requested: [Issue 126447] When using LanguageTools, toggling the checkbox check grammar in the spell checker removes content
@Andrea: As it is in your area to finally decide on issues for 4.1.2, what do you think? Thanks Marcus Am 08/06/2015 01:20 PM, schrieb bugzi...@apache.org: Marcusmar...@apache.org has asked for 4.1.2_release_blocker: Issue 126447: When using LanguageTools, toggling the checkbox check grammar in the spell checker removes content https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126447 --- Comment #1 from Marcusmar...@apache.org --- @Stefan: Thanks for the patch. Seems to be an easy fix. @All: I suggest to accept this issue and fix for the 4.1.2 release. Reasons: - Preventing data loss - Easy fix - Low risk - Support the work from AOO contributors - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Open office FAQ
On 08/06/2015 07:31 AM, Ivanka Skakun wrote: Hello sirs, First of all, thank you for developing such a useful Software. Very good features and easy in use. Due to my volunteering program I translate tutorials, faq pages into Russian and would be really glad to translate your FAQ page https://www.openoffice.org/faq.html as well. I hope it will help Russian users. Please let me know if it is possible. Regards, Ivanka Hello Ivanka and thanks for your nice offer! You can download the English version of this page from: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/faq.html?revision=1647456view=markup to use for your translation. Once you are done, it is best to file an issue through Bugzilla (https://bz.apache.org/ooo/) and add your translation as an attachment to an issue. If you need help with this part, please ask on this list. The Russian site -- http://www.openoffice.org/ru/ seems to be organized in the new format using our standard website template. We could link your translated FAQ in from the /why area I think. This is not part of our standard template but probably should be. -- MzK “The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.” --Lao Tzu - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [NOTICE] Windows build machine setted up
Am 08/07/2015 05:22 PM, schrieb Rich Bowen: On 08/07/2015 04:00 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 07/08/15 09:50, Michal Hriň wrote: Thanks for providing a binary, but I am a bit concerned that a version is made public, before the PMC have even spoken about being ready to make a release candidate or started voting on a release candidate. Is this coordinated with the release manager for 4.1.2 ? Please do not misunderstand me, I think it is great that work is being done, I am just surprised we are ready to go public with 4.1.2 even as a pre-view. hrin OK. Binary is deleted. This was not coordinated, that was only snapshot .. not release candidate. All in all Linux 32bit builds from AOO410 branch are on buildbots, so everybody can downlaod it, this is not secret. Sorry, that I was excited and want to show it publically. no problem you did a good job and I don't see any problem, you did not publish anything official and just provided a new fresh binary for preview and testing if your build env is working as expected and can be used for a Windows release build. Please continue your tests and keep us informed. I'm would be happy if I don't have to prepare windows builds. I'm finding this conversation perplexing, and, no doubt, I lack some back-story. Surely it's wonderful that someone is producing binaries for folks to try out, right? Why would we want them to be deleted, and not publicized? absolutely Binaries are not (as has been discussed DOZENS of times) official releases. And anyone is free to take our code and push out binaries. Of course, the official truth is in the source code - this applies also for AOO. But please try to imagine that the AOO users think different. Just a few percent are interested in the source code. But the very most trust in the binaries as nearly no end-user is building from the source code Can someone explain to me what the problem is here? We should be encouraging the work that Michal is doing, celebrating it, tweeting it, and encouraging everyone and their grandmothers to try out this new build. What am I missing? Maybe Jan was afraid that a new version could come into the public too early, others can see it as new release - and then the problem is just starting: we have to deny this, discussions here and there, and nobody wants to have this mess. However, all the problems can be easily solved with coordination and communication (e.g., offering binaries only from Apache infra systems like people@a.o, agreeing on file nameing to differentiate clearly from release builds, etc.). Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Read Only
Since installing Windows 10 all my Open Office files have become “read only” and can not be edited or saved in Documents and my databases seem to be blocked. How can I resolve this problem? Regards/Janet Monk
Re: Read Only
Hi all, I have been a silent reader of all the mails on this list. I have been reading these read only errors in past few days and I wanted to share my experience with windows. When I had windows 8 then every now and then some of my files which were in C drive turned to read only. After that I started using other drives only and the problem subsided. After upgrading that to windows 8.1, again many of my files in C changed to read only. These read only caused some applications to crash when trying to open in write mode without administrator rights. The cure was to change the properties of individual files and give right to current user also. . By all this, I just wanted to make the point that turning files into read only is perhaps an inherent windows problem and not of any other application as AOO. . Regards, Abhinav
Buildbot: buildslave aoo_mac-mini was lost
The Buildbot working for 'ASF Buildbot' has noticed that the buildslave named aoo_mac-mini went away It last disconnected at Sat Aug 8 03:59:25 2015 (buildmaster-local time) The admin on record (as reported by BUILDSLAVE:info/admin) was 'Apache OpenOffice dev@openoffice.apache.org '. Sincerely, The Buildbot http://ci.apache.org/ http://ci.apache.org/buildslaves/aoo_mac-mini - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
