SOURCEFORGE [Was: téléchargement version 4.1.2]

[Dave Barton]

 Original Message  
From: Philippe Roig
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 13:25:35 +0100

> Bonjour,
> 
> Je possède un ordinateur avec Windows 10.
> 
> J’ai voulu télécharger la nouvelle mise à jour 4.1.2 mais pendant
> l’installation le téléchargement m’a imposé d’installer vidéo
> converter sans possibilité de refuser j’ai finalement accepté mais le
> téléchargement de cette application se plante et l’installation
> s’arrête.
> 
> En conclusion je ne peux pas installer la nouvelle mise à jour à
> cause de l’imposition de vidéo converter.
> 
> Cordialement
> 
> Philippe Roig

The English translation of Philippe's message is:
===
Hello,
I have a computer with Windows 10.
I wanted to download the new update 4.1.2 but during installation
download directs me to install video converter, without the possibility
of refusing I finally agreed, but downloading this application crashes
and installation stops.
Consequently I can not install the new update due to the imposition of
video converter.
Best regards
Philippe Roig
===

Is it not time to _*SERIOUSLY*_ review the distribution of our binaries
via SourceForge?

Rory O'Farrell and others dutifully expend their valuable time advising
"unaware" users NOT to click on download links and buttons after they
are redirected to the SourceForge mirror page. While commendable, this
is a "shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted" approach.

No matter what efforts SourceForge make to "weed out" fraudulent and
malware links, our mailing lists and forums continue to receive a steady
stream of download problem messages from "unaware" users.

There is no way to prove this discourages individuals and organizations
from using AOO software, but continuously published reports of AOO
distributing "unwanted" and/or "malware" programs reflects badly on us
and by association the ASF.

I have no personal "gripe" against SourceForge and Roberto Galoppini's
support in this area is invaluable. However, I do not understand, or
find any reasonable explanation, why our download page does not redirect
to the ASF's own mirror network:
https://www.apache.org/mirrors/
where our binaries are already being served by 200+ mirrors around the
world.

Dave




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

Re: RE : téléchargement version 4.1.2

[Rory O'Farrell]

On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 14:04:57 +0100
Philippe Roig  wrote:

> Sorry, I used the link you provided me and I have exactly the same problem 
> which is necessary with free video converter I had also previously downloaded 
> the update from your official website. Thank you to check and test your 
> download because it does not work Best regards
> Provenance : Courrier pour Windows 10

I have just now verified the link I gave you.  For me it downloads a standard 
OpenOffice (I tested for both English-UK and French versions). When the 
SourceForge site opens there is a broad grey band at the top which says 
"Apache OpenOffice
Download of openofficeorg.mirror will start in 5 seconds...".  
This counts down and the download starts automatically when it reaches 0.  
There may be other links below this grey band, offering OpenOffice and/or other 
programs. It is not necessary to (read: do not) click on these.

RoryOF

 > 
> 
> De : Rory O'Farrell
> Envoyé le :samedi 21 novembre 2015 13:41
> À : us...@openoffice.apache.org
> Cc : Philippe Roig
> Objet :Re: téléchargement version 4.1.2
> 
> 
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 13:25:35 +0100
> Philippe Roig  wrote:
> 
> > Bonjour,
> > 
> > Je possède un ordinateur avec Windows 10.
> > 
> > J’ai voulu télécharger la nouvelle mise à jour 4.1.2 mais pendant 
> > l’installation le téléchargement m’a imposé d’installer vidéo converter 
> > sans possibilité de refuser j’ai finalement accepté mais le téléchargement 
> > de cette application se plante et l’installation s’arrête.
> > 
> > En conclusion je ne peux pas installer la nouvelle mise à jour à cause de 
> > l’imposition de vidéo converter.
> > 
> > Cordialement 
> > 
> > Philippe Roig
> > 
> 
> OpenOffice should be downloaded _only_ from
> http://www.openoffice.org/download
> 
> This site will redirect you to a SourceForge site and your download will 
> start in about five seconds with no need to click on anything else (Do NOT 
> click on anything else).
> 
> One can verify that the downloaded file is as it left the code factory by the 
> methods described in
> Apache OpenOffice - How to verify the integrity of the downloaded file?
> 
> As OO is opensource, many sites manipulate search engines so that they come 
> high on the hit list, and compile OO with unwanted add-ons or charge for it 
> with spurious offers of support.
> 
> We recommend downloading only from the above site.
> 
> Automatic translation:
> 
> OpenOffice devrait être téléchargée qu'à partir de
> http://www.openoffice.org/download
> 
> Ce site vous rediriger vers un site SourceForge et votre téléchargement va 
> commencer dans environ cinq secondes sans avoir besoin de cliquer sur quoi 
> que ce soit d'autre (Ne cliquez pas sur quoi que ce soit d'autre).
> 
> On peut vérifier que le fichier téléchargé est comme il a quitté l'usine de 
> code par les méthodes décrites dans
> Apache OpenOffice - Comment vérifier l'intégrité du fichier téléchargé?
> 
> Comme OO est opensource, de nombreux sites de manipuler les moteurs de 
> recherche afin qu'ils viennent en tête de liste de succès, et compilent OO 
> avec add-ons ou responsable indésirables pour elle avec offres fallacieuses 
> de soutien.
> 
> Nous vous recommandons de télécharger à partir du site ci-dessus.
> 
> -- 
> Rory O'Farrell 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le 
> logiciel antivirus Avast.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus


-- 
Rory O'Farrell 

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

[ISSUE DISCUSSIONS] (was RE: Proposed Calc "Find & Replace" dialog enhancements)

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

I don't understand this.

Issues are a place to provide a tracked account for something being worked on 
with regard to defects, and that includes usability matters and even 
determination of what the defect is, if any.  It is the only place where there 
is a single URL and a mailing-list account that fits typical Apache processes.

I think discussions of these matters on forums is great.  I would prefer there 
to be stronger bidirectional coupling and easy ways for people to follow links 
to specific places on the different services.  So if something starts out on 
Bugzilla, and there is a Forum discussion that goes with it or is started from 
it, they should be coupled.

My concern is that discussions are disconnected from the developers who have to 
decide on what and how action is to be taken, the users who report/analyze 
defect reports, and forum threads which may have satisfying conclusions and 
simply stop there.  I am all for greater inclusion.  Let's keep the multiple 
places where the same subject arises connected.

I don't recall the forums being given the prominence that is suggested here.  
Should we put FAQ messages on dev@ and users@ describing the desired practice, 
say monthly?   I assume blogs are not meant as part of this but as other ways 
of informing the public about something.

 - Dennis

> -Original Message-
> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 15:03
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Proposed Calc "Find & Replace" dialog enhancements
> 
> On 16/11/2015 Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> > One or more issues should be opened on Bugzilla as well, with cross-
> linking to the Forum thread(s).
> > That's important as a matter of governance.  The Forum threads are not
> fully part of the governance and accountability structure of the
> project.
> 
> The discussion is brought to the Forum as an initial, open, free,
> discussion, to gather feedback from users. Decision-making is done on
> lists but here we are in a "discovery" phase where we simply ask people
> for feedback, and the right channels for this are the blog and the
> forum, places where we reach our end-users.
> 
> Then, in a normal workflow, a proposal should be brought to the dev list
> to verify consensus, and issues opened on Bugzilla to track development.
[orcmid] 
That's my problem.  I'm concerned about "verifying consensus" where 
deliberations are elsewhere.
> 
> That said, I for one value end result more than the process, so I won't
> insist on where we should take the various steps; but it's sad to see
> that nothing gets ever posted to the blog, even though we would have
> materials for posts.
[orcmid] 
The AOO blog is not exactly an easy thing to create articles for.  It is 
definitely not a place for discussion, unless we more-actively moderate 
comments.  


> 
> 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: SOURCEFORGE [Was: téléchargement version 4.1.2]

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

[not cross-posting]

SourceForge is valuable to the project for providing the mirror capacity that 
AOO requires.  The penalty is in regard to user distrust and these awful 
situations that the list and Forum folks have to contend with.  As far as our 
users are concerned, it is the AOO project that is unreliable and has them need 
to be so cautious.

Of course SourceForge relies on advertising revenue to offset their costs.  
That is to be expected.  The problem is the confusion, not the advertising.  We 
must work with SourceForge to avoid the confusion with regard to ad placement 
and prominence. 

Andrea has pointed out separately that the alternative mirror system may not be 
workable if even available for the demands that AOO downloads represent.

 - Dennis

> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Barton [mailto:d...@tasit.net]
> Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2015 07:09
> To: Apache OpenOffice Users 
> Cc: Apache OpenOffice Developer 
> Subject: SOURCEFORGE [Was: téléchargement version 4.1.2]
[ ... ]
> 
> Is it not time to _*SERIOUSLY*_ review the distribution of our binaries
> via SourceForge?
> 
> Rory O'Farrell and others dutifully expend their valuable time advising
> "unaware" users NOT to click on download links and buttons after they
> are redirected to the SourceForge mirror page. While commendable, this
> is a "shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted" approach.
> 
> No matter what efforts SourceForge make to "weed out" fraudulent and
> malware links, our mailing lists and forums continue to receive a steady
> stream of download problem messages from "unaware" users.
> 
> There is no way to prove this discourages individuals and organizations
> from using AOO software, but continuously published reports of AOO
> distributing "unwanted" and/or "malware" programs reflects badly on us
> and by association the ASF.
> 
> I have no personal "gripe" against SourceForge and Roberto Galoppini's
> support in this area is invaluable. However, I do not understand, or
> find any reasonable explanation, why our download page does not redirect
> to the ASF's own mirror network:
> https://www.apache.org/mirrors/
> where our binaries are already being served by 200+ mirrors around the
> world.
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -
> 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: SOURCEFORGE [Was: téléchargement version 4.1.2]

[Andrea Pescetti]

Dave Barton wrote:

I do not understand, or
find any reasonable explanation, why our download page does not redirect
to the ASF's own mirror network:
https://www.apache.org/mirrors/
where our binaries are already being served by 200+ mirrors around the
world.


Leaving all the SourceForge discussion aside, one reasonable explanation 
for this last question is that the vast majority of Apache mirrors do 
NOT mirror OpenOffice: those who do are a minority. I've just tried with 
the Italian mirrors and only 2 out of 7 offer OpenOffice. Load balancers 
are broken by this incomplete mirroring: even if you try to download the 
source package http://openoffice.apache.org/downloads.html you often 
have to try multiple mirrors before getting one that works.


In short, the ASF mirror network is not nearly as complete and reliable 
as it seems at a first look (besides having other issues such as lack of 
stats and lack of unique download URLs).


Regards,
  Andrea.

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

Want to update some fonts?

[Pedro Giffuni]

Hi guys;

I know Kay has done some fonts updates in the past.
Perhaps you can test this? It's an update to the Google croscore
and dejavu fonts:

https://people.apache.org/~pfg/patches/patch-update-fonts

I think I would like to add Caladea and Carlito next (time permitting)
since they are metrically equivalent with some Microsoft fonts and
would be useful.

Pedro.

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

Re: SOURCEFORGE [Was: téléchargement version 4.1.2]

[Roberto Galoppini]

2015-11-21 19:28 GMT+01:00 Dennis E. Hamilton :

> [not cross-posting]
>
> SourceForge is valuable to the project for providing the mirror capacity
> that AOO requires.  The penalty is in regard to user distrust and these
> awful situations that the list and Forum folks have to contend with.  As
> far as our users are concerned, it is the AOO project that is unreliable
> and has them need to be so cautious.
>
> Of course SourceForge relies on advertising revenue to offset their
> costs.  That is to be expected.  The problem is the confusion, not the
> advertising.  We must work with SourceForge to avoid the confusion with
> regard to ad placement and prominence.
>

With my SourceForge hat on, there are two ways we can jointly work on:

1. Report misleading ads here, following our instructions, see
https://goo.gl/LQFHmE
2. Supporting the Clean Software Alliance guidelines (misleading ads)
https://goo.gl/69XhqW

For #1 I do actively monitor our mailing-list and I make sure SourceForge
removes promptly misleading or unwanted ads.
#2 would actually help to push the whole advertising industry to agree on
more strict guidelines.

It would probably help to contribute feedback to those guidelines, since
those are in a commentary period till the end of the year.

Having been involved in the CSA works I'd be happy to draft a comment if we
intend to do so.

Roberto



>
> Andrea has pointed out separately that the alternative mirror system may
> not be workable if even available for the demands that AOO downloads
> represent.
>
>  - Dennis
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Dave Barton [mailto:d...@tasit.net]
> > Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2015 07:09
> > To: Apache OpenOffice Users 
> > Cc: Apache OpenOffice Developer 
> > Subject: SOURCEFORGE [Was: téléchargement version 4.1.2]
> [ ... ]
> >
> > Is it not time to _*SERIOUSLY*_ review the distribution of our binaries
> > via SourceForge?
> >
> > Rory O'Farrell and others dutifully expend their valuable time advising
> > "unaware" users NOT to click on download links and buttons after they
> > are redirected to the SourceForge mirror page. While commendable, this
> > is a "shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted" approach.
> >
> > No matter what efforts SourceForge make to "weed out" fraudulent and
> > malware links, our mailing lists and forums continue to receive a steady
> > stream of download problem messages from "unaware" users.
> >
> > There is no way to prove this discourages individuals and organizations
> > from using AOO software, but continuously published reports of AOO
> > distributing "unwanted" and/or "malware" programs reflects badly on us
> > and by association the ASF.
> >
> > I have no personal "gripe" against SourceForge and Roberto Galoppini's
> > support in this area is invaluable. However, I do not understand, or
> > find any reasonable explanation, why our download page does not redirect
> > to the ASF's own mirror network:
> > https://www.apache.org/mirrors/
> > where our binaries are already being served by 200+ mirrors around the
> > world.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> > 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
>
>