test 4.2.0
Hi there I would be grateful to test version 4.2.0 if you would oblige, as OpenOffice 4.1.8 crashes on my macbook pro running BigSur. Kindly, Nick Gordon New Zealand
Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.9-RC1 as GA
[X] yes / +1 [ ] no / -1 My vote is based on [ ] binding (member of PMC) [X] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [FreeBSD] [ ] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ ] On 18 Jan, Jim Jagielski wrote: > I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community > builds of > Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9-RC1 as GA. > > These artifacts can be found at: > >https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/ > > Please cast your vote: > > The Release Candidate is good for production/GA: > > [ ] yes / +1 > > [ ] no / -1 > > My vote is based on > > [ ] binding (member of PMC) > > [ ] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [ ] > > [ ] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ ] > > This vote will be open for 96hrs instead of the normal 72hrs to > accommodate the US Holiday. > - > 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: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.9-RC1 as GA
Bruce: Check the below message out. There is a link, below. Install OpenOffice, best is next to your regular install. Test then all features important to you and report back. All the Best Peter On 18.01.21 14:47, Jim Jagielski wrote: I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community builds of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9-RC1 as GA. These artifacts can be found at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/ Please cast your vote: The Release Candidate is good for production/GA: [ ] yes / +1 [ ] no / -1 My vote is based on [ ] binding (member of PMC) [ ] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [ ] [ ] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ ] This vote will be open for 96hrs instead of the normal 72hrs to accommodate the US Holiday. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- This is the Way! http://www.apache.org/theapacheway/index.html - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Request for Bugzilla karma
On 18.01.21 21:24, Arrigo Marchiori wrote: I am subscribed with my own e-mail address and I would like to assign bug 128424 to myself. Is it possible to keep iss...@openoffice.apache.org in the loop? I keep my overview of bugzilla through that mailinglist. If you just assig the issue to you I think we will not receive any notifications, and at least for me who does work on having an overview, the issue drops out of my scope. I am also fine if there is some sort of notification where the Issue is now. All the Best Peter -- This is the Way! http://www.apache.org/theapacheway/index.html - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: OS2 code
On 19.01.21 01:05, Steve Lubbs wrote: Hi Michael, Comments inline in red. On 1/18/21 2:03 AM, Dr. Michael Stehmann wrote: Hi, I think we have to differ between responsibility and merit and support. To my mind responsibility implies support. Support implies ongoing coding, testing, and bug fixing efforts involving not only the code but the build process. The Project does accept bug reports. And Code testing and bug fixing is done by bitworks. On the webpage we IMO have to clarify we are not responsible for the OS/2 port and the merits belong to others. I think that those points are made pretty well at the top of the page. But clarification is always good. IMHO the page honors none Apache Groups in their work, as we honor committers and volunteers. We just do not make a big fuzz of it to mention it all the time. So we have it for those who care. This is my personal interpretation and it differs from the other views. Which imho makes no view invalid. But in our code we IMO should do what is in our potentials to support such a port. An argument can be made that to support implies, at a minimum, maintenance effort, as described above, on the part of the AOO project. As I understand it there has been no maintenance effort on the part of the AOO project for some time. Without any maintenance effort the code will inevitably become stale, including the build. Unfortunately the only way to determine this is to build it and test it which brings us back to some level of maintenance. All this points are addressed much better for OS/2 then our Windows code. I do not understand why OS/2 is such a fuzz to you, despite of lets say other OS ports which we still have code in our stomach and no one would thing of removing. So please keep the OS/2 code as far as it is usefull. Removing the OS2 code from future versions is not the same as making it unavailable. It will continue to be available in earlier versions. This can be elucidated on the porting page. Besides the points I've already made, keeping the OS2 code in the repository is confusing, especially to those new to the project as I am. I'm in the process of reverse engineering and documenting the design of the concurrency and threading in AOO so as to help myself and, in some small way those who follow, to understand the design of AOO. Believing OS2 to be currently supported I wasted time going down that rabbit hole. It was only when I happened to read the porting page that I realized that my efforts WRT OS2 were not warranted. If it happened to me it's bound to happen to others. :-\ We have a lot more confusing stuff then the OS/2 code. The first confusing thing is the multiple string implementations, which we still feature. :( For me the OS/2 Code has been never a real problem. I rather liked to look at the different implementations. And once I understood how the OS Code is separated, it is not a big deal anymore. And if there is a platform specific differentiation on higher levels of OpenOffice, we should look at that code and move it on lower levels if possible. Ideally only a handful of modules are platform dependent. The question I'm asking is, given the lack of responsibility and/or support by the AOO project for the OS2 code and the fact that we can easily inform anyone who is or will be involved in porting to OS2 (or any other formerly supported platforms) where the no longer supported code may be found, should we clean up the code base by removing the unsupported code from future versions? But the code is supported? I have a hard time to understand why this is an issue to you. Maybe it is that there is a Fuzziness on who is the Project? Who releases the Community binary version? Who releases the binary OS/2 Version and Who releases the Source Code? It is all a bit mixed or separated in a strange way. Really this hole stuff matters only when we look upon releases. In all other questions it does not play a role. I wonder if, after the discussion is concluded there should be a(n) (in)formal policy or guidance for the future. The Policy guidance is Community over code. This is the way ;) All the best Peter -- This is the Way! http://www.apache.org/theapacheway/index.html - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] add an unsubscribe/help footer to recruitment ML
On 1/17/21 3:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: On 10/01/2021 Peter Kovacs wrote: On 10.01.21 23:42, Andrea Pescetti wrote: But we should also be more proactive and remove people when they ask for it on the list: Whimsy https://whimsy.apache.org/ ... The moderators are Patricia, Andrea and Marcus. I confirm that indeed I use Whimsy to help people unsubscribe the recruitment list when their intention is clear and when they are confused about how to do it. I hope the new footer will help limit these cases. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org So should I go ahead with this if we are renaming the list? I don't to create work for infra if it's not needed. Thanks, Carl - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: OS2 code
Hi Michael, Comments inline in red. On 1/18/21 2:03 AM, Dr. Michael Stehmann wrote: Hi, I think we have to differ between responsibility and merit and support. To my mind responsibility implies support. Support implies ongoing coding, testing, and bug fixing efforts involving not only the code but the build process. On the webpage we IMO have to clarify we are not responsible for the OS/2 port and the merits belong to others. I think that those points are made pretty well at the top of the page. But clarification is always good. But in our code we IMO should do what is in our potentials to support such a port. An argument can be made that to support implies, at a minimum, maintenance effort, as described above, on the part of the AOO project. As I understand it there has been no maintenance effort on the part of the AOO project for some time. Without any maintenance effort the code will inevitably become stale, including the build. Unfortunately the only way to determine this is to build it and test it which brings us back to some level of maintenance. So please keep the OS/2 code as far as it is usefull. Removing the OS2 code from future versions is not the same as making it unavailable. It will continue to be available in earlier versions. This can be elucidated on the porting page. Besides the points I've already made, keeping the OS2 code in the repository is confusing, especially to those new to the project as I am. I'm in the process of reverse engineering and documenting the design of the concurrency and threading in AOO so as to help myself and, in some small way those who follow, to understand the design of AOO. Believing OS2 to be currently supported I wasted time going down that rabbit hole. It was only when I happened to read the porting page that I realized that my efforts WRT OS2 were not warranted. If it happened to me it's bound to happen to others. :-\ The question I'm asking is, given the lack of responsibility and/or support by the AOO project for the OS2 code and the fact that we can easily inform anyone who is or will be involved in porting to OS2 (or any other formerly supported platforms) where the no longer supported code may be found, should we clean up the code base by removing the unsupported code from future versions? I wonder if, after the discussion is concluded there should be a(n) (in)formal policy or guidance for the future. Good discussion. Steve Kind regards Michael
Re: Request for Bugzilla karma
Am 18.01.21 um 21:24 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori: could I please get permission to do a bit of Bugzilla administration? I am subscribed with my own e-mail address and I would like to assign bug 128424 to myself. if added to the following BZ groups: - canconfirm: Can confirm a bug or mark it a duplicate - editbugs: Can edit all bug fields - qa-team: Members of the AOO QA team This should give you full access about BZ issues. If possible, the version tag 4.1.9 should also be added. The "Target Milestone" can already be set to 4.1.9. However, the tag for "Version" and "Last Confirmation in" is needed (and actually) created when the release is published. Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: OS2 code
Am 18.01.21 um 18:42 schrieb Matthias Seidel: Am 18.01.21 um 18:33 schrieb Marcus: Am 18.01.21 um 04:01 schrieb Steve Lubbs: To begin with the use of the phrase "third-party port" in this context indicates to me that a coding/testing activity is required to support the target of the port which is not being done by the AOO project. Here are the statements on the page (that may need to be modified) that indicate to me that the AOO project does not currently support OS2. Bolded, underlined, and in red. [...] interesting, I've never thought that the level of support needs a more detailed explaination. I'll think about the suggested changes and would do it in a few days or next weekend. Maybe the wording of the page can be enhanced, but we should *never* delete a single line of code that is helpful for others to build OpenOffice on their preferred platform. I don't know if this is a direct answer to my mail. So, just to avoid any misunderstanding. Of course nobody will delete code for a platform without discussing this first on dev@. The root course is a wrong impression of the website text. And only here a fix will be done. Marcus On 1/10/21 7:29 AM, Marcus wrote: Steve, when you think that the text on [1] leads to the impression that AOO for OS/2 is dead maybe something with the wording is wrong. So, please let us rethink to update the webpage to eleminate this impression. [1] https://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html Am 10.01.21 um 01:25 schrieb Steve Lubbs: Thanks for correcting me. :-[ On 1/9/21 3:43 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote: Where did you get the idea from? ;-) AOO 4.1.8 is released for OS/2 and OS/2 based systems: https://www.bitwiseworks.com/products/ports.php#AOO I am running it in a VM on ArcaOS 5. https://www.arcanoae.com/ Am 09.01.21 um 23:40 schrieb Steve Lubbs: According to this page, https://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html, OS2 is no longer supported. Isn't it time we remove the OS2-specific code from the code base? BTW, OS2 was my favorite OS back in the day. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Request for Bugzilla karma
Dear dev@ list, could I please get permission to do a bit of Bugzilla administration? I am subscribed with my own e-mail address and I would like to assign bug 128424 to myself. If possible, the version tag 4.1.9 should also be added. Thank you in advance, -- Arrigo http://rigo.altervista.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: OS2 code
Hi, Am 18.01.21 um 18:33 schrieb Marcus: > Am 18.01.21 um 04:01 schrieb Steve Lubbs: >> To begin with the use of the phrase "third-party port" in this >> context indicates to me that a coding/testing activity is required to >> support the target of the port which is not being done by the AOO >> project. >> >> Here are the statements on the page (that may need to be modified) >> that indicate to me that the AOO project does not currently support >> OS2. Bolded, underlined, and in red. >> >> [...] > > interesting, I've never thought that the level of support needs a more > detailed explaination. > > I'll think about the suggested changes and would do it in a few days > or next weekend. OS/2 code is part of our official source. So is FreeBSD code... And despite not having a release for ARM chips it is part of our code base. Maybe the wording of the page can be enhanced, but we should *never* delete a single line of code that is helpful for others to build OpenOffice on their preferred platform. In fact this may be the main difference to "other" office suites, that are only driven by commercial interest. Matthias > > Thanks for your suggestions. > > Marcus > > > >> On 1/10/21 7:29 AM, Marcus wrote: >>> Steve, when you think that the text on [1] leads to the impression >>> that AOO for OS/2 is dead maybe something with the wording is wrong. >>> >>> So, please let us rethink to update the webpage to eleminate this >>> impression. >>> >>> [1] https://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html >>> >>> Am 10.01.21 um 01:25 schrieb Steve Lubbs: Thanks for correcting me. :-[ On 1/9/21 3:43 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote: > Where did you get the idea from? ;-) > > AOO 4.1.8 is released for OS/2 and OS/2 based systems: > > https://www.bitwiseworks.com/products/ports.php#AOO > > I am running it in a VM on ArcaOS 5. > > https://www.arcanoae.com/ > > Am 09.01.21 um 23:40 schrieb Steve Lubbs: >> According to this page, >> https://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html, >> OS2 is no longer supported. Isn't it time we remove the OS2-specific >> code from the code base? BTW, OS2 was my favorite OS back in the >> day. > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: OS2 code
Am 18.01.21 um 04:01 schrieb Steve Lubbs: To begin with the use of the phrase "third-party port" in this context indicates to me that a coding/testing activity is required to support the target of the port which is not being done by the AOO project. Here are the statements on the page (that may need to be modified) that indicate to me that the AOO project does not currently support OS2. Bolded, underlined, and in red. [...] interesting, I've never thought that the level of support needs a more detailed explaination. I'll think about the suggested changes and would do it in a few days or next weekend. Thanks for your suggestions. Marcus On 1/10/21 7:29 AM, Marcus wrote: Steve, when you think that the text on [1] leads to the impression that AOO for OS/2 is dead maybe something with the wording is wrong. So, please let us rethink to update the webpage to eleminate this impression. [1] https://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html Am 10.01.21 um 01:25 schrieb Steve Lubbs: Thanks for correcting me. :-[ On 1/9/21 3:43 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote: Where did you get the idea from? ;-) AOO 4.1.8 is released for OS/2 and OS/2 based systems: https://www.bitwiseworks.com/products/ports.php#AOO I am running it in a VM on ArcaOS 5. https://www.arcanoae.com/ Am 09.01.21 um 23:40 schrieb Steve Lubbs: According to this page, https://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html, OS2 is no longer supported. Isn't it time we remove the OS2-specific code from the code base? BTW, OS2 was my favorite OS back in the day. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Testing program
I’m running a new iMac under the Big Sur operating system. I’d be happy to participate in the testing program. Bruce Titus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
[VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.9-RC1 as GA
I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community builds of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9-RC1 as GA. These artifacts can be found at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/ Please cast your vote: The Release Candidate is good for production/GA: [ ] yes / +1 [ ] no / -1 My vote is based on [ ] binding (member of PMC) [ ] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [ ] [ ] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ ] This vote will be open for 96hrs instead of the normal 72hrs to accommodate the US Holiday. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
[GitHub] [openoffice-project] DiGro commented on pull request #1: Typo corrected
DiGro commented on pull request #1: URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice-project/pull/1#issuecomment-762174709 @Pilot-Pirx, Matthias, I'm still struggling with Git. Didn't get the change merged. Dave has however made the change for me, so all is well This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: OS2 code
Hi, I think we have to differ between responsibility and merit and support. On the webpage we IMO have to clarify we are not responsible for the OS/2 port and the merits belong to others. But in our code we IMO should do what is in our potentials to support such a port. So please keep the OS/2 code as far as it is usefull. Kind regards Michael OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
