Re: [DEVTOOLS] [PROPOSAL] branch Netbeans plugin for 3.0 and begin 4.0 trunk
Hi Juergen, On 04/14/2013 01:32 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote: Hi Carl, Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013 um 19:23 schrieb Carl Marcum: On 02/10/2013 04:11 PM, Carl Marcum wrote: On 02/10/2013 02:50 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote: Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013 um 19:04 schrieb Carl Marcum: Hi all, I would like to branch NB integration plugin for 3.0 and start modifying trunk for AOO 4.0 compatibility. I would like to also tag current version as 3.0.1 at the same time. Trunk would become version 4.0 to maintain major version number the same as AOO. If there are no objections to the above proposal within 72-hours then I will invoke Lazy Consensus and proceed to implement the above proposal. You can if course create a branch but I don't see the demand for it. You can continue the development towards 4.0 on trunk. I don't see many activity here and a branch is not really necessary from my pov. Juergen Best regards, Carl I agree. we can always create a branch based on a revision number later if needed. I thought about it more and since the next changes will be incompatible with AOO 3.4 I tagged a 3.0.2 version and created a 3.0 branch to make it easier if someone needs to make changes for 3.4 compatible plugins. I agree now and with my upcoming 3layer removal there will be some work to do in the plugin. It mainly that places of jars, tools, libs have changed. Juergen Is this something that will be implemented in AOO 4 release? Thanks, Carl - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DEVTOOLS] [PROPOSAL] branch Netbeans plugin for 3.0 and begin 4.0 trunk
Hi Jan, On 04/14/2013 02:58 PM, janI wrote: On 14 April 2013 20:25, Carl Marcum cmar...@apache.org wrote: Hi Juergen, On 04/14/2013 01:32 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote: Hi Carl, Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013 um 19:23 schrieb Carl Marcum: On 02/10/2013 04:11 PM, Carl Marcum wrote: On 02/10/2013 02:50 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote: Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013 um 19:04 schrieb Carl Marcum: Hi all, I would like to branch NB integration plugin for 3.0 and start modifying trunk for AOO 4.0 compatibility. I would like to also tag current version as 3.0.1 at the same time. Trunk would become version 4.0 to maintain major version number the same as AOO. If there are no objections to the above proposal within 72-hours then I will invoke Lazy Consensus and proceed to implement the above proposal. You can if course create a branch but I don't see the demand for it. You can continue the development towards 4.0 on trunk. I don't see many activity here and a branch is not really necessary from my pov. Juergen Best regards, Carl I agree. we can always create a branch based on a revision number later if needed. I thought about it more and since the next changes will be incompatible with AOO 3.4 I tagged a 3.0.2 version and created a 3.0 branch to make it easier if someone needs to make changes for 3.4 compatible plugins. I agree now and with my upcoming 3layer removal there will be some work to do in the plugin. It mainly that places of jars, tools, libs have changed. Juergen Is this something that will be implemented in AOO 4 release? How come it is a 3.0 branch ?? that sounds old to me, shouldnt it be 3.4.1x branch ? The Netbeans plugin versions didn't historically coincide with the OOo version numbers (that I know of). When the code came to Apache it was version 2.0.7 and I tagged that version and started work to make it run on Netbeans 6.9 which was Netbeans 7.0 api changes. That's when I changed it to 3.0. Some additional localization work took it to 3.0.2. I'm not sure what the best solution to version numbering other than to do a major number change when it's not compatible with AOO or NB and keep a compatibility table somewhere. I do agree with the principle in having a branch. We have however to make it clear to developers, that when using that branch their code will not avalible with 4.0. I agree, that's why I hope everyone continues to do work on trunk and we only merge changes if needed for some reason. But we have a well established break point. rgds jan I. Best regards, Carl - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
missing commit log
can I append a missing commit log? I committed r1446039 on command line okay, but r1446040and r1446041 using netbeans I missed the message: Added IT localization files Patch by: Fabrizio Marchesano fmarches...@gmail.com Review by: GianAngelo Cencio gacen...@gmail.com Thanks, Carl
Re: [DEVTOOLS] [PROPOSAL] branch Netbeans plugin for 3.0 and begin 4.0 trunk
On 02/10/2013 02:50 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote: Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013 um 19:04 schrieb Carl Marcum: Hi all, I would like to branch NB integration plugin for 3.0 and start modifying trunk for AOO 4.0 compatibility. I would like to also tag current version as 3.0.1 at the same time. Trunk would become version 4.0 to maintain major version number the same as AOO. If there are no objections to the above proposal within 72-hours then I will invoke Lazy Consensus and proceed to implement the above proposal. You can if course create a branch but I don't see the demand for it. You can continue the development towards 4.0 on trunk. I don't see many activity here and a branch is not really necessary from my pov. Juergen Best regards, Carl I agree. we can always create a branch based on a revision number later if needed. Thanks, Carl
Re: error in sdk
On 02/05/2013 10:30 PM, jdaniel.alvaro wrote: Hello team, I want to do a project in netbeans 7.2.1 with add-in but I have a problem, when to do finish the project a window says this: http://imagebin.org/245615 do you know why this happens? I already installed the new version of the SDK and and still I have this error. I'm working in windows. Regards, Daniel Alvaro Daniel, Can you provide more information about your environment. I see netbeans is 7.2.1. Is AOO and SDK 3.4.1? And what version of windows and 32 or 64 bit. Type and version of Java and 32 or 64 bit. It's been a very long time since I used the SDK on Windows but I seem to remember having trouble unless I used 32 bit Java for OpenOffice and Netbeans even on 64 bit Windows. Thanks, Carl
Re: first look at a scrolling News column...
On 12/31/2012 06:06 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: Well, I have finally put up a mockup of what a scrolling News column on our home page would look like. This is in the test area on staging at the moment. http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/test/ This required editing changes to the index page and a minor styling change for the home.css styles along with using an ssi for the news instead of two areas. For this mockup, I did take out a LOT of old news. Anyway, see what you think. I find the scroll bars a bit ugly but we may be able to pretty them up somehow. This will save the hassle we currently do with the News items however. +1 I like it. Thanks for work. Carl
Re: [PROPOSAL] New Apache OpenOffice 4 logo proposals...
On 12/26/2012 11:07 PM, Michael Acevedo wrote: Greetings to all in the mailing list and those in this AOO Logo Proposal subject, In this email, I would like to mention that I have added two new logo proposals to the Apache OpenOffice Logo exploration wiki article. Now let me explain what this new logo it's all about. The new logo design does away with the orb and changes it for a gull ring that rests under a blue background which itself rests on circles which are inspired on the Adobe Flex logo multicolor scheme. The new gull ring while being new, retains the familiar circular shape of the current OpenOffice logo, but at the same time is a new take that pays respect to the orb. All of these elements are wrapped in a modern black gradient icon than makes the logo stand out. Furthermore, the new logo actually changes the look of the word OpenOffice into a more modern non-capitalized openoffice word design (also an inspiration from the Adobe Flex project logo). The latter serves the function of highlighting Apache as the owner of the project (whose name is in capital letters), yet the non-capitalized openoffice names takes presence by being written in a larger size font. Overall, the new logo design is simple, clean, and modern. Now that I have given a sense of the new logo, I would like to show you a reveal video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AC-tOuhTm9Y But there is one last detail, which actually is a testament to the power of OpenOffice. The detail is that the logo that you see at the end of the video was 99% made in Apache OpenOffice Draw. Hope you liked the logo and the reveal video. Happy Holidays! You can see the formal proposal in the Cwiki at Apache: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.x+-+Logo+Explorations On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 11:20 PM, Michael Acevedo vea1...@gmail.com wrote: Greetings Kevin, I would not mind posting the logos to that AOO UX wiki. Thing is I don't know where it is or whether it is on the cwiki or mwiki (if it is on the latter, I need to request an account). Let me know. On Saturday, December 22, 2012, Kevin Grignon wrote: Michael, Great work. Design is very iterative. Keep pushing! Using the design explorations is a great way to stimulate a conversation which can help us better understand the requirements. Perhaps we could harvest the criteria for success in the thread and capture in the wiki Then we can make the design review process less subjective by having people review design explorations relative to stated goals. Also, the mailing list is tough place to review designs, can you post the design explorations to the AOO UX wiki? Regards, Kevin On Dec 23, 2012, at 10:56 AM, Michael Acevedo vea1...@gmail.com wrote: I think I've come up with something that is simplistic on the eye but beautiful an lively. Still working on it but stay tuned. On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 10:43 PM, Michael Acevedo vea1...@gmail.com wrote: RGB, I see the ring as something different. The blue to me represents the open blue sky, and the ring around it as a frame to an opening of an open world. On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 8:16 AM, RGB ES rgb.m...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/12/22 janI j...@apache.org I am no designer, but I have tried to make a suggestion to better explain what I mean. The current proposals all have squares / circles etc. and apart from the original similarity with windows8 that has a special signal value. A surface (square/circle etc) especially with a border, signal: - limitation or positive a product that fullfills a single purpose - closeness or positive a product the specialize in one function AOO is in my mind much more, we are open at levels where normal products can only dream to go: - AOO is used in nearly every corner of the earth. - AOO is open for translation to no matter how small a language group - AOO is open for developers who want to hack their own specialized versions - AOO is open for repackaging supplying the core of a wider extented product. I could go on. I think it is important that our logo signals this freedom and openess after all we are OPEN office. +1. The ring around the orb give the idea of boundaries, limits, and we are trying to go beyond every limit ;) I know my design is not professional, it is NOT meant to be so please dont judge it on that. It is simply a thought out of the box, and hopefully it can trigger some ideas. You can see my proposal here: http://people.apache.org/~jani/aoo.png I like the idea. No sure if it fits well on a page header, but definitely is a good idea for announcements, t-shirts and a lot of other situations where a big logo is needed. Regards Ricardo Have a nice christmas, whereever you are in the world. Jan I. On 21 December 2012 20:56, Michael Acevedo vea1...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the links with logos Armin, I will examine them shortly... Have a good afternoon... On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Armin Le Grand
Re: Wish List Item - Compatibility with SolidWorks
Hi Al, As another in the M.E.field and a user of SolidWorks I would like this as well. However, I don't see that progressing far until Dassault is looking for alternatives. Dassault and Microsoft are large partners and as this quote from Dassault: “Microsoft technologies are at the foundation of everything we do. can be found on a Microsoft/Dassult partner page. http://www.microsoft.com/enterprise/partners/dassault.aspx#fbid=FEwAECyPuBb It's not just Excel, it's IE and Windows only also. Best regards, Carl On 11/24/2012 10:57 AM, Al Burbeck wrote: Greetings! Open Office has been a standard for me for a long time. My thanks to all who have contributed in one way or another. I ply my trade as a consulting mechanical engineer to a diverse list of manufacturers and create all of my design work in SolidWorks. Part parcel with my work are Bills of Materials, Weldment Cut lists, Table of Contents, and other custom spreadsheets I have developed. My clients have no issue with the Open Office document formats I use, and in some cases have moved their organizations solely to Open Office. The challenge for me is I cannot directly import Open Office documents into SolidWorks (any version. I use SolidWorks 2010 and 2012). It is necessary to convert to MS Office formats, as that is the only format SolidWorks accepts. While I can also convert to PDF and paste, there are the typical burdensome steps when document changes are required. I do the usual work-arounds, but it's a pain to constantly have to go through the routines. Same with MS Office files. How about getting with SolidWorks and get yourselves in their game? I am quite sure there are many, many others that would also appreciate the compatability. Or, if you have solution, please give me a heads-up. Best Regards, Al
