[tdf-discuss] Re: LibreOffice and Java Security: OpenJDK Vulnerability
On 01/15/2013 10:58 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: Again, thanks to Simon Phipps for retweeting the information. It appears that one should *not* assume that OpenJDK does not share vulnerabilities with the Oracle Java SE and JDK: The log of changes to OpenJDK for the recent vulnerability (just as indication of the Oracle updating of OpenJDK): http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk7u-dev/2013-January/005354.html The CVE: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/alert-cve-2013-0422-1896849.html There is still reporting that this update is not a complete fix. I have not found a reliable technical source that makes clear what the remaining concern is, or if it is simply a lag in reports that have not recognized the latest patches. - Dennis Security releases for OpenJDK and Icedtea were released yesterday (Tues Jan 17). Of course I reckon that it will take awhile for the builds to get pushed to the distro's. http://blog.fuseyism.com/index.php/2013/01/16/security-and-browser-plugins/ http://blog.fuseyism.com/index.php/2013/01/16/security-and-browser-plugins/ -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: LibreOffice and Java Security: OpenJDK Vulnerability
On 01/16/2013 10:36 AM, NoOp wrote: ... Security releases for OpenJDK and Icedtea were released yesterday (Tues Jan 17). Of course I reckon that it will take awhile for the builds to get pushed to the distro's. http://blog.fuseyism.com/index.php/2013/01/16/security-and-browser-plugins/ http://blog.fuseyism.com/index.php/2013/01/16/security-and-browser-plugins/ Sorry, looks like I have URL stutter... here is the correct second URL: http://blog.fuseyism.com/index.php/2013/01/15/security-icedtea-2-1-4-2-2-4-2-3-4-released/ -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: LibreOffice and Java Security:
On 01/12/2013 09:53 PM, Larry Gusaas wrote: On 2013-01-12 9:22 PM lj wrote: Hi all, I am not sure if this is the correct list for this message. I recently read this article about a Java 1.7 Security Problem. The article states The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has recommended that users disable the Java 7 browser plug-in entirely. There have been multiple security vulnerabilities in the browser plug-in over the years and it is best not to enable java in your browser. Does this problem concern LibreOffice and Java??? No. It only affects the browser plug-in. ... I wonder... http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/cpujan2013-1515902.html http://docs.libreoffice.org/ (search on java in that page) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] bugzilla report emails are including HTML
Why are the emailed bug reports also including HTML? Example: From: bugzilla-dae...@freedesktop.org To: ... Subject: [Bug 57873] mork (Thunderbird / Icedove / Seamonkey / ...) multi address books multi profile support Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 00:30:51 + Message-ID: bug-57873-19433-aydaofm...@http.bugs.freedesktop.org/ In-Reply-To: bug-57873-19...@http.bugs.freedesktop.org/ References: bug-57873-19...@http.bugs.freedesktop.org/ Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=1355358651.1aebc430.13127; charset=us-ascii --1355358651.1aebc430.13127 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 00:30:51 + MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57873 and now the html: --1355358651.1aebc430.13127 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 00:30:51 + MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 html head base href=https://bugs.freedesktop.org/; / /head bodyspan class=vcarda class=email href=mailto: -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: user qestions, where should they go now?
On 10/04/2012 06:17 PM, NoOp wrote: ... Sorry for the multiple postings. Sent the first one on 03 Oct. When I didn't see it, I tried again, etc. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: user qestions, where should they go now?
On 10/03/2012 10:10 AM, Terrence Enger wrote: Another usere has stumbled into the development list [1]. Clearly, he needs to be directed elsewhere, but I am unsure where to direct him. The situation w.r.t. forums seems to be in flux, and I am reluctant to send him to a mail list that I not follow myself. Is there a simple answer? File|Export as PDF|under 'General' tick Embed OpenDocument file; Makes this PDF easily editable in LibreOffice|Export See: http://help.libreoffice.org/Common/Export_as_PDF http://help.libreoffice.org/Common/Export_as_PDF#Embed_OpenDocument_file The OP found his/her way to the dev list, so why would you be reluctant to point the poster to the LO user list. Certainly if he/she can find their way to the dev list, they can also find their way to the user list: https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/ https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ us...@global.libreoffice.org: User support list for LibreOffice users needing help with a problem. Subscription: users+subscr...@global.libreoffice.org Digest subscription: users+subscribe-dig...@global.libreoffice.org Archives: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ Mail-Archive.com: http://www.mail-archive.com/users@global.libreoffice.org/ GMANE: http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.libreoffice.user Gary -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: user qestions, where should they go now?
On 10/03/2012 10:10 AM, Terrence Enger wrote: Another usere has stumbled into the development list [1]. Clearly, he needs to be directed elsewhere, but I am unsure where to direct him. The situation w.r.t. forums seems to be in flux, and I am reluctant to send him to a mail list that I not follow myself. Is there a simple answer? ... File|Export as PDF|under 'General' tick Embed OpenDocument file; Makes this PDF easily editable in LibreOffice|Export See: http://help.libreoffice.org/Common/Export_as_PDF http://help.libreoffice.org/Common/Export_as_PDF#Embed_OpenDocument_file The OP found his/her way to the dev list, so why would you be reluctant to point the poster to the LO user list. Certainly if he/she can find their way to the dev list, they can also find their way to the user list: https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/ https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ us...@global.libreoffice.org: User support list for LibreOffice users needing help with a problem. Subscription: users+subscr...@global.libreoffice.org Digest subscription: users+subscribe-dig...@global.libreoffice.org Archives: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ Mail-Archive.com: http://www.mail-archive.com/users@global.libreoffice.org/ GMANE: http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.libreoffice.user -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: user qestions, where should they go now?
On 10/03/2012 10:10 AM, Terrence Enger wrote: Another usere has stumbled into the development list [1]. Clearly, he needs to be directed elsewhere, but I am unsure where to direct him. The situation w.r.t. forums seems to be in flux, and I am reluctant to send him to a mail list that I not follow myself. Is there a simple answer? Yes, and something that you should be aware of also: File|Export as PDF|under 'General' tick Embed OpenDocument file; Makes this PDF eailly editable in LibreOffice|Export http://help.libreoffice.org/Common/Export_as_PDF http://help.libreoffice.org/Common/Export_as_PDF#Embed_OpenDocument_file The OP found his/her way to the dev list, so why would you be reluctant to point the poster to the LO user list. Certainly if he/she can find their way to the dev list, they can also find their way to the user list: https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/ https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ us...@global.libreoffice.org: User support list for LibreOffice users needing help with a problem. Subscription: users+subscr...@global.libreoffice.org Digest subscription: users+subscribe-dig...@global.libreoffice.org Archives: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ Mail-Archive.com: http://www.mail-archive.com/users@global.libreoffice.org/ GMANE: http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.libreoffice.user BTW: perhaps you other devs might want to consider subscribing to the user list... you might find some interesting feedback regarding LO there. Gary Thanks, Terry. References -- [1] http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2012-October/039289.html -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Libre Office Zotero Integration [Proposition of a New Partner?]
On 08/14/2012 05:23 AM, Fabian Rodriguez wrote: On 08/14/2012 05:09 AM, Anthony Easthope wrote: .. * Libreoffice is perfect for use within university's / schools as it can be easily distributed thanks to the GNU license the same goes for Zotero You are referring to the client component. The server is not free, open source. Really?? These might be of interest: http://www.zotero.org/support/dev/source_code https://github.com/zotero/dataserver From the source code: license.txt: quote Zotero Data Server Copyright © 2010 Center for History and New Media George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA http://zotero.org The Center for History and New Media distributes the Zotero Data Server source code under the GNU Affero General Public License, version 3 (AGPLv3). The Zotero name is a registered trademark of George Mason University. See http://zotero.org/trademark for more information. Third-party copyright in this distribution is noted where applicable. All rights not expressly granted are reserved. /quote http://www.zotero.org/support/dev/source_code You can setup a server to store Zotero files, but it's not a trivial process and it lacks any and all ZOtero social features/web front-end. It's even advised against (for corruption risks) by Zotero. Agree regarding setup: http://www.zotero.org/support/dev/dataserver_setup Also might be of interest: https://chronicle.com/blogs/profhacker/make-your-own-zotero-webdav-server-and-access-your-zotero-attachments-anywhere/38526 http://blog.holz.ca/2011/11/phpzoterowebdav-installation/ http://forums.zotero.org/discussion/20339/ [phpZoteroWebDAV 2.0 - php based WebDAV server and libra] ... BTW: Congrats on the new baby boy! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Using HUD with LibreOffice
On 06/12/2012 08:56 AM, Charles-H.Schulz wrote: For Ubuntu fans out there, make it viral :-) http://www.muktware.com/3681/using-hud-libreoffice Best, Interesting comment from: Ralf Hersel 1 day ago Warning! Don't do it. Do not install 'lo-menubar' to get HUD functionality in standard Ubuntu 12.04 LibreOffice. Why? In order to get HUD functionality you need the Global Menu. If you install the Global Menu, at least two errors will occur: 1. 'Print Preview' in LibreOffice Writer will crash the application. 2. Some top menu items (e.g. 'window' menu in LibreOffice Calc) will not show up at all. These are just two errors that I detected; maybe there are more. If you can live with them ... go on and install 'lo-menubar'. You have been warned. Do you know if that is an issue? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: [Writer] Problem with modern typefaces having more than the standard styles
On 05/18/2012 06:57 AM, GwenDragon wrote: Hello, No new ideas to fix the problem of incorrect reimport of formatting in LibreOffice 3.5 with the Kallos (and other font families) font problem? Are you using the OpenType version of Kallos ITC? If so you might want to have a look through some of these to see if anything is similar: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=specificorder=relevance+descbug_status=__all__product=LibreOfficecontent=OpenType I have _many_ ITC fonts on my Ubuntu/Debian system (way too many to list here), and for the most part I can select them in LO (3.5.3.2)[1], where I cannot select all choices in Abiword, or Kword. For example, if I select an ITC .otf font galliard: $ locate galliard /home/user/.fonts/galliard-black.otf /home/user/.fonts/galliard-blackitalic.otf /home/user/.fonts/galliard-bold.otf /home/user/.fonts/galliard-bolditalic.otf /home/user/.fonts/galliard-italic.otf /home/user/.fonts/galliard-roman.otf /home/user/.fonts/galliard-ultra.otf /home/user/.fonts/galliard-ultraitalic.otf As you can see, the only galliard fonts on this system are .otf. In LO 3.5 (via Format|Character) I can select ITC Galliard: Ultra UltraItalic Roman Italic Bold Bold Italic Black Ultra Italic Black Italic I made a file with each font selection, took a screenshot added it to the file, saved the file, closed LO and reopened LO and the file. Before saving I noticed that the bolding seemed to be backwards (with bold selected the font appears normal, with bold unselected from LO icon the font appears bold). After saving I noticed (in addition to the bolding) when checking Format|Charater: - Italic changed UltraItalic - Roman changed to Ultra It is repeatable I'll add a pdf and odt of the document on your bug report. Gary [1] LibreOffice 3.5.3.2 Build ID: 235ab8a-3802056-4a8fed3-2d66ea8-e241b8 -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: LibreOffice for Academic Work -- College/University
On 05/21/2012 01:18 PM, Bruce Byfield wrote: On Sunday, May 20, 2012 09:54:21 PM NoOp wrote: On 05/18/2012 03:14 PM, Bruce Byfield wrote: On Friday, May 18, 2012 11:29:33 AM NoOp wrote: On 05/17/2012 03:15 PM, Marc Paré wrote: ... There is a need for a few templates for academic use; a built-in ... You might want to contact/collaborate with Orest Kinasevyc. He wrote several templates for APA Style 5th 6th editions for students: My own academic days are past, so please excuse a suggestion I'm not willing to implement myself. However, I'm sure that more people would use the bibliographical tools if the samples given weren't misleading. Anyone trying to learn from them might easily give up in despair. Perhaps you can explain as to how the samples are misleading? Maybe you can provide a sample(s) of your own. Or be helpful and provide links to other APA templates that meet your approval. My apologies for not being clearer. I wasn't talking about this particular template, but the default examples given in LibreOffice itself. Ah. Thanks for the clarification. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: LibreOffice for Academic Work -- College/University
On 05/18/2012 03:14 PM, Bruce Byfield wrote: On Friday, May 18, 2012 11:29:33 AM NoOp wrote: On 05/17/2012 03:15 PM, Marc Paré wrote: ... There is a need for a few templates for academic use; a built-in ... You might want to contact/collaborate with Orest Kinasevyc. He wrote several templates for APA Style 5th 6th editions for students: My own academic days are past, so please excuse a suggestion I'm not willing to implement myself. However, I'm sure that more people would use the bibliographical tools if the samples given weren't misleading. Anyone trying to learn from them might easily give up in despair. Perhaps you can explain as to how the samples are misleading? Maybe you can provide a sample(s) of your own. Or be helpful and provide links to other APA templates that meet your approval. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: LibreOffice for Academic Work -- College/University
On 05/17/2012 03:15 PM, Marc Paré wrote: ... There is a need for a few templates for academic use; a built-in ... You might want to contact/collaborate with Orest Kinasevyc. He wrote several templates for APA Style 5th 6th editions for students: http://www.kinasevych.ca/2010/03/openoffice-org-templates-for-apa-style-student-and-academic-papers/ [Be sure to read the 1 and only comment from the author] Download page: http://www.kinasevych.ca/c/201003/02/apa/ The 6th edition APA template is 12 pages with side notes (includes instructions for Zotero etc). -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: security-related information, CVE-2012-1149, CVE-2012-2334
On 05/16/2012 08:57 AM, Caolán McNamara wrote: https://www.libreoffice.org/advisories/ CVE-2012-1149 Integer overflows in graphic object loading An integer overflow vulnerability in LibreOffice graphic loading code could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service (application crash) or potentially execute arbitrary code on vulnerable installations of LibreOffice. Thanks to Tielei Wang via Secunia SVCRP for reporting this flaw. Users are recommended to upgrade to 3.5.3 to avoid this flaw CVE-2012-2334 Denial of Service with malformed .ppt files Reading invalid record lengths in LibreOffice powerpoint (escher) import code could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service (application crash) on vulnerable installations of LibreOffice. Thanks to Sven Jacobi for reporting this flaw. Users are recommended to upgrade to 3.5.3 to avoid this flaw C. Thanks for posting that - it's very much appreciated. Any idea if 3.5.3 also addresses this one that also came out today? http://www.openoffice.org/security/cves/CVE-2012-2149.html LO 3.5.3.2 still has a filter for WPD files, and it would be very nice if it continue to do so if the filter can be patched rather than removed like AOO. Thanks Gary Lee -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: security-related information, CVE-2012-1149, CVE-2012-2334
On 05/16/2012 01:09 PM, Caolán McNamara wrote: On Wed, 2012-05-16 at 12:29 -0700, NoOp wrote: Any idea if 3.5.3 also addresses this one that also came out today? http://www.openoffice.org/security/cves/CVE-2012-2149.html This is actually libwpd, which gets bundled into non-distro builds. The advisory relates to a very old version of libwpd bundled into the last OpenOffice.org release. LibreOffice 3.3.X already contained a sufficiently recent version of libwpd to be unaffected by that, so you're fine with any version of LibreOffice. the filter can be patched rather than removed like AOO. The filter got removed from AOO due to being under the LGPL (!) https://cwiki.apache.org/OOOUSERS/ipclearance.html ... Thanks! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: LibreOffice Version Mismatch/Conflict
On 03/26/2012 02:33 AM, Help_Please wrote: Ok then. Thanks. Maybe it will be corrected soon. My copy of Secunia PSI is reporting a problem/potential update to LibreOffice to version 3.5.1.2 and I already have 3.5.1.2 installed. This again is because of the version conflict (I'm pretty certain). Oh well again thanks. Read this thread on the user list: LibreOffice ''Insecure per Secunia -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Security Advisories
On 03/23/2012 05:24 AM, Christian Lohmaier wrote: Hi NoOp, On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 2:56 AM, NoOp gl...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On 03/22/2012 06:31 PM, Italo Vignoli wrote: NoOp wrote: It would be nice if someone 'official' (ala TDF) could post the CVE-2012-0037 notice on both the user and announce lists. The public was not supposed to know of this CVE, people should be given time to update to the fixed version before. See e.g. http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/10/05/the-document-foundation-publishes-details-of-libreoffice-3-4-3-security-fixes/ Following industry best practice, details of security fixes are withheld until users have been given time to migrate to the new version. I think that you and Simon are missing the message I was attempting to convey. I'll repeat my original question: Why is it that security advisories such as this: https://www.libreoffice.org/advisories/CVE-2012-0037/ are not posted on the user or announce lists? So I fail to understand why you Simon seem to think that I'm complaining about not receiving the notice prior to the the LO public announcement. My posting of how I found out about the security issue (Redhat bug report AOO user list), was meant to point out that I do not check into www.libreoffice.org daily; I do however check the lists that I'm subscribed to on a regular basis (user/announce/security announce/bug/etc lists. LibreOffice/TDF does not have a 'Security Announce' list. Why so much resistance in asking that the same advisory that is posted on the web site, be posted on the User and Announce lists as well? Or at least the User list (and any official web forums if there is one) so that users are made aware can take action? Not posting such annoucements on the LO User list results in thread like this: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/msg18326.html [libreoffice-users] CVE-2012-0337 ... -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Security Advisories
Why is it that security advisories such as this: https://www.libreoffice.org/advisories/CVE-2012-0037/ are not posted on the user or announce lists? The only way I found out about this was via a Redhat bug report: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791296 [Bug 791296 - (CVE-2012-0037) CVE-2012-0037 raptor: XML External Entity (XXE) attack via RDF files ] And then later on the ApacheOOO user list: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.incubator.ooo.user/866 It would be nice if someone 'official' (ala TDF) could post the CVE-2012-0037 notice on both the user and announce lists. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Security Advisories
On 03/22/2012 06:31 PM, Italo Vignoli wrote: NoOp wrote: It would be nice if someone 'official' (ala TDF) could post the CVE-2012-0037 notice on both the user and announce lists. It is now reported on the blog post. Well just how many users are subscribed to a blog post? Nor do I think that they (at least I don't) check www.libreoffice.org daily: https://www.libreoffice.org/ Are these the posts that you are referring to? http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2012/03/22/tdf-announces-libreoffice-3-4-6/ http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2012/03/15/libreoffice-3-5-1-provides-additional-security-and-stability/ Neither of those blog posts contain information regarding CVE-2012-0037. Neither do the release logs or release notes. Nor is there any mention of which bug reports are related to this issue - is there one? LO 3.5.1 is showing: LibreOffice 3.5.1 Final (2012-03-15) The Redhat Bug report (Bug 791296) was dated 2012-03-16 - so LO was aware of, and patched this in 3.5.1 prior to 15 March? Lacking an LO Security Announce list, I just think that it would be nice if such announcements were posted on the user announce lists as well and the blog. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: The Floppy icon and meritocracy
On 02/10/2012 05:44 AM, 1920...@googlemail.com wrote: The freedesktop.org Icon Theme Specification defines a 'document-save' icon as: document-save The icon for the save action. Should be an arrow pointing down and toward a hard disk. http://standards.freedesktop.org/icon-naming-spec/icon-naming-spec-latest.html The new LO Tango theme does not follow this specification, and instead uses a non-Tango icon: a down arrow pointing to an open file cabinet drawer Tango doesn't have a 'save as template' icon anyway, so we couldn't use it unmodified anyway. In that case you create _additional_ icons (following the spec of course), just as others have: http://tango.freedesktop.org/Tango_Icon_Library#Additional_Sets (Although I seem to remember reading that the template icon has been left as a floppy? I did point out this problem before...) The template save icon in 3.5 (sc/lc_saveasatemplate) is a combination of the standard Tango template icon (text-x-generic-template.png/svg[1]) interposed over a floppy hasn't changed from LO 3.3 and 3.4. That icon has other issues besides using the floppy - the text for the icon is simply 'Save', so it's easy to confuse with the document save icon 'Save (Ctrl+S)'. [1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Text-x-generic-template.svg -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: The Floppy icon and meritocracy
On 02/08/2012 06:17 AM, Pedro wrote: ... In any case I managed to hack the Tango theme and replace the new icons with the old ones (BTW someone forgot to update the saveastemplate icons in the new Theme ;) ) You can't use your old tango theme from 3.4.x because the folder structure has been changed between versions. So, if anyone is interested, it's freely available here http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2347109/images_tango.zip What distrurbs me is that the new LO Tango icons do not follow the standard base Tango theme. As I pointed out in the other thread: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.discuss/7633 The freedesktop.org Icon Theme Specification defines a 'document-save' icon as: document-save The icon for the save action. Should be an arrow pointing down and toward a hard disk. http://standards.freedesktop.org/icon-naming-spec/icon-naming-spec-latest.html The new LO Tango theme does not follow this specification, and instead uses a non-Tango icon: a down arrow pointing to an open file cabinet drawer. You'll find that if you/LO actually download and check the 'document-save' icons in: http://tango.freedesktop.org/Tango_Icon_Library http://tango.freedesktop.org/releases/tango-icon-theme-0.8.90.tar.gz it is an arrow pointing down and toward a hard disk. Other applications, and the desktop (GNOME), that I use adhere to the base Tango theme. I fail to understand why LO insists on bastardizing the theme and still calling it Tango. Even the LO icon name fails to follow the freedesktop.org naming convention of 'document-save', and instead LO have kept the name used in Ooo: lc_save.png. If you want the floppy, use the default Galaxy theme: Tools|Options|LibreOffice|View|Icon size and style: Glalaxy (default). http://www.openoffice.org/ui/VisualDesign/OOo_galaxy.html -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Can we replace Floppy Disk
On 12/30/2011 08:12 AM, M Robinson wrote: ... I haven't heard of Delete/Eraser that works as well on SSDs as traditional hard drives. That said USB will be the most common storage media soon enough. Who saves to CDs at work? I don't think the icon is a big deal, the whole interface is dated, I pitched a Firefox addon-like interface a while back, but I'm still ahead of my time on that. Rather than reinventing the wheel, update the saveicon with a stock USB icon: a vertical USB icon, it looks like a human carrying stuff and you have the integrated download arrow, and it is a recognized symbol on cameras, phones, TVs, etc. http://imagebin.org/190980 Rather than reinvent the wheel: Stock icons: GNOME Humanity: http://svn.gnome.org/svn/gnome-icon-theme/trunk/scalable/actions/document-save.svg [my system Humanity: /usr/share/icons/Humanity/actions/16/document-save.svg matches the one from freedesktop.org] Tango: http://webcvs.freedesktop.org/tango/tango-icon-theme/32x32/actions/document-save.png?view=co [which is not used by LO when the Tango theme is selected - LO still uses a floppy with the Tango theme. My system Tango: /usr/share/icons/Tango/22x22/actions/document-save.png matches the one from freedesktop.org] freedesktop.org Icon Theme Specification: http://standards.freedesktop.org/icon-naming-spec/icon-naming-spec-latest.html document-save The icon for the save action. Should be an arrow pointing down and toward a hard disk. I suspect that LO are still using these icons for Tango: http://jimmac.musichall.cz/i.php?i=Tango-OOo [Tango OpenOffice.org 2.0 -Note this artwork is not public domain.] However, that standard Tango icons *are* public domain: http://tango.freedesktop.org/ quote Terms Of Use The Tango base icon theme is released to the Public Domain. The palette is in public domain. Developers, feel free to ship it along with your application. The icon naming utilities are licensed under the GPL. Though the tango-icon-theme package is released to the Public Domain, we ask that you still please attribute the Tango Desktop Project, for all the hard work we've done. Thanks. /quote -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: overall communication guidelines and reply-to mangling
On 11/25/2011 02:19 PM, Florian Effenberger wrote: Hi, FYI: It was not me asking for that change, nor Friedrich, but I'd like to reply to this: NoOp wrote on 2011-11-25 23:11: Why not experiment with the moderators or test list instead? Why the discuss list? Because a real test can only work on a larger list, where we see the impact... Florian I disagree. The moderators list is active, you guys post there regularly - try it on yourselves before creating a why is this happening panic on this list? Keep in mind that this list is also used by general users: http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ discuss@documentfoundation.org: Mailing list for general discussions about The Document Foundation. Better yet, try it on the dev list as this seems to be where the request is originating from. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Security Information of 3.3.4
On 11/22/2011 06:59 AM, Miyoshi Omori wrote: OK. Clean up is after 3.4.3. Migrating to 3.4 is difficult, but have to do. Nice to solve this problem. Thank you However... There has been no change to these links regarding 3.3.4: http://www.libreoffice.org/advisories/CVE-2011-2713/ [Despite the fact that Huzaifa Sidhpurwala reported that it is not a security issue and notabug on 5-Oct-2011 (the same day as the LO announcement)] http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2011-2713 * cpe:/a:sun:openoffice.org:3.3.0 * cpe:/a:libreoffice:libreoffice:3.3.0 * cpe:/a:libreoffice:libreoffice:3.3.1 * cpe:/a:libreoffice:libreoffice:3.3.2 * cpe:/a:libreoffice:libreoffice:3.3.3 * cpe:/a:libreoffice:libreoffice:3.3.4 * cpe:/a:libreoffice:libreoffice:3.4.0 * cpe:/a:libreoffice:libreoffice:3.4.1 * cpe:/a:libreoffice:libreoffice:3.4.2 and previous versions * Denotes Vulnerable Software In an earlier thread I specifically asked about 3.3.4 on 12 Oct: http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.discuss/7035 where I was informed that the security fix was backported to 3.3.4. So I don't know what to believe. Gary Lee (NoOp) 2011/11/22 NoOp gl...@sbcglobal.net On 11/20/2011 07:26 AM, Volker Merschmann wrote: Hi, 2011/11/20 Miyoshi Omori miyoshi.om...@gmail.com: Hello, My request is about information security. Security issues have already been announced as, CVE-2011-2713 corresponds to a comment. TDF as information, but said that it had been made LibreOffice 3.4.3 and 3.3.4 fixed. According to NIST report http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2011-2713, 3.3.4 is classified as a vulnerable version on this security issue. If it is incorrect, could you formally request a modification of information as TDF. As a user, it is also a serious problem. Thanks for reporting, I also think the information about 3.3.4 is incorrect there. Your mail has been forwarded to the security team. Volker https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725668 [(CVE-2011-2713) CVE-2011-2713 openoffice.org: Out-of-bounds read in DOC sprm parser] Status: CLOSED NOTABUG https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725668#c14 quote Huzaifa S. Sidhpurwala 2011-10-05 06:40:46 EDT It initially appeared that this flaw may be exploitable similar to CVE-2010-3452, where an OOB Read caused Arbitrary Code Execution. However in the case of this particular flaw, the junk data read is just parsed into an internal representation of properties and the maximum harm this should cause in application crash (Denial Of Service). Timeline: - Reported to securityt...@openoffice.org on 25-July-2011 - Recieved a reply (with tdf-secur...@lists.documentfoundation.org copied) on the same date - Release date changed with a few delays in between - Release on 5-Oct-2011 Statement: This issue results in an OOB read which is not exploitable for arbitrary code execution and can simply cause a crash. We do not consider this as a security issue. /quote -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: overall communication guidelines and reply-to mangling
On 11/25/2011 02:00 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Regina Henschel wrote: All mailing lists I'm described to (and believe me that are a lot) behave in the way that a click on Antwort auf diese Nachricht replies to the list. So keep the documentfoundation.org lists to behave this way too. Only @lists.freedesktop.org behave not that way and that is very annoying. It results in accidentally sending only private answers Same for me. A mailing list, to me, is a group of people discussing together and transparently. When I answer a mailing list message, I'm speaking to everybody in the group and I expect this to be the default behaviour. +1 If you really consider to change it, please let the [sub]scribers vote on it. Converting only one list, especially a -discuss list, seems a confusing move. At least, if one can separate behaviour by domain (i.e., freedesktop.org lists and documentfoundation.org/libreoffice.org lists), it takes less effort to remember when a reply should be addressed differently. However, it seems the experiment has been decided so let's go on, even though I believe that nobody will change his preferences after the experiment, so a preliminary poll would likely yield the same results. Regards, Andrea. Why not experiment with the moderators or test list instead? Why the discuss list? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Top Posting...
On 10/02/2011 09:07 AM, Italo Vignoli wrote: On 30 September 2011 02:46, NoOpgl...@sbcglobal.net wrote: I must say that I *am* surprised that LO haven't the technical/political ability/tenacity to properly post information regarding this issue in the same manner as the links provided (OOo, Mozilla, Ubuntu, et al). I have published a comprehensive Mailing List Netiquette, which should satisfy your needs. Thanks! http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette Of course, a mailing list netiquette is just a reference document, and we cannot kill people who ignore it (the majority of users ignore the simple existence of the netiquette). Fully agree. And the intent of my OP was never to turn away posters that top post Even if the final consensus is to only top post... at least will help with consistancy on this (users), and the other LO lists. but instead to have a page that users can be 'politely' pointed to and 'asked' to abide by list standards. With regard to concerns about top/interspersed/bottom posting on the accessibility list; I think that the question should be asked there. If that list prefers top-posting for accessibility reasons then that point can be added into the http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette. Ironically in the past I've purposely top-posted when addressing a poster that I knew was blind the poster informed me that it was easier for him to have the posts interspersed with proper trimming. Other accessibility lists seem to go either way, so I do not know the correct answer regarding this issue. Again, perhaps the best would be to ask on the LO accessibility list and then adopt whichever preference is shown there. Thanks again I *very* much appreciate your time effort in doing this. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Top Posting... Can we have an LO Mailing List Guidelines Page?
Top posted on purpose. After all that + discussions on the -user list it seems that LO doesn't really care to provide any specific rules/regulations/FAQ regarding Top/Interspersed/Bottom posting on any of their lists. So I'll abandon the topic and in the future when this issue comes up simply reply that on LO lists it's WFC (WhoFinallyCares - to be polite). I must say that I *am* surprised that LO haven't the technical/political ability/tenacity to properly post information regarding this issue in the same manner as the links provided (OOo, Mozilla, Ubuntu, et al). May you all endure the continued threads that are liable to crop up regarding this in each list in the future. On 09/07/2011 05:16 PM, NoOp wrote: For those that continue to insist on top posting on the LO lists: please consider bottom posting with interspersed replies. I realiz(s)e that the existing: http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ doesn't specifically clarify anything with regards to top/bottom posting. However at the bottom of each mail on this list is a link to: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette That page doesn't help much either, but it /does/ include a link to: http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html which includes this bit: http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote2.html#ss2.3 quote 2.3 Why should I place my response below the quoted text? Usually, the reading-flow is from left to right and from top to bottom, and people expect a chronological sequence similar to this. Especially people who are reading a lot of articles (and who therefore would qualify as the ideal person to answer your question) appreciate it if they can read at first the text to which you are referring. The quoted text is some kind of help to remember the topic, which of course will not work, if you place the quoted text below your response. Furthermore, that's the standard. This may sound as a weak argument, but since people are not used to reading the other way around, they have no idea what you are referring to and have to go back and forth between the referenced articles, have to jump between different articles and so on. In short - reading the article becomes more and more difficult - for people who read many articles it is reason enough to skip the entire article, if the context is not obvious. And besides: doesn't it look stupid to first get the answer and then see the question? (Aside from Jeopardy, of course.) Furthermore, you (yes: You) save a lot of time using this way of quoting: You do not need to repeat what the person you refer to wrote, in order to show the context. You just place your comment after the text you wish to comment upon, and everybody immediately knows what you refer to. Also, you realize which text you are *not* responding to and can delete these parts. So: using this technique you save time, your readers don't have to waste time, you save bandwidth and disk-space. Isn't it great what you can achieve by such simple means? /quote and that seems to imply that such posting styles on this list are the desired guideline. Samples of similar on other lists: http://www.mozilla.org/about/forums/etiquette.html quote Top-posting vs bottom-posting. Some people like to put reply after the quoted text, some like it the other way around, and still some prefer interspersed style. Debates about which posting style is better have led to many flame wars in the forums. To keep forum discussion friendly, please do interspersion with trimming (see above for trimming rules). For a simple reply, this is equivalent bottom-posting. So, remove extraneous material, and place your comments in logical order, after the text you are commenting upon. The only exceptions are the accessibility forums, which are top-posting. /quote http://www.ubuntu.com/support/community/mailinglists quote Proper quoting: Proper quoting is very important on mailing lists, to ensure that it is easy to follow the conversation. There are four fundamental rules: Write your email underneath the email which you are replying to. ... /quote and even: http://www.openoffice.org/ml_guidelines.html quote Replying When replying to other people it is customary to intersperse your response with their questions, both so you can answer the actual question that was asked, and so everyone else has some idea what you are talking about. It is also customary to limit your quoting to the minimum possible to get your point across. Take the time to be considerate, remember those subscribers who have slow, expensive connections. /quote Note: that last is liable to go away given the recent transition/announcements by Apache regarding mail lists... but it's worth mentioning anyway. Eventually I hope that LO will actually include a link to general posting guidelines on the http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ page with complete
[tdf-discuss] Re: Problems well ordered and qualified in BugZilla? (Was Re: Re: strange page orientation problem)
On 09/22/2011 02:52 PM, NoOp wrote: On 09/21/2011 11:16 PM, Cor Nouws wrote: ... I know there are problems in 3.4 that are not present in 3.3. (and why). And what the situation should be: that all problems have been described in an issue and that the really annoying ones qualified as such and picked up by a developer. However, I have the impression that not all problems posted to users@ have been handled as such. Not sure though. Also I noticed some things mentioned as (serious) problem, turned out to be no or (just) minor annoyances (IMO). Furthermore, we are in a lucky situation compared with half a year ago: there are regular test builds for Windows also and devs are fixing windows specific issues... So, do you think it would be useful to check the problems reported on users@, check their status in BugZilla and if needed add them to the MostAnnoying gathering issues? Sure. I'll try to go through them this weekend come up with a list; starting with those msgs that indicate 'works in 3.3.4 but not in 3.4.3. ... I've downloaded all of the msgs from the users list will try to sort/search. It may take a few more days. Gary -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Problems well ordered and qualified in BugZilla? (Was Re: Re: strange page orientation problem)
On 09/21/2011 11:16 PM, Cor Nouws wrote: Hi Gary, NoOp wrote (21-09-11 05:11) If 3.4.x then I *highly* recommend trying 3.3.4 instead. To me it seems that 3.4.x (3.4.3) is full of bugs and should never have been released at all, particularly with this statement: http://www.libreoffice.org/download/ quote LibreOffice 3.4.3 Final (2011-08-31) Safe for production use by most users and enterprises. /quote That statement is, at the very least (again IMO, but can be verified by the bug reports), wrong. Note: for anyone that disputes that, simply review the users list and bug reports - you'll find many issues regarding 3.4.x that are resolved by reverting back to 3.3.x. I know there are problems in 3.4 that are not present in 3.3. (and why). And what the situation should be: that all problems have been described in an issue and that the really annoying ones qualified as such and picked up by a developer. However, I have the impression that not all problems posted to users@ have been handled as such. Not sure though. Also I noticed some things mentioned as (serious) problem, turned out to be no or (just) minor annoyances (IMO). Furthermore, we are in a lucky situation compared with half a year ago: there are regular test builds for Windows also and devs are fixing windows specific issues... So, do you think it would be useful to check the problems reported on users@, check their status in BugZilla and if needed add them to the MostAnnoying gathering issues? Sure. I'll try to go through them this weekend come up with a list; starting with those msgs that indicate 'works in 3.3.4 but not in 3.4.3. Speaking for myself: I would be happy to help, but because of workload, it should be a process of weeks, rather than days.. No worries thanks for the excellent idea. ... Gary -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: strange page orientation problem
On 09/19/2011 02:35 AM, jef.peeraer wrote: i try to upgrade all my OOo users to LO, but encounter a serious problem. i have a template for labels to be printed on a ql-1060 (which has default labels of 102 mm (4) width). The label format in the template is user defined, 10,2 cm width and 6 cm height, portrait orientation. This used to work perfectly with OOo, but with LO, the print dialog suddenly shows the label in landscape orientation (that is 6cm width and 10,2 cm height). i have to go the the properties of the label printer, and change the orientation from landscape to portrait manually. so i have the impression tha the page orientation from LO is not passed to the label printer. this is rather annoying stuff, whicg can be worked arround, but is very confusing. jef peeraer You fail to mention which version of LO and which OS; can you please advise? If 3.4.x then I *highly* recommend trying 3.3.4 instead. To me it seems that 3.4.x (3.4.3) is full of bugs and should never have been released at all, particularly with this statement: http://www.libreoffice.org/download/ quote LibreOffice 3.4.3 Final (2011-08-31) Safe for production use by most users and enterprises. /quote That statement is, at the very least (again IMO, but can be verified by the bug reports), wrong. Note: for anyone that disputes that, simply review the users list and bug reports - you'll find many issues regarding 3.4.x that are resolved by reverting back to 3.3.x. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Top Posting... Can we have an LO Mailing List Guidelines Page?
On 09/08/2011 07:07 AM, Robert Parker wrote: There is one thing more irritating than top posting. People who rant about it. There was no rant. Perhaps you might take time to read the post *and* review the threads in these lists (particularly the 'users' list? Other lists (as I've demonstrated) provide clear instructions the guidelines list users are expected to follow. The point is that LO does not, and instead uses a link to a vague wiki at the bottom of list messages rather than posting guidelines upfront. This tends to lead to ongoing debates on how list posters are to behave. As mentioned: I don't really care if the consensuses is to only top-post on these lists. My primary consideration is to have an established set of posting guidelines (as in the examples provided) so that we no longer have to resort to the 'mine is better' model. It makes it easier for all users; particularly new users as it's then rather simple to point to the guideline url/page and *politely* ask them to abide by the list guidelines. Why is it that after all of the previous debates, posts, aggravation, that LO can't just put up a page regarding list guidelines? Thats a question btw, not a rant. Following /not/ snipped on purpose: On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 7:16 AM, NoOp gl...@sbcglobal.net wrote: For those that continue to insist on top posting on the LO lists: please consider bottom posting with interspersed replies. I realiz(s)e that the existing: http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ doesn't specifically clarify anything with regards to top/bottom posting. However at the bottom of each mail on this list is a link to: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette That page doesn't help much either, but it /does/ include a link to: http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html which includes this bit: http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote2.html#ss2.3 quote 2.3 Why should I place my response below the quoted text? Usually, the reading-flow is from left to right and from top to bottom, and people expect a chronological sequence similar to this. Especially people who are reading a lot of articles (and who therefore would qualify as the ideal person to answer your question) appreciate it if they can read at first the text to which you are referring. The quoted text is some kind of help to remember the topic, which of course will not work, if you place the quoted text below your response. Furthermore, that's the standard. This may sound as a weak argument, but since people are not used to reading the other way around, they have no idea what you are referring to and have to go back and forth between the referenced articles, have to jump between different articles and so on. In short - reading the article becomes more and more difficult - for people who read many articles it is reason enough to skip the entire article, if the context is not obvious. And besides: doesn't it look stupid to first get the answer and then see the question? (Aside from Jeopardy, of course.) Furthermore, you (yes: You) save a lot of time using this way of quoting: You do not need to repeat what the person you refer to wrote, in order to show the context. You just place your comment after the text you wish to comment upon, and everybody immediately knows what you refer to. Also, you realize which text you are *not* responding to and can delete these parts. So: using this technique you save time, your readers don't have to waste time, you save bandwidth and disk-space. Isn't it great what you can achieve by such simple means? /quote and that seems to imply that such posting styles on this list are the desired guideline. Samples of similar on other lists: http://www.mozilla.org/about/forums/etiquette.html quote Top-posting vs bottom-posting. Some people like to put reply after the quoted text, some like it the other way around, and still some prefer interspersed style. Debates about which posting style is better have led to many flame wars in the forums. To keep forum discussion friendly, please do interspersion with trimming (see above for trimming rules). For a simple reply, this is equivalent bottom-posting. So, remove extraneous material, and place your comments in logical order, after the text you are commenting upon. The only exceptions are the accessibility forums, which are top-posting. /quote http://www.ubuntu.com/support/community/mailinglists quote Proper quoting: Proper quoting is very important on mailing lists, to ensure that it is easy to follow the conversation. There are four fundamental rules: Write your email underneath the email which you are replying to. ... /quote and even: http://www.openoffice.org/ml_guidelines.html quote Replying When replying to other people it is customary to intersperse your response with their questions, both so you can answer the actual question that was asked, and so everyone else has some
[tdf-discuss] Top Posting... Can we have an LO Mailing List Guidelines Page?
For those that continue to insist on top posting on the LO lists: please consider bottom posting with interspersed replies. I realiz(s)e that the existing: http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ doesn't specifically clarify anything with regards to top/bottom posting. However at the bottom of each mail on this list is a link to: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette That page doesn't help much either, but it /does/ include a link to: http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html which includes this bit: http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote2.html#ss2.3 quote 2.3 Why should I place my response below the quoted text? Usually, the reading-flow is from left to right and from top to bottom, and people expect a chronological sequence similar to this. Especially people who are reading a lot of articles (and who therefore would qualify as the ideal person to answer your question) appreciate it if they can read at first the text to which you are referring. The quoted text is some kind of help to remember the topic, which of course will not work, if you place the quoted text below your response. Furthermore, that's the standard. This may sound as a weak argument, but since people are not used to reading the other way around, they have no idea what you are referring to and have to go back and forth between the referenced articles, have to jump between different articles and so on. In short - reading the article becomes more and more difficult - for people who read many articles it is reason enough to skip the entire article, if the context is not obvious. And besides: doesn't it look stupid to first get the answer and then see the question? (Aside from Jeopardy, of course.) Furthermore, you (yes: You) save a lot of time using this way of quoting: You do not need to repeat what the person you refer to wrote, in order to show the context. You just place your comment after the text you wish to comment upon, and everybody immediately knows what you refer to. Also, you realize which text you are *not* responding to and can delete these parts. So: using this technique you save time, your readers don't have to waste time, you save bandwidth and disk-space. Isn't it great what you can achieve by such simple means? /quote and that seems to imply that such posting styles on this list are the desired guideline. Samples of similar on other lists: http://www.mozilla.org/about/forums/etiquette.html quote Top-posting vs bottom-posting. Some people like to put reply after the quoted text, some like it the other way around, and still some prefer interspersed style. Debates about which posting style is better have led to many flame wars in the forums. To keep forum discussion friendly, please do interspersion with trimming (see above for trimming rules). For a simple reply, this is equivalent bottom-posting. So, remove extraneous material, and place your comments in logical order, after the text you are commenting upon. The only exceptions are the accessibility forums, which are top-posting. /quote http://www.ubuntu.com/support/community/mailinglists quote Proper quoting: Proper quoting is very important on mailing lists, to ensure that it is easy to follow the conversation. There are four fundamental rules: Write your email underneath the email which you are replying to. ... /quote and even: http://www.openoffice.org/ml_guidelines.html quote Replying When replying to other people it is customary to intersperse your response with their questions, both so you can answer the actual question that was asked, and so everyone else has some idea what you are talking about. It is also customary to limit your quoting to the minimum possible to get your point across. Take the time to be considerate, remember those subscribers who have slow, expensive connections. /quote Note: that last is liable to go away given the recent transition/announcements by Apache regarding mail lists... but it's worth mentioning anyway. Eventually I hope that LO will actually include a link to general posting guidelines on the http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ page with complete posting guidelines. Even if the final consensus is to only top post... at least will help with consistancy on this (users), and the other LO lists. Added Note: I'd originally sent this to the users list as IMO that is where the guidelines are needed most. So there may be some cross posting in replies. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Monthly Bug Hunting Session
On 09/05/2011 07:19 AM, Rainer Bielefeld wrote: Hello, I waht to invite you to our Monthly bug Hunting Session, what sill start tomorrow, Tuesday 2011-09-06 at 13:00 UTC. ... Rainer, You may find this helpful when making these type of announcements: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedform.html Enter your event info it will produce a page with local times for locations around the world. Example: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Monthly+bug+Hunting+Sessioniso=20110906T13 Gary -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: [QA] Opening a .doc file - Regression in Libreoffice 3.4 ???
On 08/23/2011 01:47 PM, Sveinn í Felli wrote: Sorry if this is not the proper list to ask, but before filing a bug I'd like to know if someone has seen this before: The following .doc file does open correctly in OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 and OpenOffice.org 3.2.1 but neither in LibreOffice 3.4.2 nor in LibreOffice 3.4.3 OOO340m1 (Build:301) - tested on Debian and LinuxMint: http://www.tullverket.se/download/18.4ab1598c11632f3ba9280009674/enhetsdokument+anvands+vid+import+och+export+4+blad_tv718_3.doc Seems like a problem with lookup in many fields (Error: Source reference not found), also looks like cell formatting is separated onto another page than the form tables. Curiously in LibreOffice 3.4.3 OOO340m1 the file is always opened as read-only, no matter which permissions or filesystem is used. Of course this could simply be a corrupted file, still it opens correctly in OOo. Any ideas ? Regards, Sveinn í Felli Opens fine in OOo 3.2.1 (go-oo/Ubuntu version), OOo 3.3.0, and OOo-Dev 3.4.0 . Does *not* open properly in *any* LO versions that I currently have installed (3.3.3 and 3.4.2). You've found YALOB (Yet Another LO Bug); of which there seem to more more of every day oddly enough with previous OOo files. I see rapid regression with *every* new LO update and have actually started using older OOo go-oo packages for stability. Note to others who may think that I do not use or have installed LO: $ locate versionrc /opt/libreoffice/basis3.3/program/versionrc /opt/libreoffice/program/versionrc /opt/libreoffice/ure/bin/versionrc /opt/libreoffice3.4/basis3.4/program/versionrc /opt/libreoffice3.4/program/versionrc /opt/libreoffice3.4/ure/bin/versionrc /opt/ooo-dev/basis3.4/program/versionrc /opt/ooo-dev/ure/bin/versionrc /opt/ooo-dev3/program/versionrc /opt/openoffice.org/basis3.3/program/versionrc /opt/openoffice.org/ure/bin/versionrc /opt/openoffice.org3/program/versionrc /usr/lib/openoffice/basis3.2/program/versionrc /usr/lib/openoffice/program/versionrc /usr/lib/ure/bin/versionrc and I have LO installed for testing on Ubuntu 11.04 and 11.10. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Viability of the 3.4.2 Release
On 08/01/2011 03:42 AM, Peter Hillier-Brook wrote: Given that the release of LibreOffice 3.4.2 is targeted at enterprise users, I find it surprising that the product is thought to be ready for release. At lease 2 significant bugs have been introduced and remain present that would, to my mind, discourage personal, let alone enterprise users. They are: 1 Inability to connect to address data sources - at least in Linux systems. ... Yep: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32948 Odd part it that it mostly works in 3.3. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: LibO 3.4.2 RC1 under Windows
On 07/18/2011 05:12 PM, Robert Boehm wrote: On 07/18/2011 07:04 PM, plino wrote: Robert Boehm wrote: Obviously, if the version preferred by the installer is the only version that the installed files will work with is the only choice, then well, OK. But if it's compatible with the latest version, maybe there is a way to make sure that the latest version available is installed (that is compatible) rather than whatever it was built with but I am ignorant as to if this is feasible or notor if testing is available to make sure that this works. I have uninstalled the version bundled with LibO and kept the newer version. All is working as expected because updates to VC++ 2008 are security and bug fixes. ... Gooda work-aroundthanks. Not necessarily as LO is installing a version with security issues IMO that needs to be resolved. The standard 'user' won't know to uninstall the bundled version as plino did. This is similar to when OOo installed insecure versions of java et al. The user would then have parallel versions of jave installed. I'd recommend a followup to the dev list. plino, when you do that you might also add links to the security notices for the earlier version of VC++ 2008. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: LibO 3.4.2 RC1 under Windows
On 07/18/2011 06:07 PM, plino wrote: NoOp wrote: I'd recommend a followup to the dev list. plino, when you do that you might also add links to the security notices for the earlier version of VC++ 2008. The Dev list is for devs only. I have unsubscribed from it. I got crap for posting there a few times (Jesús Corrius will certainly remember Change executable/sh names - which went nowhere and are still not changed btw), so I can't blame you. ... -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Question re: Oracle Report Builder and Sun java, java openjdk
On 07/16/2011 06:53 PM, Marc Paré wrote: I have just installed Mageia Linux on a couple of boxes and due to the fact that some of the websites the owners of these boxes wish to access work best with sun java, I removed java openjdk. This then led to a warning that the Oracle report builder would be removed. I then uninstalled java openjdk and then tried to reinstall Oracle report builder without java openjdk which was impossible to do. I was wondering Oracle report builder entirely dependent of java openjdk? It doesn't look like it will work with sun java. ... For my distro's version of report builder (Ubuntu) I show: $ apt-cache depends openoffice.org-report-builder openoffice.org-report-builder Depends: libbase-java-openoffice.org Depends: libsac-java Depends: libxml-java-openoffice.org Depends: libflute-java-openoffice.org Depends: libpentaho-reporting-flow-engine-java-openoffice.org Depends: liblayout-java-openoffice.org Depends: libloader-java-openoffice.org Depends: libformula-java-openoffice.org Depends: librepository-java-openoffice.org Depends: libfonts-java-openoffice.org Depends: libserializer-java-openoffice.org Depends: libcommons-logging-java Depends: openoffice.org-report-builder-bin Depends: openoffice.org-core Depends: openoffice.org-java-common PreDepends: openoffice.org-common |PreDepends: default-jre |PreDepends: gcj-jre |PreDepends: java-gcj-compat gcj-jre |PreDepends: openjdk-6-jre |PreDepends: sun-java5-jre |PreDepends: sun-java6-jre |PreDepends: java5-runtime default-jre gcj-4.4-jre gcj-4.5-jre gcj-jre openjdk-6-jre sun-java6-jre PreDepends: jre Conflicts: openoffice.org-java-common Conflicts: openoffice.org-reportdesigner Conflicts: ure Replaces: openoffice.org-reportdesigner openoffice.org-report-builder Enhances: openoffice.org-base Comments on: http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/en/project/reportdesign aren't exactly stellar... That said, LO 3.4.1 shows that Report Builder 1.2.1 is installed (and working): /opt/libreoffice3.4/share/extensions/report-builder and the readme_en-US.txt file shows: quote System Requirements * A recent version of Oracle Open Office or OpenOffice.org * A recent version of the Java(TM) Runtime Environment /quote And these are the only 'java' that I have installed: $ sudo update-alternatives --config java There are 2 choices for the alternative java (providing /usr/bin/java). SelectionPath Priority Status 0/usr/bin/gij-4.4 1044 auto mode 1/usr/bin/gij-4.4 1044 manual mode * 2/usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun/jre/bin/java 63manual mode -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Text box rotation problem in Writer
On 07/07/2011 12:05 PM, Cor Nouws wrote: Hi Gary, NoOp wrote (07-07-11 19:52) On 07/07/2011 06:19 AM, Cor Nouws wrote: Can you please explain how you create a text box in Writer, that you can rotate? Did you do that via copy/paste with Draw? View|Toolbars|Drawing Click on the 'T'|write something|exit the textbox reselect right-click|Position and Size|Rotation|Rotation angle|180° Ah,indeed Drawing involved ;-) Thanks for this pointer. I can't replicate in 3.3.3 or 3.4.1 (linux). Same for me on a daily build (*): works fine. Unless, of course, I save as .doc ;-) Then indeed 180 is 90 after opening again. Must be a know issue from OOo - remember I've seen it years ago already. ... It appears to be an issue with the 'Save/Export' routine. I have WinXP MS Office 2002 on a virtual machine. I copied the saved .doc file to that machine and in MS Word it opens at 90 instead of 180. Searching bugzilla finds a lot of text box issues, but not this one. If I get some time later today I'll file a bug report. Gary -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: New LibreOffice Reader Eliminates Need for PDF Reader
On 07/04/2011 04:07 PM, Robert Derman wrote: NoOp wrote: On 06/25/2011 03:37 PM, Alexandro Colorado wrote: On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 7:37 AM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote: On 25 Jun 2011, at 08:33, Ian Lynch wrote: Manfred wrote: I still believe that PDF is the best solution to distribute final versions of text (and maybe other office) documents. I'd say yes if they are likely to be printed on paper, no if it is only likely to be read from a screen. I disagree. Once a document no longer needs editing (and this is a frequent need in daily life - think purchase receipt, invoice, insurance schedule and so on) it needs to be provided in an electronic format that cannot be easily altered. PDF plays this role, ODF doesn't. No, but HTML does. More to the point, chm files also are build for read-only. Surely they are more microsoft based, but even Read (activity from the OLPC/Sugar), had to add a webkit renderer for another popular format -- epub. Which of course is done for read-only porpouses. So a bigger discussion than demanding PDF reader, might be to upgrade the very old HTML renderer in LibreOffice to something like webkit. Actually, NoOp didn't write any of that. Please mind your attributions. Might updating LO's HTML capability also improve its ability to create and edit HTML? Back when I was maintaining a web page, I seem to remember using OOo Writer for this, so if I remember correctly OOo, and therefore LO can create and edit HTML, but it would certainly improve its usefulness to small businesses if it could do it even better. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: New LibreOffice Reader Eliminates Need for PDF Reader
On 06/25/2011 03:37 PM, Alexandro Colorado wrote: On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 7:37 AM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote: On 25 Jun 2011, at 08:33, Ian Lynch wrote: Manfred wrote: I still believe that PDF is the best solution to distribute final versions of text (and maybe other office) documents. I'd say yes if they are likely to be printed on paper, no if it is only likely to be read from a screen. I disagree. Once a document no longer needs editing (and this is a frequent need in daily life - think purchase receipt, invoice, insurance schedule and so on) it needs to be provided in an electronic format that cannot be easily altered. PDF plays this role, ODF doesn't. No, but HTML does. More to the point, chm files also are build for read-only. Surely they are more microsoft based, but even Read (activity from the OLPC/Sugar), had to add a webkit renderer for another popular format -- epub. Which of course is done for read-only porpouses. So a bigger discussion than demanding PDF reader, might be to upgrade the very old HTML renderer in LibreOffice to something like webkit. ... This might be of interest: http://andreasgal.com/2011/06/15/pdf-js/ [pdf.js: Rendering PDF with HTML5 and JavaScript] http://blog.mozilla.com/cjones/2011/07/03/pdf-js-first-milestone/ [pdf.js reached its first milestone] https://wiki.mozilla.org/PDF.js Perhaps that could be modifed/integrated to also view .odt etc? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] LibreOffice +US Gov't ECCN Export Control
In the past I'd answered a few questions regarding OOo ECCN[1] and pointed the poster to Sun's ECCN[2]. What are the implications for LO general with regards to ECCN? I do see that Novell/Attachmate Group do list an ECCN for LO[3] with a category of 5D992. Given that questions eventually will come up regarding LO ECCN by US Government/Business users, how is the best way to handle this and respond? I do not think TDF is in a position to have LO general categorized with ECCN 5D992. So with US Government/Business users be limited to Novell/Attachmate Group products? If the answer is yes, this seems to be a shame as the US Department of Defense (DoD) do actively promote OSS: http://cio-nii.defense.gov/sites/oss/Open_Source_Software_%28OSS%29_FAQ.htm Gary [1]http://www.export.gov/logistics/eg_main_018803.asp [2] http://www.mail-archive.com/users@openoffice.org/msg115669.html and http://www.mail-archive.com/users@openoffice.org/msg117905.html [3] http://www.novell.com/apps/company/legal/export/export_list.jsp -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: [Ping Florian] nntp gmane posts to user list still not getting to the list
On 06/15/2011 08:20 AM, Marc Paré wrote: Le 2011-06-15 10:09, plino a écrit : Nabble posts are working. Thanks ;) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Ping-Florian-nntp-gmane-posts-to-user-list-still-not-getting-to-the-list-tp3061361p3067421.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. There are still some Gmane lists that are not working well. Some lists you can post a new thread, but cannot respond to any threads even your own thread. This list discuss is now working correctly as you can see from my test messages. This list doesn't use @global.libreoffice.org, it uses @documentfoundation.org. That is why we can post here. === ... Reply-To: discuss@documentfoundation.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org ... To: discuss@documentfoundation.org ... X-Original-To: discuss@documentfoundation.org Delivered-To: documentfoundation.org--disc...@bilbo.documentfoundation.org ... Errors-To: postmas...@documentfoundation.org Precedence: list List-Id: discuss.documentfoundation.org List-Unsubscribe: mailto:discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List-Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ List-Post: mailto:discuss@documentfoundation.org List-Help: mailto:discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List-Subscribe: mailto:discuss+subscr...@documentfoundation.org List-Owner: mailto:postmas...@documentfoundation.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.documentfoundation.discuss:6012 ... -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: [Ping Florian] nntp gmane posts to user list still not getting to the list
On 06/13/2011 11:29 PM, Florian Effenberger wrote: Hi Gary, NoOp wrote on 2011-06-14 03.00: Any idea when the issue with posting to the user list (gmane.comp.documentfoundation.libreoffice.user) ala your change from @libreoffice.org to @global.libreoffice.org will be fixed? On that list you are still missing contributions from gmane user/contributors. I would have expected that the change would have tested*before* the address change. I informed them days before we changed the address, they replied I should give them a ping *after* things have been changed. So I dod, minutes after the change was effective. We need to wait until they've incorporated the changes. Florian What other lists are also affected? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] [Ping Florian] nntp gmane posts to user list still not getting to the list
Florian, Any idea when the issue with posting to the user list (gmane.comp.documentfoundation.libreoffice.user) ala your change from @libreoffice.org to @global.libreoffice.org will be fixed? On that list you are still missing contributions from gmane user/contributors. I would have expected that the change would have tested *before* the address change. Thanks, Gary -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Adabas D database usage
On 06/12/2011 01:43 AM, Francois Tigeot wrote: On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 10:31:28AM +0200, Alexander Thurgood wrote: Le 12/06/11 03:04, Uwe Altmann a écrit : Meanwhile Adabas is a legacy product. I wonder if anyone uses it in a productive environment. Surely not on a Mac. As has been said - whoever need this can stick on an older OOo Version. I think François has already proposed a patch in master on the developer list for the config scripts to no longer build the Adabas driver component module. I confirm it. And let me add this is the legacy Adabas D driver we're talking about; Star/Open/LibreOffice never had a native Adabas driver to begin with. The choice of names is really confusing but Adabas D and Adabas are different products from the same company; I've changed the subject accordingly. Thanks. That help clarify for me. Gary -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Adabas database usage
On 06/11/2011 04:47 AM, Francois Tigeot wrote:
...
I think the picture is clear enough; I'll have a word on the developers list
and try to disable the Adabas D driver.
Please don't.
$ cat /etc/adabasrc
DBROOT=/opt/adabas
DBCONFIG=${DBCONFIG:-${HOME}/.adabas}
DBWORK=${DBWORK:-${HOME}/.adabas}
PATH=${PATH:-}${PATH:+:}${DBROOT}/bin:${DBROOT}/pgm
LD_LIBRARY_PATH=${LD_LIBRARY_PATH:-}${LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:}${DBROOT}/lib
export DBROOT DBWORK DBCONFIG PATH LD_LIBRARY_PATH
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Adabas database usage
On 06/11/2011 01:45 AM, Francois Tigeot wrote: ... Where did you find your download copy ? Is it recent ? I had a look at the official website here : http://www.softwareag.com/Corporate/products/adabas/rela_3rd_prod/adad/default.asp and there's no download link. The Download free Adabas D license (Personal Edition) text is just that, text. I had a look at the request a commercial license form; the most recent operating system in the list is Windows Server 2003. At least one (Tru64) has been abandonned for years ... Perhaps this is what you are looking for?: http://www.softwareag.com/corporate/products/adabas_2010/download/default.asp -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Adabas database usage
On 06/11/2011 11:02 AM, Francois Tigeot wrote: On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 10:41:54AM -0700, NoOp wrote: On 06/11/2011 04:47 AM, Francois Tigeot wrote: I think the picture is clear enough; I'll have a word on the developers list and try to disable the Adabas D driver. Please don't. $ cat /etc/adabasrc DBROOT=/opt/adabas [...] Does this mean you're using Adabas D with LibreOffice ? If this is the case, I'll have a go at enabling it everywhere. I'd experimented with Adabas D with OpenOffice.org. Unfortunately, I can't test with LO due to not being able to use *any* data source: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32948 -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Adabas database usage
On 06/11/2011 12:42 PM, Francois Tigeot wrote: On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 11:47:54AM -0700, NoOp wrote: I'd experimented with Adabas D with OpenOffice.org. Unfortunately, I can't test with LO due to not being able to use *any* data source: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32948 I'm sorry but if this is only for an experiment, I don't see the point in keeping the library driver. Valid point. I seem to recall that I installed it with StarOffice. As far as I know, nobody has used Adabas D since 2004, and the stuff is proprietary crippleware at best. There are much better options today if you want to use a serious database engine. Then perhaps the driver should be updated to support Adabas 8.2? http://www.softwareag.com/corporate/products/new_releases/adabas/default.asp The Community Edition is version 6.1.8. Please note that even if the native Adabas D driver is disabled, you can still use the database engine with the JDBC or the ODBC driver: http://documentation.softwareag.com/adabas/aad1514/ineteng/chapter6.htm http://documentation.softwareag.com/adabas/aad1513/unxuseng/uxodbc.htm Thanks. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice
On 06/08/2011 08:59 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:04 PM, NoOp wrote: Repeat. On 06/06/2011 06:05 PM, NoOp wrote: On 06/04/2011 05:10 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: ... Whether OOo lives or dies in Apache, Oracle has made it abundantly clear that this is it... This is one promise I fully expect Oracle will keep :/ Interesting... Could you clarify that statement? 1. @ASF: What happens to OOo if ASF votes *not* to accept the OOo project into the incubator? And it that is the case, what happens to the OOo software that has been granted to the ASF by Oracle? ... Was it your intention to pop into this list with: Hello! I have also just subscribed to both discuss@ and steering-discuss@ in hopes that if there are questions here regarding OOo, LOo, TDF and the ASF, I can respond. I'm also here to also ask that if you feel more comfortable emailing me directly, that is fine as well. and no longer respond to questions? The questions are, IMO, valid and are important - both for OOo and TDF/LO. Sorry I did not reply to this email in a timely manner... although I have replied to others, I did not have time to answer this one; I have been traveling and am at a conference and so sincere apologies for taking 2 days to reply. ... Thanks appreciate the informative reply. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice
On 06/07/2011 01:01 AM, Cor Nouws wrote: ... Apologies if this may have already been asked answered. If so, can someone point me to the appropriate messages within the hundreds of posts many, many threads on the ASF incubator list, or on this list? Well, as much letters I spend on the if-subject above, so little Would take me some time to dig the indeed already impressive archives on this subject, to be able to point you to the answers that will not help you much further than the words I spend on this 'if-subject' above and than your own imagination. It is my experience in the discussions there that fundamental questions on the why and how of the situation are ignored or circumvented, which is fair enough understandable since it is not really what the podling in Apache is about, or even fed with FUD, which is less palatable IMO. No problem. I was away for the weekend racing just now trying to catch up on the hundreds of posts on multiple lists. HTH a bit, It does. Regards Cor (who realises that there are still some use case questions pending that we together worked on few weeks ago :-\ ) Thanks Cor. Your reply is much appreciated. Gary -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice
Repeat. On 06/06/2011 06:05 PM, NoOp wrote: On 06/04/2011 05:10 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: ... Whether OOo lives or dies in Apache, Oracle has made it abundantly clear that this is it... This is one promise I fully expect Oracle will keep :/ Interesting... Could you clarify that statement? 1. @ASF: What happens to OOo if ASF votes *not* to accept the OOo project into the incubator? And it that is the case, what happens to the OOo software that has been granted to the ASF by Oracle? ... Was it your intention to pop into this list with: Hello! I have also just subscribed to both discuss@ and steering-discuss@ in hopes that if there are questions here regarding OOo, LOo, TDF and the ASF, I can respond. I'm also here to also ask that if you feel more comfortable emailing me directly, that is fine as well. and no longer respond to questions? The questions are, IMO, valid and are important - both for OOo and TDF/LO. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice
On 06/07/2011 05:26 PM, Greg Stein wrote: On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 21:05, NoOp gl...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On 06/04/2011 05:10 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: ... Whether OOo lives or dies in Apache, Oracle has made it abundantly clear that this is it... This is one promise I fully expect Oracle will keep :/ Interesting... Could you clarify that statement? 1. @ASF: What happens to OOo if ASF votes *not* to accept the OOo project into the incubator? And it that is the case, what happens to the OOo software that has been granted to the ASF by Oracle? We already have a recorded software grant from Oracle. So in that sense, we can release that code under the ALv2 right now. Normally, Apache will only make releases after appropriate review and testing. But if a project doesn't even get started, then there is nobody to perform that process, so podlings that do not start or do not graduate never get a chance to release the code. In this case, it is quite extra-ordinary. As a Director of the Foundation, I would lobby my fellow Board members to construct a tarball of the granted source files and drop that onto one of our servers. Take it as-is. No warranty implied and all that. I am pretty confident that the Board would agree to such an action. 2. @TDF: More importantly (from my POV) - what, if any, affect will this have on TDF/LO if OOo 'dies in Apache'? I suspect TDF will simply continue as before. They could rebase their files from the ALv2-licensed files, providing a much greater flexibility in the licensing of their overall work. Apologies if this may have already been asked answered. If so, can someone point me to the appropriate messges within the hundreds of posts many, many threads on the ASF incubator list, or on this list? Not a problem. There is a ton of email, and maybe not enough hours in the day to deal with it :-) I saw your later query to Jim, asking for a response. He hasn't responded because he is away at a conference for a few days. Cheers, -g Thanks Greg. Appreciate the response. Gary Lee -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice
On 06/04/2011 05:10 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: ... Whether OOo lives or dies in Apache, Oracle has made it abundantly clear that this is it... This is one promise I fully expect Oracle will keep :/ Interesting... Could you clarify that statement? 1. @ASF: What happens to OOo if ASF votes *not* to accept the OOo project into the incubator? And it that is the case, what happens to the OOo software that has been granted to the ASF by Oracle? 2. @TDF: More importantly (from my POV) - what, if any, affect will this have on TDF/LO if OOo 'dies in Apache'? Apologies if this may have already been asked answered. If so, can someone point me to the appropriate messges within the hundreds of posts many, many threads on the ASF incubator list, or on this list? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation's Incubator
On 06/02/2011 03:14 AM, plino wrote: Another interesting article (especially the comments on the post and the answers by Rob Weir) http://www.robweir.com/blog/2011/06/apache-openoffice.html ... Marbux speaks out: http://www.itworld.com/marbux (Paul E. (Marbux) Merrell, J.D. ) commenting on: http://www.itworld.com/software/170521/big-winner-apache-openofficeorg -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation's Incubator
quote REDWOOD SHORES, CA--(Marketwire - Jun 1, 2011) - With today's proposal to contribute the OpenOffice.org code to The Apache Software Foundation's Incubator, Oracle continues to demonstrate its commitment to the developer and open source communities. Donating OpenOffice.org to Apache gives this popular consumer software a mature, open, and well established infrastructure to continue well into the future. The Apache Software Foundation's model makes it possible for commercial and individual volunteer contributors to collaborate on open source product development. -- Luke Kowalski, vice president, Oracle Corporate Architecture Group. /quote More: http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/statements-on-openofficeorg-contribution-to-apache-nasdaq-orcl-1521400.htm It will be interesting to see how this works out how TDF will work with ASF. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation's Incubator
On 06/01/2011 09:23 AM, M Henri Day wrote: 2011/6/1 NoOp ... More: http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/statements-on-openofficeorg-contribution-to-apache-nasdaq-orcl-1521400.htm It will be interesting to see how this works out how TDF will work with ASF. Fascinating, NoOp - wheels within wheels ! Thanks for posting this !... Henri TDF's Statement: http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/06/01/statement-about-oracles-move-to-donate-openoffice-org-assets-to-the-apache-foundation/ -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation's Incubator
On 06/01/2011 05:53 PM, Robert Holtzman wrote: On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 09:51:09AM -0700, NoOp wrote: ... TDF's Statement: http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/06/01/statement-about-oracles-move-to-donate-openoffice-org-assets-to-the-apache-foundation/ TDF's statement included : Today we welcome Oracle’s donation of code that has previously been proprietary to the Apache Software Foundation, it is great to see key user features released in a form that can be included into LibreOffice. Since when is OOo proprietary? Rather interesting discussions going on over on the ASF Incubator list: http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.incubator.general/28435 -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Mailing List FAQ
On 05/24/2011 11:43 PM, Volker Merschmann wrote: Hi, 2011/5/25 NoOp gl...@sbcglobal.net: Is there one? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ doesn't show or refer to one. The german wiki page http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Local_Mailing_Lists/de has some additions and links for that. Maybe somebody should translate that to the english page. Volker I suppose. But that page is on http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Local_Mailing_Lists/ so even if translated and cleaned up wouldn't suffice. The place for such a FAQ should be on http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ and apply to all locales. Suggestions: http://www.mozilla.org/about/forums/etiquette.html http://www.ubuntu.com/support/community/mailinglists [Technical guidelines - in particular] http://www.openoffice.org/ml_guidelines.html And then once finalised/finalized should be posted in each mail list on a monthly basis so that list users are aware of etiquette/action/cooperation on the lists. This used to be common practice for mail lists in the past helped resolve unnecessary posts regarding posting styles[1], etc. It's pretty hard to condem someone for top-posting, going way of topic, discussing religion, et al if there isn't a FAQ or some form of common guideline for user behaviour in the mail lists. Nor can you chastise someone for posting in the developer list regarding a valid user concern simply because you are not a developer etc. Example: If the developer list doesn't want common users posting what are considered valid user concerns (i.e., broken pre-release packages, failure to provide the same in packages that affect installed stable packages) without being insulted and chastised, then items like this should be included up front on the http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ page as well. That said, here is a question; how can a common user be expected to possibly find http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Local_Mailing_Lists/ to begin with? I see no link on http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ do you? [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Mailing List FAQ
Is there one? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ doesn't show or refer to one. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Any wikipedia members/contributors here?
On 05/21/2011 11:04 AM, Robert Derman wrote: NoOp wrote: On 05/19/2011 05:18 PM, NoOp wrote: If you are a wikipedia member/contributor, perhaps you can have a look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_OpenDocument_software No mention of LibreOffice. Appearantly that is no longer the case. It is promanently mentioned as of now 5/21/11. That's why I added the part that you snipped: Thanks Dubyus: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comparison_of_OpenDocument_softwareaction=history That page shows where 'Dubyus' went in and added it on the 20th... -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Any wikipedia members/contributors here?
On 05/19/2011 05:18 PM, NoOp wrote: If you are a wikipedia member/contributor, perhaps you can have a look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_OpenDocument_software No mention of LibreOffice. Thanks Dubyus: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comparison_of_OpenDocument_softwareaction=history -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: OpenOffice dead and burried?
On 05/19/2011 10:23 AM, plino wrote: Hi Tor Please no. We who have had to look at that codebase and even fix some problems in it are glad that it is abandoned. It is a huge unmaintainable pile of XSLT, and then some silly C# code around that. (snip) Furthermore, this allegedly Open Source project (hosted on soureforge) includes (for the benefit of its use as a plug-in to MS Office; not relevant when used from OOo) some binary bits with unclear (IANAL) redistribution license. Fun. Then I think it's time to create a proper C/C++ ODF importer for Word. If this worked properly then this would be a further step in promoting ODF as a de facto open format alternative. ... Given that Oracle has tossed OOo back over the fence, I wonder if that also includes the Sun ODF Plugin... the one they first offered for free, and then changed to a purchase. If so, then that might be worth salvaging. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: OpenOffice dead and burried?
On 05/19/2011 11:03 AM, Andras Timar wrote: 2011/5/19 plino pedl...@gmail.com: Then I think it's time to create a proper C/C++ ODF importer for Word. If this worked properly then this would be a further step in promoting ODF as a de facto open format alternative. ODF support is present in MS Office 2007 SP2 and MS Office 2010 (it even can be selected as default file format) so what would be your target? MS Office 2003 and older? It does not look reasonable to me, because by the time we develop something useable, only a minority of users will use such old versions of MS Office. I think you should keep in mind that many users of LO are folks that simply can't, or won't spend the money to buy Office 2007 (and hence also need to spend even more money to upgrade their systems in order to use it). There are *millions* of users that are still using WinXP and older versions of MS Office (think schools, libraries, individuals, small companies, government offices, etc). Granted the ideal situation would be to have all of them install LO, but we know: 1) that just isn't going to happen, 2) and even if they do install LO, they are not going to purge their existing versions of MS Office... it just doesn't work that way. An ODF plugin (like the Sun ODF Plugin) could go a long way in gaining trust for existing MS Office users, particularly if it does an LO splashscreen when starting as the Sun one does. However, I also imagine that creating/converting/maintaining such a program would be a huge amount of effort/work. So I doubt that it will happen on LO's watch think it possible only with the backing of a major ($$$) corporation such as IBM or similar. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Any wikipedia members/contributors here?
If you are a wikipedia member/contributor, perhaps you can have a look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_OpenDocument_software No mention of LibreOffice. However, before updating the page, be aware of: http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.libreoffice.user/4599 [ODF format validity] (read the entire thread - including the 'Continue reading' bits) Or, try to look up the thread on: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ (good luck with that) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Forums - A Different Question
On 05/03/2011 02:17 AM, Manfred Usselmann wrote: On Mon, 02 May 2011 19:49:53 -0700 NoOp... Sorry, but I'd have to disagree... http://openoffice.org/terms_of_use The resources are owned and operated by Oracle. It's no contraction that the resource is made available by Oracle and the forum is run by community members as stated by Drew. Didn't Oracle anyhow recently announce that OpenOffice.org will become a pure community project? And that justifies continuing to use Oracle resources how? Whilst http://user.services.openoffice.org may (currently) tolerate LO posts, No, they don't just tolerate it, they explicitly support LibrOffice posts: User community support forum for OpenOffice.org, StarOffice, NeoOffice and LibreOffice True. But again, that justifies continuing to use Oracle resources how? LibreOffice is a branch from OOo just as go-oo and associated linux distributions that used the go-oo packages were. A continued issue on the OOo user list was determining if a linux user was using a standard OOo, or if they were using linux distribution variant. A great deal of OOo list user time was determining if the poster was using a go-oo variant, and then redirecting them to their linux specific support facilities (ex: launchpad for Ubuntu OOo). LibreOffice (IMO) should 'man up' and either provide resources for their own forums, or as an interim just state that currently there are no such LO forums available. Or support: http://libreofficeforum.org/ or similar. I find it embarassing that LO continue use/abuse the Oracle/OOo resources; y'all are big boys that branched off of OOo... right? Let's review: http://www.documentfoundation.org/ quote It is an independent self-governing meritocratic Foundation, created by leading members of the OpenOffice.org Community. /quote http://www.documentfoundation.org/foundation/ quote Our Mission Our mission is to facilitate the evolution of the OpenOffice.org Community into a new open, independent, and meritocratic organizational structure within the next few months. An independent Foundation is a better match to the values of our contributors, users, and supporters, and will enable a more effective, efficient, transparent, and inclusive Community. We will protect past investments by building on the solid achievements of our first decade, encourage wide participation in the Community, and co-ordinate activity across the Community. /quote -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Forums - A Different Question
On 04/30/2011 01:56 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Harold Fuchs wrote: Has Oracle given permission for TDF to use its forum, or doesn't TDF need such permission? Does TDF *want* to use an Oracle resource? I think Drew has already explained this on multiple mailing lists, anyway: the forums at http://user.services.openoffice.org/ are run by community members and not by Oracle, they explicitly include LibreOffice among the supported software (see page header), they can be used with no need for permissions from Oracle, and they are probably the best place where LibreOffice users can get support if they don't like mailing lists. Regards, Andrea. Sorry, but I'd have to disagree... http://openoffice.org/terms_of_use The resources are owned and operated by Oracle. Whilst http://user.services.openoffice.org may (currently) tolerate LO posts, certainly LO/TDF should prefer to not continue to send users/prospective users to OOo properties for support and answers regarding LO. Doing so is akin to having OOo send users/prospective users to the LO users list for support. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] [OT] Japan Earthquake
To all the LibreOffice/TDF users/contributors in Japan areas affected by the earthquake, I wish you, your families, and friends well. Gary -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: Mail List issues
On 03/10/2011 03:08 AM, Florian Effenberger wrote: ... infrastructure budget. I'm not commenting on the language (you also insulted me above, so don't throw the first stone), but he surely knows what he is doing in technical terms. My sincere apologies. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: Mail List issues
On 03/10/2011 02:47 PM, Friedrich Strohmaier wrote: Hi Charles, *, Charles Marcus schrieb: On 2011-03-10 8:09 AM, Christian Lohmaier wrote: The one situation where unsubscribing is difficult is when the reply asking for confirmation to unsubscribe is flagged as spam and thus not sorted to the user's inbox, but then again that's not the fault of the list-management. So change the default behavior... Make the confirmation email just that - a confirmation that an unsubscribe request has been made, and if they don't cancel the request within - what, 12? 24? hours, then the unsubscribe request is honored. Not a really good idea in my opinion, because anyone can unsubscribe You! In worst case, this enables the possibility of an unsubscription war. ... Then perhaps a reminder email after 48 hours going back to advise something along the lines of: We've noticed that you'd not responded to the previous unsubscribe email response. If you do not respond to this message within x hours/days your account will be automatically unsubscribed. To prevent this, please follow the link to: url and click I do not wish to unsubscribe or To prevent this, please reply instructions If you are still having issues with this, please contact: xyz@domain directly. That should give the user ample opportunity to respond. Regarding an unsubscription war; the direct contact address should put a stop to that if the moderator/list owner sees that the address is receiving multiple unsubscribe requests. If the messages are tagged as spam by the users ISP filters, then that's certainly the users problem. I do not have any experience with mlmmj so I've no idea if such a response can be automated, or if it is possible. But lacking the ability to modify settings/subscribe/unsubscribe like those in mailman, perhaps something like this might work? Note to Florian: Starting next week I'll install mlmmj on one of my test servers and see if I can gain some knowledge/exerience with it. I'm sure it will be better if someone with _real_ mlmmj experience provides added feedback in this thread, but I'm certainly willing to experiment/try. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: Mail List issues
On 03/10/2011 05:09 AM, Christian Lohmaier wrote: On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 6:17 AM, NoOp gl...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On 03/09/2011 06:16 AM, Christian Lohmaier wrote: ... And you mentioned that one could have learned from OOo lists: Ha, that is a good one. The OOo lists have explicit unsubscribe instructions in *every* footer, but still people complain about not knowing to unsubscribe. So having that in the footer will not help *at all* And you have experience on the OOo user list? The OOo user list is not the only list in the OOo project. No. But the issues I refer to are primarily from 5 years of posting on the OOo user list. . When you think you are qualified to share your expertise with us, without calling people stupid or ignorant, come back feel free to comment. They /are/ stupid, as they don't bother to read instructions. No excuse at all for this. They might be very intelligent otherwise, but when it comes to unsubscribing, they're too ignorant. Really? I suppose that you/we could dig up the archives and take a look. I reckon that in the majority of cases the issue is with users that are not experienced with mail lists. But then again, when you have a broken system that: 1) allows unsubscribed users to begin with, and 2) have a link on your (OOo) support page that simply states: http://support.openoffice.org/index.html Users Mail List (Subscribe / Archives) OpenOffice.org Project community support provided by a network of hundreds of experienced users. You must be subscribed to post messages. It's quite conceivable that you'll get users that haven't a clue what a mailing list is, or how to get out of it. Let's take a look at LO's help page: http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/ For user support, we have: Mailing lists: the user support mailing list address is our main channel for LibreOffice users needing help with a problem: us...@libreoffice.org. You need to subscribe to the list first before you can post a question. To do that, just send an empty message (no subject line, no message body) to users+subscr...@libreoffice.org. Instructions will be mailed back to you immediately (check for new mail, and check your spam/bulk mail folder just in case). For information about our other mailing lists, please visit the global mailing list index. Let's recap: You need to subscribe to the list first before you can post a question. However that doesn't seem to be that case, does it? Unsubscribed users are (as in the OOo case) are posting away on the lists. On top of that, gmane.org nntp posters are *required* to subscribe before they can post on the list then figure out the: http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ quote In the case of the GMANE interface, you can also post messages to the lists; to do this, you need to provide your e-mail address (to protect our lists from spam). You have the option of signing-up to receive each posted message individually (the most-commonly chosen option), or to receive them batched together as a daily digest (which you might consider as defeating the purpose of using GMANE). /quote bit. Hint: *nothing* in requiring gmane.org nntp posters to sign up first prevents spam, gmane.org does a better job on it's own. /NEVER EVER/ has there been a technical problem with unsubscribing. It Really? I think that you are mistaken. There are multiple posts from long time OOo users (that can read) that have had issues with unsubscribing. was *always* the user being too stupid to either mail the unubscribe address in the first place (they instead write stuff like STOP THIS, I DON'T WANT ANY MORE MAILS!!!, I'LL SUE YOU), or they're too dumb/stupid/ignorant to read the automatic reply asking for confirmation (i.e. another reply). No disputing that you'll get those for the very reasons I've mentioned. So what are the plans to prevent that happening on the LO lists? The one situation where unsubscribing is difficult is when the reply asking for confirmation to unsubscribe is flagged as spam and thus not sorted to the user's inbox, but then again that's not the fault of the list-management. They are stupid/ignorant because they did receive an introductional mail with the various commands to unsubscribe or get help when they did subscribe. They throw away that information without reading it. And instead of asking nicely, they immediately start shouting on the list. I call this stupid and/or ignorant. And I'd ask again: you have experience on the OOo user list? And I point out that you'll get those here for the very reasons I've mentioned. So what are the plans to prevent that happening on the LO lists? The /only/ exception to this rule is * People not speaking english, those are excused. (OTOH they managed to subscribe to the list nevertheless, and that works the same way as unsubscribing would) Really? Perhaps you'd care to rethink that. When you have a link on the support page that hooks inexperienced users
[tdf-discuss] Re: Mail List issues
On 03/09/2011 02:07 AM, Florian Effenberger wrote: Hello, Mailman has not been chosen mainly out of two reasons: 1. Moderation via e-mail is not comfortable. It especially requires one password shared among all moderators, which is inconvenient. 2. Although virtual domains are supported, the list name can only exist once per Mailman installation. That means, disc...@de.libreoffice.org and disc...@it.libreoffice.org could not exist. It rather would have to be de-disc...@de.libreoffice.org and it-disc...@it.libreoffice.org. In addition, managing virtual domain names is a bit more complicated in Mailman compared to mlmmj. No idea no real preference other than the ablity for the user to login and modify their profile settings subscribe/unsubscribe. That said I find it hard to believe that you couldn't have mailman accounts for each list. Ubuntu have many: https://lists.ubuntu.com/ all of which are mailmain based. Sample: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel etc. I agree that Mailman provides a lot of other great features that would come in handy and would have saved us a lot of time, but the above two limitations are real tough to deal with. Then my recommendation is to find something else, as the inability of the user to manager their list settings is a problem. I also agree that mlmmj has some drawbacks, but basically, it does it job very well. It doesn't if it doesn't allow the user to modify their mail list preferences settings, and/or unsubscribe/subscribe without jumping through hoops. To my understanding, many complaints would have either occured with other lists as well -- like some people want attachments, others don't, the next ones love forums, others don't -- and other things are not bugs in mlmmj itself. None of my comments regard attachments I think that you are being a bit obtuse silly here. For some configurations, Google Mail seems to omit the + in the addresses, however, the + is supported by RFC, so it's clearly a bug at Google that affects us. Other people complained about not being able to receive e-mail -- most of the time, it has been a few French providers blocking the mails without any reason, and, again, in violation of the RFC, not even answering to e-mails when the postmaster is mailed. Features like mark moderated messages are really desirable, but they are not supported by any other mailing list system, IIRC, so we would have to implement that ourselves anyways. And that is relevent to my questions how? And, what I also see, people simply cannot read. They send email to the help alias, but do not understand what to do. That would have occured with Mailman as well, and I guess people would have even be more confused by the web interface and the password they need. Perhaps it is because by the time the reach point of unsubscribing to the list(s) that they don't want to read? Don't know, but if the unsubscribe/subscribe information were posted on the website mail list area maybe they could instead be referred to that instead of some special email? There are a few drawbacks that will be solved with a newer mlmmj release we plan to roll out soon, like the cut-off moderation messages. How about tagging moderated messages so that subscribed users know that the post is from a unsubscribed poster and has been forwarded by a moderator? It's rather simple: just as a [Moderated] tag to the subject of the message. We also plan to provide an administrative interface, where list owners can edit some settings and (un)subscribe people. I agree that a lack of this is really ugly. However, it needs time and resources, so if anyone volunteers to code, let us know. :-) NoOp wrote on 2011-03-09 04.05: 1. Why are unsubscribed posts even allowed? It would seem that folks would have learned from the OOo list history. This is an endless discussion. Ask five people what they prefer, and you get seven replies. I am fine with both, but IMHO, the majority of list moderators wanted unsubscribed posts to be possible. Then if the mandate is to allow unsubscribed posts, *please* identify the post as such with a [Moderated] tag in the subject. As you may/or may not have witnessed on the OOo list over the past 5 years or so, this issue has been a subject of contention that raises it's ugly head at least once a month. The general consensus was to allow unsubscribed posters; the key problem was/is that there was/is no easy way to know if the post came from such. So folks send off a reply only to be told later that the time they took to respond fell on deaf ears because the OP was from someone not subscribed to the list. They then have to decide whether they wish to reforward their response to the Unsub, or just move on. Note: it seems that I've fallen into this category on the OOo list; after 5 years of posts, I'm suddenly
[tdf-discuss] Re: Mail List issues
On 03/09/2011 06:16 AM, Christian Lohmaier wrote: ... And you mentioned that one could have learned from OOo lists: Ha, that is a good one. The OOo lists have explicit unsubscribe instructions in *every* footer, but still people complain about not knowing to unsubscribe. So having that in the footer will not help *at all* And you have experience on the OOo user list? I see that your one and only post there was in 2005: Subject: Re: Ergebnis der DE Co-Lead Wahl Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 22:57:01 +0200 You obviously didn't spend any time on the OOo user lists regarding unsubscribe/subscribe/moderator issue. When you think you are qualified to share your expertise with us, without calling people stupid or ignorant, come back feel free to comment. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Mail List issues
Of late there are multiple posts on the users list regarding mail list subscribe and unsubscribe issues. A post back in October [tdf-discuss] Mailing list user preferences?: http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.discuss/100 [Note: I tried to find the thread in: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/threads.html but couldn't figure out how to easily search gave up] discusses some of this. Florian points out an issue with mailman: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.discuss/226 quote We use mlmmj for good reasons. Mailman has a lot of options and the luxury of a web interface, but it's a total mess for moderators. You have one password per list for all moderators, and moderation via e-mail is a pain. /quote But I wonder if the issue with mailman (moderator passwords) is actually the case: http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/mailman-admin.pdf I'm not versed on mailman, so I don't know the answer. However, the current issue of mail list subscribers not being able to subscribe/unsubscribe/modify user settings/etc in mlmmj as they can in mailman is an issue. And it will likely be more of an issue as the number of subscribers to the list(s) grow. Perhaps Florian et al can explain just how TDF plan to implement the lists, now and in the future? Some questions: 1. Why are unsubscribed posts even allowed? It would seem that folks would have learned from the OOo list history. 2. Why are multiple moderators necessary? If it's to get some poor soul to sort reject spam, then there are automated tools to do that instead. 3. Why are we getting posts on the user other lists using Mlmmj — Mailing List Management Made Joyful: http://mlmmj.org/ that the user can't unsubscribe, or can't set nomail? 4. Why is it necesary to send an email for unsubscribe instructions? Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org etc at all? Hello... is this some type of secret handshake that takes place to get off of the users list? This list has: Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org What seems to be the problem with simply posting the unsubscribe information on the website and at the bottom of each post? Such as: To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org To unsubscribe, e-mail to users+unsubscr...@libreoffice.org When I subscribed I received the following: ... From: discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org ... Subject: =?utf-8?q?Welcome_to_discuss=40documentfoundation.org?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Encoding: 8bit Welcome! You have been subscribed to the discuss@documentfoundation.org mailinglist. To unsubscribe send a message to: discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org And for help send a message to: discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org So why the requirement to send and ask for help? Is it because Mlmmj — Mailing List Management Made Joyful may not be so resilient/secure overall? Does the listname+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org not work any longer? Let's please discuss nip this issue in the bud now/early before the lists/users grow can no longer be managed properly. Gary Lee -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: Mail List issues
On 03/08/2011 07:05 PM, NoOp wrote: ... 4. Why is it necesary to send an email for unsubscribe instructions? Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org etc at all? Hello... is this some type of secret handshake that takes place to get off of the users list? This list has: Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org What seems to be the problem with simply posting the unsubscribe information on the website and at the bottom of each post? Such as: To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org To unsubscribe, e-mail to users+unsubscr...@libreoffice.org When I subscribed I received the following: ... From: discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org ... Subject: =?utf-8?q?Welcome_to_discuss=40documentfoundation.org?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Encoding: 8bit Welcome! You have been subscribed to the discuss@documentfoundation.org mailinglist. To unsubscribe send a message to: discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org And for help send a message to: discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org So why the requirement to send and ask for help? Is it because Mlmmj — Mailing List Management Made Joyful may not be so resilient/secure overall? Does the listname+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org not work any longer? Forgot to add: Welcome! You have been subscribed to the nomail version of the us...@libreoffice.org mailinglist. To unsubscribe send a mail to: users+unsubscribe-nom...@libreoffice.org And for help send a mail to: users+h...@libreoffice.org -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: [Resolved] Re: Ping Florian - StartCom Certs
On 02/27/2011 10:47 PM, Florian Effenberger wrote: Hi, NoOp wrote on 2011-02-27 22.52: Found it. security.enable.ssl2 was set to true. Reset it to false the page now loads fine. thanks for sharing! There are quite some other reports of issues with the SSL certificate, so if anyone else experiences problems, let me know. Florian Sorry, that should have been: 'security.enable_ssl2' note the underscore between 'enable' and 'ssl2'. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: Ping Florian - StartCom Certs
On 02/27/2011 07:10 AM, M Henri Day wrote: ... Interesting ! I checked this out in FF, Chromium, and Opera and at first glance everything looked fine. However, that latest Opera contains a feature that allows one to check security information with respect to a website, and under the «Security» tab, I see the following (my translation from the Swedish) : * This web site is not secure.* The connexion to www.libreoffice.org is not secure and should not be used to transmit sensitive information. The server attempted to activate security functions but failed. The above notice is followed by a so-called «certificate summary», as follows : Owner : *.libreoffice.org, Florian Effenberger Issuer : StartCom Class2 Primary Intermediate Server, CA StartCom Ltd. Expires : 2012-12-27 01.37.00 GMT Encryption protocol : TLS v1.0 256 bit AES (1024 bit DHE_RSA/SHA) Henri That's OK as it is pulling the images from an http vs http: http://www.libreoffice.org/assets/resized_screenshots_avoid/Screenshot-12.png In other words, its mixed only 'partially' secure. If you try https://www.libreoffice.org/download/ that page should show the security lock. And if you check the security (Tools|Advanced|Page Security Info) you should see: The connection to www.libreoffice.org is secure. Opera/9.80 (X11; Linux i686; U; en) Presto/2.7.62 Version/11.01 The issue, at this point, is with SeaMonkey (linux) Konquer. If I try on SeaMonkey Windows 2.1b2 it's fine: http://img402.imageshack.us/f/seamonkeycertwindows1.png/ I've posted on the SeaMonkey dev group to see I someone there can figure out the issue. Gary -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] [Solved] Re: Ping Florian - StartCom Certs
On 02/27/2011 11:52 AM, M Henri Day wrote: 2011/2/27 NoOp snipped On 02/27/2011 07:10 AM, M Henri Day wrote: ... That's OK as it is pulling the images from an http vs http: http://www.libreoffice.org/assets/resized_screenshots_avoid/Screenshot-12.png In other words, its mixed only 'partially' secure. Not quite sure what you mean by «pulling the images from an http vs http» here, Gary, as the address for which the anomalous security ratings is shown is, in fact, «https://www.libreoffice.org/», i e, a https address. In any event, I still get the above messages for «https://www.libreoffice.org/» on Opera What that means is that the rotating images that you see on the page showing LO screenshots are obtained from http://www.libreoffice.org/assets/resized_screenshots_avoid/. That's a non-encrypted link so Opera is telling you that there are unencrypted objects on the page therefore isn't completely secure. In other browsers (Firefox for instance) you will see a 'broken lock' on that page to indicate that it has mixed objects (unencrypted/encrypted). If you try https://www.libreoffice.org/download/ that page should show the security lock. And if you check the security (Tools|Advanced|Page Security Info) you should see: The connection to www.libreoffice.org is secure. Opera/9.80 (X11; Linux i686; U; en) Presto/2.7.62 Version/11.01 That was indeed the case on Opera 11.01 on my 64-bit Ubuntu 10.10 setup The issue, at this point, is with SeaMonkey (linux) Konquer. If I try on SeaMonkey Windows 2.1b2 it's fine: http://img402.imageshack.us/f/seamonkeycertwindows1.png/ I've posted on the SeaMonkey dev group to see I someone there can figure out the issue. Looks like a SeaMonkey profile issue. Just tried on a different machine the regular profile gets the errors. Switched to a clean 'test' profile and https://www.libreoffice.org/download works fine (linux). Now I just have to find the correct mozilla sqlite file that apparently is still stuck on *.documentfoundation.org and not picking up *.libreoffice.org. Apologies for for the false alarm noise. Gary ... -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: [Solved] Re: Ping Florian - StartCom Certs
On 02/27/2011 01:09 PM, M Henri Day wrote: 2011/2/27 NoOp gl...@sbcglobal.net On 02/27/2011 11:52 AM, M Henri Day wrote: 2011/2/27 NoOp snipped On 02/27/2011 07:10 AM, M Henri Day wrote: ... That's OK as it is pulling the images from an http vs http: http://www.libreoffice.org/assets/resized_screenshots_avoid/Screenshot-12.png In other words, its mixed only 'partially' secure. Not quite sure what you mean by «pulling the images from an http vs http» here, Gary, as the address for which the anomalous security ratings is shown is, in fact, «https://www.libreoffice.org/», i e, a https address. In any event, I still get the above messages for «https://www.libreoffice.org/» on Opera What that means is that the rotating images that you see on the page showing LO screenshots are obtained from http://www.libreoffice.org/assets/resized_screenshots_avoid/. That's a non-encrypted link so Opera is telling you that there are unencrypted objects on the page therefore isn't completely secure. In other browsers (Firefox for instance) you will see a 'broken lock' on that page to indicate that it has mixed objects (unencrypted/encrypted). Gary, I can't access the http://www.libreoffice.org/http://www.libreoffice.org/assets/resized_screenshots_avoid/ assets/resized_screenshots_avoid/http://www.libreoffice.org/assets/resized_screenshots_avoid/http://www.libreoffice.org/assets/resized_screenshots_avoid/page ; when I try I'm informed that I don't have the requisite permissions. That's correct - you don't have permission. I was only pointing out that the .png's for the screenshots on the web page pull the files from there. You will of course be able to access these: http://www.libreoffice.org/assets/resized_screenshots_avoid/Screenshot-12.png http://www.libreoffice.org/assets/resized_screenshots_avoid/Screenshot-11.png http://www.libreoffice.org/assets/resized_screenshots_avoid/Screenshot-10.png etc. I was just pointing out that those are the reason why you are getting a mixed (encrypted/unencrypted) page notice. If those links used https: https://www.libreoffice.org/assets/resized_screenshots_avoid/Screenshot-10.png Then the entire page would show as secure when you use https to access it. ... -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] [Resolved] Re: Ping Florian - StartCom Certs
On 02/27/2011 12:15 PM, NoOp wrote: ... Looks like a SeaMonkey profile issue. Just tried on a different machine the regular profile gets the errors. Switched to a clean 'test' profile and https://www.libreoffice.org/download works fine (linux). Now I just have to find the correct mozilla sqlite file that apparently is still stuck on *.documentfoundation.org and not picking up *.libreoffice.org. Apologies for for the false alarm noise. Found it. security.enable.ssl2 was set to true. Reset it to false the page now loads fine. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Ping Florian - StartCom Certs
Florian, you need to update the new StartCom Certs to include libreoffice.org. www.libreoffice.org uses an invalid security certificate. The certificate is only valid for the following names: *.documentfoundation.org , documentfoundation.org (Error code: ssl_error_bad_cert_domain) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: Ping Florian - StartCom Certs
On 02/25/2011 12:30 PM, Florian Effenberger wrote: Which site did you open? Seems to work here? NoOp wrote on 2011-02-25 21.25: Florian, you need to update the new StartCom Certs to include libreoffice.org. http://www.libreoffice.org/ Click on Download http://www.libreoffice.org/download/ Now click on Downloading Instructions http://www.libreoffice.org/download/instructions/ Now scroll down to: When finished downloading, please read the installation instructions. Odd. I can't get it to repeat on another tab. I still have the tab opened with the problem will post some screenshots in a few moments. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: Ping Florian - StartCom Certs
On 02/25/2011 12:42 PM, NoOp wrote: On 02/25/2011 12:30 PM, Florian Effenberger wrote: Which site did you open? Seems to work here? NoOp wrote on 2011-02-25 21.25: Florian, you need to update the new StartCom Certs to include libreoffice.org. http://www.libreoffice.org/ Click on Download http://www.libreoffice.org/download/ Now click on Downloading Instructions http://www.libreoffice.org/download/instructions/ Now scroll down to: When finished downloading, please read the installation instructions. Odd. I can't get it to repeat on another tab. I still have the tab opened with the problem will post some screenshots in a few moments. http://img638.imageshack.us/f/screenshot6z.png/ On the tab with that page open and this url: http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/installation/linux/ if I right click on 'Installation' I get this url: https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/installation/ The https is the one that is causing the cert alert. In fact, looking at all links show https vs http. As to why I'm getting https links from the original www.libreoffice.org page is a mystery to me. But I'll keep that tab opened see if I can figure out why. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: Ping Florian - StartCom Certs
On 02/25/2011 01:12 PM, NoOp wrote: ... http://img638.imageshack.us/f/screenshot6z.png/ On the tab with that page open and this url: http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/installation/linux/ if I right click on 'Installation' I get this url: https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/installation/ The https is the one that is causing the cert alert. In fact, looking at all links show https vs http. Sorry, forgot the link to the shot showing the cert alert: http://img841.imageshack.us/f/screenshot5di.png/ -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: Ping Florian - StartCom Certs
On 02/25/2011 01:14 PM, NoOp wrote: On 02/25/2011 01:12 PM, NoOp wrote: ... http://img638.imageshack.us/f/screenshot6z.png/ On the tab with that page open and this url: http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/installation/linux/ if I right click on 'Installation' I get this url: https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/installation/ The https is the one that is causing the cert alert. In fact, looking at all links show https vs http. Sorry, forgot the link to the shot showing the cert alert: http://img841.imageshack.us/f/screenshot5di.png/ Added note: you can reproduce if you use https://www.libreoffice.org/ -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: Setup Advice
On 02/21/2011 02:16 PM, Mark Preston wrote: I'm about ready to load up LibreOffice and start running it for work but have really one simple question before I do. Background is I will be running it on Windows Vista, currently run OpenOffice and will be using it near daily including with MS Office documents and presentations. So the question is: can I load LibO side-by-side with OpenOffice and if not what is the procedure to load LibO and - should there be probelms - to reload OpenOffice? Most importantly, this is a multi-user system so it needs to be loaded for at least three users. Any advice much appreciated. It's an issue: http://www.libreoffice.org/download/release-notes/ quote For Windows users that have OpenOffice.org installed, we advise uninstalling that beforehand, because it registers the same file type associations. /quote The issue is that LO uses the same executables as OOo (swriter, etc) and hasn't yet cleaned up the code to use something else (lowriter, etc). This can cause *considerable* issues with OOo and LO coexisting on the same Windows system. If you want to have both installed (on Windows - it's no issue on linux) at the same time, then I'd suggest installing 'in parallel', see: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Installing_in_parallel http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Run_OOo_versions_parallel#Windows So at this point (on Windows) you are better off with either/or: OOo or LO, but not both at the same time. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: Unable to use SCIM to import CJK languages into LibreOffice on 64-bit Ubuntu 10.10
On 02/21/2011 12:18 AM, M Henri Day wrote: 2011/2/21 NoOp ... Perhaps try iBus instead? https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ibus NoOp, thanks for your suggestion. Alas, I found myself unable to get IBus to work ; for example, after installing IBus according to the instructions on the Ubuntu Community page and adding Chinese and Japan, I didn't find «IBus Preferences» under «System» → «Preferences», nor did «Ctrl + Space» start IBus in, e g, LibreOffice, despite my having selected «ibus» as my keyboard input method under «System» → «Administration» → «Language Support». Log out back in, or: $ killall gnome-panel System|Preferences|Keyboard Input Methods ... Note: you really should move this over to the user list: http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ us...@libreoffice.org: User support list for LibreOffice users needing help with a problem. this list: discuss@documentfoundation.org: Mailing list for general discussions about The Document Foundation. On the user list see the thread: LibreOffice with iBus on linux. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: Unable to use SCIM to import CJK languages into LibreOffice on 64-bit Ubuntu 10.10
On 02/21/2011 01:16 AM, Christian Lohmaier wrote: Hi Peter, On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Peter Junge snipped wrote: On 02/21/2011 04:18 PM, M Henri Day wrote: SCIM is AFAIK really outdated. SCIM works fine, worked fine for the past years. ... http://sourceforge.net/projects/scim/files/scim/ == 2009. http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/scim/index.php?title=Main_Page SCIM platform project is suffered from lack of working members. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/desktop-karmic-input-methods http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/IBus It might work fine, but Peter is correct, scim is really outdated. Yes, it's maintained in Ubuntu: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/scim but lots of older working packages are still maintained. Also note that scim is only available from the universe repository. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ibus has been available since karmic and in the main repository. The good part is that you have choices :-) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: Unable to use SCIM to import CJK languages into LibreOffice on 64-bit Ubuntu 10.10
On 02/20/2011 07:39 AM, M Henri Day wrote: I recently had occasion to reinstall 64-bit Ubuntu 10.10 (n b, not because of a problem in Ubuntu itself, but because I replaced Windows Vista with Windows 7 on the Windows side of this dual-boot machine and thereafter failed in my attempts to restore GRUB2) and after doing so, noticed that no matter what I tried, I was unable to get SCIM to import CJK languages into a Writer text. Same problem, of course, when using OOo ; I'm using the latest (Swedish) 3.3 version in both cases. SCIM works fine with other applications on Ubuntu, like the gedit text editor or Gmail's compose. In contrast to the situation on Ubuntu, I have no problem using the Microsoft IMEs to import these languages into LO or OOo texts. However, I don't want to be forced to run Windows 7 in order to write, e g, a Chinese or Japanese text in a LO or OOo document. Is it possible to get SCIM and LO to play nice with each other and in that event, does anyone have any suggestions as to how to go about doing so ?... Henri Perhaps try iBus instead? https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ibus -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: RC1 PreRelease missing 32bit debs
On 02/14/2011 12:13 PM, twcw chenhall wrote: On 12/02/11 00:55, NoOp wrote: RC1 PreRelease missing 32bit debs http://www.libreoffice.org/download/pre-releases/ 64bit .debs are there, but not the 32bit .debs. Clicking on 'Linux x86 (deb) results in: null Also checking: http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/testing/3.3.1-rc1/deb/ http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/testing/3.3.1-rc1/deb/x86/ only shows .asc files. The x86 debs for LO3.3.1RC1 are available as of this morning. TerryW Thanks. Got the same msg from Florian on the mirrors list. Downloaded, installed working. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: Extensions for LibreOffice
On 02/12/2011 02:17 AM, M Henri Day wrote: 2011/2/12 Robert Holtzman hol...@cox.net On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 12:46:02PM +0100, Rainer Bielefeld wrote: Christophe Strobbe schrieb: I hope they are, but[...] Hi, I see several problems: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33265 Has anyone gotten an untrusted site warning for this link? FF says the certificate has expired. -- Bob Holtzman Key ID: 8D549279 If you think you're getting free lunch, check the price of the beer Bob, when I checked the link in FF 3.6.15pre on 64-bit Ubuntu 10.10, I saw the following : «(Felkod: sec_error_unknown_issuer)». I get the same type of warning in Chromium (11.0.669.0 (74721)). Agree that someone from tdf should check this out !... Henri https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20250 freedesktop bug database uses certificate signed by CA not recognized by Mozilla Try: http://wiki.cacert.org/BrowserClients Afterwards you should be able to view 20250. Firefox instructions on that page worked for me with SeaMonkey as well. @Bob: there are instructions for Chrome as well. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: Trouble installing on Windows XP
On 02/10/2011 12:32 PM, abenglen wrote: I have used OpenOffice for several years, and now I am trying to install LibreOffice on a Windows XP computer. About 4/5th the way thru installing (according to progress on the status bar), installation stops (hangs) and goes no further. There was no action clicking on Cancel button in the installation window--the only way to close the window was with the Task Manager. In case the conflict was with OpenOffice, I removed it. Now I can't install LibreOffice or even reinstall OpenOffice. In the middle of the installation process, it accesses the OpenOffice website; why? Any help is appreciated. Probably better to ask this on the user list rather than the discuss list. However, if you look at: http://www.libreoffice.org/download/release-notes/ there is a reference to If you run Windows 2000, you may require this update before being able to install LibreOffice. which links to: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?displaylang=enFamilyID=889482fc-5f56-4a38-b838-de776fd4138cpf=true Supported Operating Systems:Windows 2000 Service Pack 3;Windows 2000 Service Pack 4;Windows Server 2003;Windows XP;Windows XP Service Pack 1;Windows XP Service Pack 2 I wonder if perhaps that may be the issue? What version of XP? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] RC1 PreRelease missing 32bit debs
RC1 PreRelease missing 32bit debs http://www.libreoffice.org/download/pre-releases/ 64bit .debs are there, but not the 32bit .debs. Clicking on 'Linux x86 (deb) results in: null Also checking: http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/testing/3.3.1-rc1/deb/ http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/testing/3.3.1-rc1/deb/x86/ only shows .asc files. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [tdf-discuss] 恭禧發財
On 02/04/2011 12:18 AM, M Henri Day wrote: 2011/2/4 Harold Fuchs hwfa.libreoff...@gmail.com ... Google translator translates your 戴安理 as Diane Li. Why, please? I have *no* Chinese of any description (Mandarin, Cantonese, ...) whatsoever so, if it's a pun or similar, please explain. Oh, and to James Wilde, thank you very much for Google translator; wonderful! -- Harold Fuchs London, England Harold,as I explained in another posting on this somewhat confused thread, «戴安理» is just my name in Chinese script. ... Henri, you left out the 'M'. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: EPS images in ODF documents
On 02/01/2011 01:44 AM, Magnus Johansson wrote: I have made two test files with the kind of EPS images I work with. I put the test together with OOo in the ODT document and then printed a PDF file of that document with CUPS-PDF; I hope I managed to upload and attach them here properly. With the files I want to show my problem and that is the poor quality of the EPS images in the ODT document. The resulting PDF file is on the contrary very good; it is e.g. better than if I had made the original document in DOC format in Microsoft Word. But the ODT file that I work with when writing my texts and books has such poor EPS illustrations that I cannot rely on them for quick controls of what they contain. Regards, Magnus http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/file/n2396161/EPS_Image_Test_1.odt EPS_Image_Test_1.odt http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/file/n2396161/EPS_Image_Test_1.pdf EPS_Image_Test_1.pdf Post the eps file that you used. I wonder just what version of MS Word you are using that does such a better job. Certainly not MSO Word 2003 as importing an eps into that results in the same as OOo 3.3 or LO 3.3. I did several tests using a .ps file from http://www.mutopiaproject.org/cgibin/make-table.cgi?collection=bachengpreview=1 http://www.mutopiaproject.org/ftp/BachJS/BWV807/bach-english-suite-2-bourree-2/bach-english-suite-2-bourree-2-let.ps.gz and converted the file to eps using Scribus. Of course the print to pdf renders the converted .eps just fine. The MSO Word 2003 file didn't render the eps any better than OOo or LO. If you'd like to explore further then I suggest (again) that you start a new thread over on the users list as that's a better list to troubleshoot things like this. Further, if you do so I'll be happy to swap screenshots as well. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: EPS images in ODF documents
On 01/30/2011 04:01 AM, Magnus Johansson wrote: Halló Sveinn, and thanks for your reply. I don't know if my EPS images are vector graphics or bitmapped. How can I find out? This discussion is probably better over on the libereoffice user list - that way you might find more answers. I've had success importing an .eps (it was originally an .svg that was exported to .eps from Inkscape). If you can save a few pages of your document and send to me directly I'll be happy to test in LO Stable (RC4) and OOo 3.3.0 on linux WinXP and Win7. I can also test with OOo3.2.1 on linux (I'm not sure if I have any OOo3.2.x in the archives for Win). Send to glgxg @ sbcglobal.net (note: I'll most likely not respond until tomorrow (my time). Gary Added note: I can post the eps file that I used for testing, but think that this should be on the user list rather than the discuss list. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: The Document Foundation launches LibreOffice 3.3
On 01/27/2011 03:34 AM, Michael Meeks wrote: Hi there, On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 18:43 -0800, NoOp wrote: It also still uses soffice.exe et all in Windows; meaning that LO still takes over OOo if both are installed in parallel. Unfortunately, there is some inevitability of conflict here. This would have always been the situation between StarOffice and OpenOffice in the past eg. AFAIK (and I am no expert), we would both want to clobber the same COM component names - and remove them socially on uninstall etc. Short of the typical I notice XYZ other app is the default, do you want to change to me type code that would need adding on both sides, there will be issues here for a while. The latter seems MS like; are LO insistent on obliterating OOo by continuing to use OOo registry entries and executable file names? If you install OO.o over LO - you will find it does the same thing; there is no malice implied on either side. Actually OOo does not. I just tested OOo final 3.3.0 on WinXP and it does not disturb LO. Right-clicking on an .odt and selecting 'Open With' offers: OpenOffice.org Writer (OOo 3.3.0 stable was installed after LO) LibreOffice Writer (RC4/Stable is installed) Microsoft Word I suggest that you revisit the Change executable/sh names thread that I started on the dev list. That SVG import still is incomplete and doesn't work properly. In fact SVG import is pretty much an ongoing joke (whether it be OOo-go-oo or LO). Well; it does something useful; we (and you) are welcome to make it better. In my view, something useful is almost always better than nothing, even if it is not perfect. Perhaps the most serious thing it does is showcase the poor performance of draw with lots of complex shapes - something that is intrinsic to draw, but of course not seen if you don't load any data into it ;-) Perhaps 'ongoing joke' was a little harsh I offer my apologies to Bernhard Haumacher any devs that have been working on it since then. However the problem(s) have been ongoing for years (starting in 2005 + http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/SVG_Import_Filter). My point was; promoting a broken feature as key reason to switch to LO seems to me to be misguided. You know it's broke, I know it's broke, and the multiple (years old) bug reports validate my opinion. It really doesn't matter if the issue is with Draw or the SVG extension/code, the issue is/was the press release promoting a feature with significant issues. Sorry, but IMO RC4/Final should have waited awhile until some of the more basic bugs were resolved. I am sorry you think so. But rest assured, you'll have plenty of time to fix and test bug fixes for 3.3.1 with us all. It is not as if the baseline we are starting from is bug-free perfection too. Happy to help in any way that I can. BTW these might be worth a look/relook as well: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openoffice.org/+bug/138141 [[upstream] export of openoffice draw to svg renders text invisable in the svg file] - note my post of 2008 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32852 [[Linux] LibORC2: Impress video / `GLIBCXX_3.4.11' not found] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33050 [ [FILESAVE] LibO stops responding saving particular documents as .doc] If you look at the history, https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_activity.cgi?id=33050 you'll find that was discovered in RC2. There's more, but that's enough for this response. I'm quite happy to help via troubleshooting/testing etc., but IMO taking a fast track to release so soon after RC4 (which is the stable release) is an indication that the releases are timed to distros/other events. I think it better to slow things down and release 'when LO are ready' rather than on buttons pushed by outside sources. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: LibreOffice Final or still RC4 (64 Deb)
On 01/27/2011 05:01 PM, Johanes Lee wrote: Hi, I downloaded LibreOffice 64-bit for Deb Version: LibO_3.3.0_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz But extracted as following directory LibO_3.3.0rc4_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US Install success, Found this version information in the About screen: LibreOffice 3.3.0 OOO330m19 (Build:6) tag libreoffice-3.3.0.4 Did I download and install the latest version of LibreOffice? Yes. MD5sums are the same on both. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
