Re: Problems displaying Dialogs on Mac OSX
Gerardo , maybe the General options must been set to use OO-(UNO-AWT)dialogs and not system dialogs Hope it helps Fernand Hello everybody. I've been working with the UNO-AWT dialogs, i've translated the look and feel of an extension, from using Java Swing to UNO-AWT. I've tested the extension an it seems that the dialogs doesn't work on Mac OSX, but it works on Windows XP 32 bits, and Linux Slackware 13.37 x64. So i think it is more a Mac OSX thing, so do you know the cause of the problem, or some dependecy or whatever?. I doesn't put any debug dialog because when i tested it, it doesn't display anything. Here it is the extension if you want to test it yourself: http://ooo2gd.googlecode.com/issues/attachment?aid=1020004001name=UNOGDocs.oxttoken=6ce68ec8588a3944efa1002c0a7781ce Regards.
[Mac OS X, Intel] some issue with Apple remote
Hi, One reported me some issue using the Apple remote on Mac OS X. Can someone building on Mac try to use Impress with the Apple remote, and confirm there is an issue (or not) ? What is expected : using a fresh build of Apache OpenOffice.org, the apple remote works well on all Mac OS X versions (Intel only) Thanks in advance, Eric Bachard -- qɔᴉɹə Projet OOo4Kids : http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page L'association EducOOo : http://www.educoo.org Blog : http://eric.bachard.org/news
Re: [OT] Progress in my fight to walking normal!!!
Hello Raphael, I remember I met you in Geneva (was Linux Day, maybe 2009), and I was impressed by your energy, and your kindness. We are all with you, and wish you all the best !! Bon courage ! Eric Le 8 nov. 11 à 19:46, Raphael Bircher a écrit : Hi at all I make a big progress in my fight to walking normal. I won't going here in the medical details but one spastic muscle is now under much better control. This muscle was never active in sport activity, and his inactivity was the main reason why I'm about 1/3 slower in running as normal people. Last wekend this muscle take activity the first time during a run. Well, this is just the beginning. It will take about a year training to put the muscle to the same level as the other one. And I don't realy know how big the impact is. I will have to train hard in the next years. So please understand that I can't particip on events. I need to train realy frequently. Greetings Raphael -- My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/ -- qɔᴉɹə Projet OOo4Kids : http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page L'association EducOOo : http://www.educoo.org Blog : http://eric.bachard.org/news
Re: [OT] Progress in my fight to walking normal!!!
Hi Raphael, that are really good news and i am very happy for you. Juergen On 11/8/11 7:46 PM, Raphael Bircher wrote: Hi at all I make a big progress in my fight to walking normal. I won't going here in the medical details but one spastic muscle is now under much better control. This muscle was never active in sport activity, and his inactivity was the main reason why I'm about 1/3 slower in running as normal people. Last wekend this muscle take activity the first time during a run. Well, this is just the beginning. It will take about a year training to put the muscle to the same level as the other one. And I don't realy know how big the impact is. I will have to train hard in the next years. So please understand that I can't particip on events. I need to train realy frequently. Greetings Raphael
Re: [OT] Progress in my fight to walking normal!!!
Hi Raphael, I wish you all the best for your 'fight'. Best regards, Oliver. On 08.11.2011 19:46, Raphael Bircher wrote: Hi at all I make a big progress in my fight to walking normal. I won't going here in the medical details but one spastic muscle is now under much better control. This muscle was never active in sport activity, and his inactivity was the main reason why I'm about 1/3 slower in running as normal people. Last wekend this muscle take activity the first time during a run. Well, this is just the beginning. It will take about a year training to put the muscle to the same level as the other one. And I don't realy know how big the impact is. I will have to train hard in the next years. So please understand that I can't particip on events. I need to train realy frequently. Greetings Raphael
representing OOo (was Re: [Request] create ooo-disc...@incubator.apache.org mailing list)
On 8 November 2011 19:23, Louis Suárez-Potts lsuarezpo...@gmail.com wrote: ... now the project's representative on all three ODF TCs at Oasis, as well as its representative to Software in the Public Interest. Louis, Whilst I, as a mentor, welcome you contributions here I feel compelled to point out that you are not the project's representative on all three ODF TCs at Oasis, as well as its representative to Software in the Public Interest. Only PPMC members who are active and engaged with the project in an ongoing and constructive fashion can claim to be a part of the project and, even then, they are not representatives of the project. They are individuals who happen to have a *personal* opinion about the project. Occasionally the PPMC may appoint someone to speak for the project in various forums. To my knowledge the OOo PPMC has not yet granted approval for anyone to speak on the projects behalf. Is this an important point? Probably not in the bigger scheme of things. However, this is a podling learning how ASF projects work and therefore, as a mentor, I feel compelled to point out that a signature of this form is not appropriate in an Apache Project - regardless of how constructive your contributions are. Ross -- Ross Gardler (@rgardler) Programme Leader (Open Development) OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
Re: [Request] create ooo-disc...@incubator.apache.org mailing list
On 8 November 2011 23:58, eric b eric.bach...@free.fr wrote: Hi Shane, Le 8 nov. 11 à 23:48, Shane Curcuru a écrit : As a mentor, I have two comments: - When requesting a new mailing list, it is critical to clearly define the focus and expected community that would use a list. In particular, showing specific threads on other lists that would be better moved to the new list is helpful to give others a detailed explanation of the kinds of things a new list proposer would expect to see on the new list. The TDF/LO people did something intelligent about that, and really separate what is devel form what is not. The link I have i mind is : http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Use_of_MailList Everything is clearly explained and seems to be well accepted. Pointing to a document foundation wiki page and claiming is well accepted in an Apache project is not really appropriate. That being said if you think the AOOo project ought to adopt a similar policy for its lists then lets discuss that. Creating new email lists is simple technically, but should be approached with caution in terms of the effects of splitting community energy. It is not convinced you split energy separating pure development and what is not. There is a dynamic on ooo-dev list, in the sense people producing code ( anything producing website or something close to code) are active and start working together. There is an argument to be made for providing an avenue for non-development discussions. The problem (as I see it) with this request is that it is for a list without a clearly defined objective. OOO-discuss does not have a clear objective. Is it a user list? Is it a bud discussion list? A feature request list? A policy discussion list? Some other discuss list? The problem is, the number of posts is too high for a development list, and that's mainly why I suggested to create a new list. This may be true. However, we have discussed list creation before and we agreed to adopt a practice of tagging posts appropriately until such a time as a single topic are was too overwhelming. Perhaps that time has come and a second more focussed list is needed. However, the place to discuss this is not OOo-private and in any case the list will not be approved if the only justification is to hide the the noise we currently observe with ooo-dev mailing list A much more healthy reaction is to manage the OOo-dev list better (unless you are saying we need a user list, for example). Ross
Re: [Request] create ooo-disc...@incubator.apache.org mailing list
Hi Ross, Le 9 nov. 11 à 11:34, Ross Gardler a écrit : The link I have i mind is : http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Use_of_MailList Everything is clearly explained and seems to be well accepted. Pointing to a document foundation wiki page and claiming is well accepted in an Apache project is not really appropriate. Sorry, I wanted to show I was open, and when something is good, I don't fear to recognize it is. That being said if you think the AOOo project ought to adopt a similar policy for its lists then lets discuss that. What about do even better then ? :-) Creating new email lists is simple technically, but should be approached with caution in terms of the effects of splitting community energy. It is not convinced you split energy separating pure development and what is not. There is a dynamic on ooo-dev list, in the sense people producing code ( anything producing website or something close to code) are active and start working together. There is an argument to be made for providing an avenue for non- development discussions. The problem (as I see it) with this request is that it is for a list without a clearly defined objective. OOO-discuss does not have a clear objective. Is it a user list? Is it a bud discussion list? A feature request list? A policy discussion list? Some other discuss list? You are right, I was not enough precise, and any help to improve / rewrite my proposal is welcome. The problem is, the number of posts is too high for a development list, and that's mainly why I suggested to create a new list. This may be true. However, we have discussed list creation before and we agreed to adopt a practice of tagging posts appropriately until such a time as a single topic are was too overwhelming. Perhaps that time has come and a second more focussed list is needed. Yes, perhaps. However, the place to discuss this is not OOo-private and in any case the list will not be approved if the only justification is to hide the the noise we currently observe with ooo-dev mailing list I assume to word : noise is relative, and depends on the case. Review a patch on ooo-marketing mailing list is not well accepted either :-) A much more healthy reaction is to manage the OOo-dev list better (unless you are saying we need a user list, for example). In fact my proposal was an open door to improvement, and I expected opinions, people who disagree and other answers .. and so on. I'm confident somebody will have a good idea soon :-) Regards, Eric Bachard -- qɔᴉɹə Projet OOo4Kids : http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page L'association EducOOo : http://www.educoo.org Blog : http://eric.bachard.org/news
Re: [Mac OS X, Intel] some issue with Apple remote
On 11/9/11 9:09 AM, eric b wrote: Hi, One reported me some issue using the Apple remote on Mac OS X. Can someone building on Mac try to use Impress with the Apple remote, and confirm there is an issue (or not) ? What is expected : using a fresh build of Apache OpenOffice.org, the apple remote works well on all Mac OS X versions (Intel only) i have run a quick test on MacOS 10.7.2 with a fresh built (fro the same machine) of Apache Open Office (no copyleft components). I have loaded a presentation and my old Apple remote worked as expected, no problem detected so far. Hope that helps Juergen
Re: Problems displaying Dialogs on Mac OSX
Hi Gerardo, *, 2011/11/9 Gerardo Gómez gerardo.g...@gmail.com: I've been working with the UNO-AWT dialogs, i've translated the look and feel of an extension, from using Java Swing to UNO-AWT. I've tested the extension an it seems that the dialogs doesn't work on Mac OSX, but it works on Windows XP 32 bits, and Linux Slackware 13.37 x64. So i think it is more a Mac OSX thing, so do you know the cause of the problem, or some dependecy or whatever?. well, you write that you're using OOo's dialogs, so this might not apply, but java AWT and Mac OS doesn't work, see details here: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=92926 (I strongly disagree with the fixed state it - but as my patch did only work on 10.4 and wasn't correct in all places - what can you do) Anyway - if you're really using the OOo-api for the dialogs then this should not be the problem. ciao Christian
ODF Plugfest in Gouda, NL (17th+18th Nov. 2011)
Hi, I want to let you know that I will attend the ODF Plugfest in Gouda, NL next week [1], [2]. As an active member of the OASIS ODF TC (since Dec. 2006) and a long-term developer of OpenOffice.org (since July 2002) I was attending the ODF Plugfest since it got started in 2009 - I have missed the one in Berlin in July this year due to my vacation with my family. At the former events I have shared/discuss/present my view on the work at the OASIS ODF TC and about the work which is going on in the OpenOffice.org project regarding ODF. I also represented Sun/Oracle and its products around ODF. See [3] for details. For the ODF Plugfest next week I am planning to give somehow a status update of our Apache OpenOffice.org project (incubating) from my point of view. Something like: - developers are working on the code for an IP cleared milestone - status of the migration as found at [4] - ... Any objections to do so? Any further information which I can and should share on this event? Here, I want to ask Dave and Don directly for input as they are/were in Vancouver presenting/discussing our project ;-) Are there other project members attending the ODF Plugfest in Gouda? If yes, it would be a great opportunity to get in touch personally as members of the same project. Best regards, Oliver. [1] http://odfplugfest.org/2011-gouda/ [2] http://plugtest.opendocsociety.org/doku.php [3] http://plugtest.opendocsociety.org/doku.php?id=plugfests:200906_thehague:participants:oliver-rainer_wittmann [4] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/OpenOffice.org+Migration+Status
Do recent bugs filed against Libre 3.4 need to be refiled with apache tracker?
Guys, I apologize if this has been asked and answered, but over the past year I have filed several bugs against Libre which would also apply to OO 3.4. How do you want to handle these types of issues? Do you review the Libre tracker at freedesktop.org or do duplicates bugs need to be opened in the apache tracker? I presume you won't want duplicates filed, but is there some mechanism in place to make sure those bugs don't slip through the cracks and plague OO 3.4 the way they have Libre 3.4? May also be worth a note on the http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html page or the https://issues.apache.org/ooo/ page. Thanks. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Re: Do recent bugs filed against Libre 3.4 need to be refiled with apache tracker?
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 12:21 AM, David C. Rankin drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com wrote: Guys, I apologize if this has been asked and answered, but over the past year I have filed several bugs against Libre which would also apply to OO 3.4. How do you want to handle these types of issues? Do you review the Libre tracker at freedesktop.org or do duplicates bugs need to be opened in the apache tracker? Hi David, thanks for the great question. I don't think I've seen this question come up before. Currently there is no automatic exchange of bug reports between the two projects. I don't think that would make sense in general. From what I've seen there are many bugs in LO that do not exist in OOo, and presumably when we put out Apache releases we'll have bugs that don't exist in LO. But certainly there will be defects that exist in both products. And where we know that it will make sense to share the reports. Probably the easiest solution is, when you believe the defect exists in OOo as well, to enter a new defect in the AOOo Bugzilla, with a link to the LO defect. And then add a comment to the LO defect pointing to the AOOo defect report. No need to duplicate the content, but it would be useful to cross-link the defect reports. That way it will be easier for LO to find and grab our patches when we fix an issue. I presume you won't want duplicates filed, but is there some mechanism in place to make sure those bugs don't slip through the cracks and plague OO 3.4 the way they have Libre 3.4? May also be worth a note on the http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html page or the https://issues.apache.org/ooo/ page. Thanks. Let's see if there are any better ideas for how to track these cross-product defects, and then we can document the consensus recommendations, on the website (hopefully also at the LO website as well). Regards, -Rob -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Re: [DISCUSS]: new home for pre-built unowinreg.dll
On 11/5/11 1:30 PM, Mathias Bauer wrote: Am 01.11.2011 14:15, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt: Hi, for all unix builds it is possible to use a pre-built unowinreg.dll that is used in the SDK for Java client applications. Background: This dll contains some glue code that helps to find a default office installation on windows. This is used to bootstrap an UNO environment and establish a remote connection to an existing or new office instance from the Java client application that triggers this code. If is possible to cross compile this dll with mingw in some way but not really necessary. It was always possible to download a pre-built version and include it in the SDK on all plattforms expecting Windows where it is built always. I would suggest that we store this pre-built dll somewhere to ensure that this mechanism can be used or will work in the future as well. The URL to download the pre-built version is http://tools.openoffice.org/unowinreg_prebuild/680/unowinreg.dll The code is part of the odk module and is quite simple. Means it can be always checked what's in the dll. We can apply a md5 checksum to ensure that no manipulated dll is downloaded. Any ideas where we can store this dll in the future? In the build the unowinreg.dll is expected to be in external/unowinreg. Usually the developer needs to copy it there. We could just check it in there in case we wanted to stick with the binary. i think it is not allowed to check in binaries in the source tree, at least pre-built ones. I would be happy with this solution because it was the solution we had at the beginning ;-) Juergen Regards, Mathias
Re: ODF Plugfest in Gouda, NL (17th+18th Nov. 2011)
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 7:14 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, I want to let you know that I will attend the ODF Plugfest in Gouda, NL next week [1], [2]. As an active member of the OASIS ODF TC (since Dec. 2006) and a long-term developer of OpenOffice.org (since July 2002) I was attending the ODF Plugfest since it got started in 2009 - I have missed the one in Berlin in July this year due to my vacation with my family. At the former events I have shared/discuss/present my view on the work at the OASIS ODF TC and about the work which is going on in the OpenOffice.org project regarding ODF. I also represented Sun/Oracle and its products around ODF. See [3] for details. For the ODF Plugfest next week I am planning to give somehow a status update of our Apache OpenOffice.org project (incubating) from my point of view. Something like: - developers are working on the code for an IP cleared milestone - status of the migration as found at [4] - ... Any objections to do so? I think it is perfectly fine to share *facts* about the project and to encourage interested parties to join. But we need to be careful about opinions and predictions. You can have personal opinions, or even IBM opinions, but you have no officialAOOo project-authorized opinions or predictions unless it is discussed here first. I think everyone will want to know, When will we see the first Apache release of OpenOffice? Everyone wants to know this. I think we all have our opinions on this. I personally think it will be in January. But this is not something that the project has explicitly agreed to as a goal. Any further information which I can and should share on this event? Here, I want to ask Dave and Don directly for input as they are/were in Vancouver presenting/discussing our project ;-) Maybe some mention also of the Apache ODF Toolkit, which is also under incubation: http://incubator.apache.org/odftoolkit/ Are there other project members attending the ODF Plugfest in Gouda? If yes, it would be a great opportunity to get in touch personally as members of the same project. Best regards, Oliver. [1] http://odfplugfest.org/2011-gouda/ [2] http://plugtest.opendocsociety.org/doku.php [3] http://plugtest.opendocsociety.org/doku.php?id=plugfests:200906_thehague:participants:oliver-rainer_wittmann [4] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/OpenOffice.org+Migration+Status
Re: [Request] create ooo-disc...@incubator.apache.org mailing list
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 5:34 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: snip There is an argument to be made for providing an avenue for non-development discussions. The problem (as I see it) with this request is that it is for a list without a clearly defined objective. OOO-discuss does not have a clear objective. Is it a user list? Is it a bud discussion list? A feature request list? A policy discussion list? Some other discuss list? One idea, unconventional for Apache, but might still make sense: 1) Create a new list: ooo-general. Transfer the subscriber list of ooo-dev to ooo-general. This new list becomes the official cross-functional list for the AOOo project. It is the list where all project-wide proposals and votes are held. It is the list of record for the project. It is the list we're talking about when we say, If it didn't happen on the list, it didn't happen 2) Focus ooo-dev on the code. I know this is an odd approach for most Apache projects, where 90% of the discussion might be on code, with a small amount of discussion about the website or marketing. But with an end user oriented product like OpenOffice, it has always been the case that the discussions are far more diverse. I think there may be some benefit to encouraging a healthy code focus on ooo-dev, while enabling ooo-general to serve as a necessary list for cross-functional coordidation and communications. -Rob
Re: representing OOo (was Re: [Request] create ooo-disc...@incubator.apache.org mailing list)
Hi, On 9 November 2011 05:25, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: On 8 November 2011 19:23, Louis Suárez-Potts lsuarezpo...@gmail.com wrote: ... now the project's representative on all three ODF TCs at Oasis, as well as its representative to Software in the Public Interest. Louis, Whilst I, as a mentor, welcome you contributions here I feel compelled to point out that you are not the project's representative on all three ODF TCs at Oasis, as well as its representative to Software in the Public Interest. Actually, that's an interesting question. I don't mean to assert a stance I cannot hold legitimately, but earlier this year, when there was an OOo, I was appointed that role and OOo paid for my Oasis membership. I continue to more broadly advocate the ODF. Only PPMC members who are active and engaged with the project in an ongoing and constructive fashion can claim to be a part of the project and, even then, they are not representatives of the project. They are individuals who happen to have a *personal* opinion about the project. I fully understand. I raised this issue with some members of the Oasis ODF TCs. Again, I don't mean to assert untenable or illegitimate stances. Occasionally the PPMC may appoint someone to speak for the project in various forums. To my knowledge the OOo PPMC has not yet granted approval for anyone to speak on the projects behalf. Is this an important point? Probably not in the bigger scheme of things. However, this is a podling learning how ASF projects work and therefore, as a mentor, I feel compelled to point out that a signature of this form is not appropriate in an Apache Project - regardless of how constructive your contributions are. Thanks. This gets confusing, if not for me (it isn't), then outside of my own particular carapace. What I'll do is re-cast my shadow to be representing me, Louis, in personae Louis, and if my interests and those of Apache OOo coincide, then whoopee. Cheers, louis Ross -- Ross Gardler (@rgardler) Programme Leader (Open Development) OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
Re: Report Builder extension (was Re: [proposal] development for the first AOO release)
Hi, On 07.11.2011 12:42, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: On 07.11.2011 11:15, Mathias Bauer wrote: On 07.11.2011 09:50, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: On 03.11.2011 09:16, Mathias Bauer wrote: On 02.11.2011 15:52, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: I am not planning to remove the report builder extension. I am planning to remove the 3rd party components which are used by the report builder extension as they are licensed under LGPL. This will have the effect that the report builder will not work anymore. Thus, I have got in mind to disable its building without touching any code of it. You don't need to do that as by default the report builder isn't built. :-) I know ;-) But, I wanted to assure that nobody uses the configure option to enable the build and then fail. Why prevent others from building Report Builder? We don't build the JFree Report stuff anyway, to build the Report Builder you have to provide the pre-built jars. Currently they are pulled automatically from ext_src, but we could change that to pulling it from external like other stuff and throw errors in case the jars aren't there and the switch for building Report Builder is used. So someone who wants to build it just needs to copy the jars to external/jfreereport or so. I am not simply removing the --enable-report-builder configure option. The configure script already has a --with-system-jfreereport option together with certain --with-...-jar options in order to build the report builder extension with system's jars. Thus, I kept the --enable-report-builder option, but removed the --with-system-jfreereport option in order to build _only_ with system's jars. Unfortunately, my patch was not fully functional - but an improvement is in progress. This improvement more or less corrects the existing stuff regarding usage of system's jars for jfreereport. I have finished the improvement - or better the correction. Now, it should be possible to build the Report Builder extension with jars available in the system. To do so, the following (already existing) configure options have to be used: --enable-report-builder --with-sac-jar=JARFILE --with-libxml-jar=JARFILE --with-flute-jar=JARFILE --with-jfreereport-jar=JARFILE --with-liblayout-jar=JARFILE --with-libloader-jar=JARFILE --with-libloader-jar=JARFILE --with-libformula-jar=JARFILE --with-librepository-jar=JARFILE --with-libfonts-jar=JARFILE --with-libserializer-jar=JARFILE --with-libbase-jar=JARFILE I have reactivated environment variable SYSTEM_JFREEREPORT. It can not be used via a configure option, but is by default set to YES, if configure option --enable-report-builder is used. Thanks again for reporting the defect in my contribution. Again, feedback is welcome. Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [Mac OS X, Intel] some issue with Apple remote
On 11/9/11 3:55 PM, Alexander Thurgood wrote: Le 09/11/11 09:09, eric b a écrit : Hi all, Whether of interest or not, it is a known issue on LibreOffice with at least the white AppleMotes, not sure if the newer brushed metal ones are also affected : https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33816 I couldn't see any problem with my versions of OOo 3.2.1, 3.3.0 or 3.4.0-dev (last dev build provided by Oracle). HTH, Alex i used an old white one as well for my test and it worked. Juergen
Re: [code] main/dmake
Hi Ross, I'm still a little but confused about what license incompatible code means here. In its exact wording MPL code *is* incompatible, as only the binaries are allowed to be in an Apache release. Does that mean that we must not have MPL source code in our svn? The link http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html does not answer this question: Software under the following licenses may be included in binary form within an Apache product if the inclusion is appropriately labeled: As binary releases contain binaries anyway, I assume that Software means the source code. The cited statement leaves it open if that means released source tarballs or svn. Maybe the following link helps: http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#release-typeso What Must Every ASF Release Contain? Every ASF release must contain a source package, which must be sufficient for a user to build and test the release provided they have access to the appropriate platform and tools. This rule can be followed by providing a source tarball as part of the binary release that contains the same MPL binaries as the product, but not the source code. It does not explicitly forbid MPL source code (that is used to build the binaries we deliver in source tarball and product) in our svn repo. But I failed to find a quote that explicitly *allows* it. Can you shed some light on this? Regards, Mathias On 05.11.2011 12:27, Ross Gardler wrote: In order to graduate there can be no license incompatible code in SVN. The solution below is ok only as an interim solution. Sent from my mobile device (so please excuse typos) On 4 Nov 2011, at 15:38, Oliver-Rainer Wittmannorwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, our build tool dmake is licensed under GPL. Thus, it can not be part of our source releases. But, we can use it for building - as we are using the gcc compiler. Thus, I will move the dmake source folder from .../ooo/trunk/main/ to new folder .../ooo/buildtools/ in order to assure that everything under .../ooo/trunk/ can become part of our source release. In order to get our bootstrap process still working it needs some adaption: I am planning to introduce a configure option in order to provide manually the path to the source folder of the build tool dmake - something like with-dmake=$PATH to dmake folder. If this option is not used, the default path ../../buildtools/dmake/ - relative from folder main - will be taken. The configure will then check, if this folder exists - the manual given one or the default. The bootstrap process will then work with this path to create the build tool dmake. Any objections? Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [Mac OS X, Intel] some issue with Apple remote
Le 9 nov. 11 à 11:57, Jürgen Schmidt a écrit : On 11/9/11 9:09 AM, eric b wrote: Hi, Hi Jürgen, One reported me some issue using the Apple remote on Mac OS X. Can someone building on Mac try to use Impress with the Apple remote, and confirm there is an issue (or not) ? What is expected : using a fresh build of Apache OpenOffice.org, the apple remote works well on all Mac OS X versions (Intel only) i have run a quick test on MacOS 10.7.2 with a fresh built (fro the same machine) of Apache Open Office (no copyleft components). Ok, we know it works on 10.7.x At home, I got 10.4 and 10.5, but not 10.6 so I need other feedback. All possible cases are : 10.4, 10.5, 10.6, 10.7 associated to either white or metallic remote. I have loaded a presentation and my old Apple remote worked as expected, no problem detected so far. Hope that helps If svn up does nothing in main/apple_remote for you, yes it does. Else rebuild libAppleRemote.dylib Note : hdu seems to have removed mxi suffix recently. Just rename the lib in case OOo doesn't start, because checked in SalData at launch Thank you ! Eric -- qɔᴉɹə Projet OOo4Kids : http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page L'association EducOOo : http://www.educoo.org Blog : http://eric.bachard.org/news
Re: [Mac OS X, Intel] some issue with Apple remote
Hi, Le 9 nov. 11 à 15:55, Alexander Thurgood a écrit : Le 09/11/11 09:09, eric b a écrit : Hi all, Hi, Whether of interest or not, it is a known issue on LibreOffice with at least the white AppleMotes, not sure if the newer brushed metal ones are also affected : https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33816 Let's proceed the incremental way : first be sure there is no problem, or fix the potential issue in OpenOffice.org, then we'll see for the other cases. I couldn't see any problem with my versions of OOo 3.2.1, 3.3.0 or 3.4.0-dev (last dev build provided by Oracle). I recently fixed several issues in Apache OpenOffice.org source code, and I added another part I forgot to commit in OOo3.3.x long time ago. Now, the metallic remote should work (apologies, I don't have one myself), but maybe there is another issue elsewhere in the code (in slideshow, or vcl probably). Thanks for the feedback, Eric Bachard -- qɔᴉɹə Projet OOo4Kids : http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page L'association EducOOo : http://www.educoo.org Blog : http://eric.bachard.org/news
Re: [Request] create ooo-disc...@incubator.apache.org mailing list
On Nov 8, 2011, at 2:48 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote: As a mentor, I have two comments: - When requesting a new mailing list, it is critical to clearly define the focus and expected community that would use a list. In particular, showing specific threads on other lists that would be better moved to the new list is helpful to give others a detailed explanation of the kinds of things a new list proposer would expect to see on the new list. Creating new email lists is simple technically, but should be approached with caution in terms of the effects of splitting community energy. - I highly recommend that people view through the slides for the well-respected How Open Source Projects Survive Poisonous People set of slides: https://sites.google.com/site/io/how-open-source-projects-survive-poisonous-people The talk is worth watching, but for those short on time the slides are worth reading. In particular, the aspects about how communities of many different kinds of people (the vast majority who are not poisonous, by the way!) can effectively work together on public mailing lists. A key slide is pp 5, and pp7 as a followup: Attention and Focus These are your scarcest resources You must protect them The hour spent watching this will be worth hours in reclaimed time and productivity! Thanks, Dave - Shane
Re: Do recent bugs filed against Libre 3.4 need to be refiled with apache tracker?
Hello David; If you find a bug in OpenOffice.org file it directly on Apache's bugzilla. Duplicate bug reports are fine, they really are. So far I am the only one in the business of actually committing fixes to issues, so trust me and ignore completely what Rob suggested. I will act with extreme prejudice ignoring any bug report linked to libreoffice on the principle that such contributions or the resulting followups are not made under a compatible license. I won't even look at them. best regards, Pedro. --- On Wed, 11/9/11, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: ... On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 12:21 AM, David C. Rankin drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com wrote: Guys, I apologize if this has been asked and answered, but over the past year I have filed several bugs against Libre which would also apply to OO 3.4. How do you want to handle these types of issues? Do you review the Libre tracker at freedesktop.org or do duplicates bugs need to be opened in the apache tracker? Hi David, thanks for the great question. I don't think I've seen this question come up before. Currently there is no automatic exchange of bug reports between the two projects. I don't think that would make sense in general. From what I've seen there are many bugs in LO that do not exist in OOo, and presumably when we put out Apache releases we'll have bugs that don't exist in LO. But certainly there will be defects that exist in both products. And where we know that it will make sense to share the reports. Probably the easiest solution is, when you believe the defect exists in OOo as well, to enter a new defect in the AOOo Bugzilla, with a link to the LO defect. And then add a comment to the LO defect pointing to the AOOo defect report. No need to duplicate the content, but it would be useful to cross-link the defect reports. That way it will be easier for LO to find and grab our patches when we fix an issue. I presume you won't want duplicates filed, but is there some mechanism in place to make sure those bugs don't slip through the cracks and plague OO 3.4 the way they have Libre 3.4? May also be worth a note on the http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html page or the https://issues.apache.org/ooo/ page. Thanks. Let's see if there are any better ideas for how to track these cross-product defects, and then we can document the consensus recommendations, on the website (hopefully also at the LO website as well). Regards, -Rob -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Re: Report Builder extension (was Re: [proposal] development for the first AOO release)
Hi Oliver; I won't ask you to revert this but I think it's a complete waste of time. Those tarballs don't really have a home so it's improbable that someone will get them into their build, plus it's too many flags to get that building. My attempt to contact Pentaho concerning this extension produced no result. I consider this extension orphaned and I think it should be moved elsewhere out. Pedro. (Yes, I woke up on the left side of the bed today ;-) ). --- On Wed, 11/9/11, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: ... I have finished the improvement - or better the correction. Now, it should be possible to build the Report Builder extension with jars available in the system. To do so, the following (already existing) configure options have to be used: --enable-report-builder --with-sac-jar=JARFILE --with-libxml-jar=JARFILE --with-flute-jar=JARFILE --with-jfreereport-jar=JARFILE --with-liblayout-jar=JARFILE --with-libloader-jar=JARFILE --with-libloader-jar=JARFILE --with-libformula-jar=JARFILE --with-librepository-jar=JARFILE --with-libfonts-jar=JARFILE --with-libserializer-jar=JARFILE --with-libbase-jar=JARFILE I have reactivated environment variable SYSTEM_JFREEREPORT. It can not be used via a configure option, but is by default set to YES, if configure option --enable-report-builder is used. Thanks again for reporting the defect in my contribution. Again, feedback is welcome. Best regards, Oliver.
Re: Do recent bugs filed against Libre 3.4 need to be refiled with apache tracker?
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org wrote: Hello David; If you find a bug in OpenOffice.org file it directly on Apache's bugzilla. Duplicate bug reports are fine, they really are. So far I am the only one in the business of actually committing fixes to issues, so trust me and ignore completely what Rob suggested. I will act with extreme prejudice ignoring any bug report linked to libreoffice on the principle that such contributions or the resulting followups are not made under a compatible license. I won't even look at them. Do you really think the facts expressed in a bug report are covered by a license? I'm not talking about patches, but the facts of Do X, Y and Z and Calc crashes?. If you think that, then I think you are mistaken. -Rob best regards, Pedro. --- On Wed, 11/9/11, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: ... On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 12:21 AM, David C. Rankin drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com wrote: Guys, I apologize if this has been asked and answered, but over the past year I have filed several bugs against Libre which would also apply to OO 3.4. How do you want to handle these types of issues? Do you review the Libre tracker at freedesktop.org or do duplicates bugs need to be opened in the apache tracker? Hi David, thanks for the great question. I don't think I've seen this question come up before. Currently there is no automatic exchange of bug reports between the two projects. I don't think that would make sense in general. From what I've seen there are many bugs in LO that do not exist in OOo, and presumably when we put out Apache releases we'll have bugs that don't exist in LO. But certainly there will be defects that exist in both products. And where we know that it will make sense to share the reports. Probably the easiest solution is, when you believe the defect exists in OOo as well, to enter a new defect in the AOOo Bugzilla, with a link to the LO defect. And then add a comment to the LO defect pointing to the AOOo defect report. No need to duplicate the content, but it would be useful to cross-link the defect reports. That way it will be easier for LO to find and grab our patches when we fix an issue. I presume you won't want duplicates filed, but is there some mechanism in place to make sure those bugs don't slip through the cracks and plague OO 3.4 the way they have Libre 3.4? May also be worth a note on the http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html page or the https://issues.apache.org/ooo/ page. Thanks. Let's see if there are any better ideas for how to track these cross-product defects, and then we can document the consensus recommendations, on the website (hopefully also at the LO website as well). Regards, -Rob -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Re: Do recent bugs filed against Libre 3.4 need to be refiled with apache tracker?
Thank you, David, for looking to ensure that issues that might pertain to multiple projects are reported appropriately to each project. We definitely appreciate the extra effort from our users! Personally, I think it would be good to submit full independent bugs to each project's issue tracker. Since the active development communities are notably different, this would make it easier for AOOo and LO developers to work on fixes in their respective projects. But that's just my suggestion. Thanks! - Shane On 2011-11-08 9:21 PM, David C. Rankin wrote: Guys, I apologize if this has been asked and answered, but over the past year I have filed several bugs against Libre which would also apply to OO 3.4. How do you want to handle these types of issues? Do you review the Libre tracker at freedesktop.org or do duplicates bugs need to be opened in the apache tracker? I presume you won't want duplicates filed, but is there some mechanism in place to make sure those bugs don't slip through the cracks and plague OO 3.4 the way they have Libre 3.4? May also be worth a note on the http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html page or the https://issues.apache.org/ooo/ page. Thanks.
Re: Do recent bugs filed against Libre 3.4 need to be refiled with apache tracker?
Rob Weir wrote on Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 12:49:56 -0500: On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org wrote: Hello David; If you find a bug in OpenOffice.org file it directly on Apache's bugzilla. Duplicate bug reports are fine, they really are. So far I am the only one in the business of actually committing fixes to issues, so trust me and ignore completely what Rob suggested. I will act with extreme prejudice ignoring any bug report linked to libreoffice on the principle that such contributions or the resulting followups are not made under a compatible license. I won't even look at them. Do you really think the facts expressed in a bug report are covered by a license? I'm not talking about patches, but the facts of Do X, Y and Z and Calc crashes?. If you think that, then I think you are mistaken. I wonder if there's a room for shared bug tracking --- i.e., people enter a bug once, and then the fix is tracked N times, once for every set of incompatible licenses the fix is developed under. (initially N=2)
Re: [Mac OS X, Intel] some issue with Apple remote
Hi Am 09.11.11 16:20, schrieb eric b: I couldn't see any problem with my versions of OOo 3.2.1, 3.3.0 or 3.4.0-dev (last dev build provided by Oracle). If someone leads me to a recent build of 3.4, i'll be able to test that with 10.6 and 10.5 and a white apple remote. btw 3.3 works fine under 10.6 with the white apple remote. -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen Uwe Altmann
Re: Do recent bugs filed against Libre 3.4 need to be refiled with apache tracker?
Hi Pedro, Pedro Giffuni schrieb: Hello David; If you find a bug in OpenOffice.org file it directly on Apache's bugzilla. Duplicate bug reports are fine, they really are. So far I am the only one in the business of actually committing fixes to issues, so trust me and ignore completely what Rob suggested. I will act with extreme prejudice ignoring any bug report linked to libreoffice on the principle that such contributions or the resulting followups are not made under a compatible license. I won't even look at them. I do not understand, why you will ignore solutions found in LibreOffice. For example bug https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=115922 has a solution in https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32872. Why do you will ignore it? (Actually it is a simple typo FontWorkAlignmentController - FontworkAlignmentController) Even if you can not take the patch as it is, the bug report in LibreOffice might tell you the reason of the problem and it might contain valuable comments and test documents. Kind regards Regina
Re: [Mac OS X, Intel] some issue with Apple remote
Hi Uwe Am 09.11.11 19:24, schrieb Uwe Altmann: Hi Am 09.11.11 16:20, schrieb eric b: I couldn't see any problem with my versions of OOo 3.2.1, 3.3.0 or 3.4.0-dev (last dev build provided by Oracle). If someone leads me to a recent build of 3.4, i'll be able to test that with 10.6 and 10.5 and a white apple remote. btw 3.3 works fine under 10.6 with the white apple remote. Not completly up date, but same AOOo Builds. Attention they will be installed as OpenOffice.org and not as OOo-Dev http://people.apache.org/~rbircher/builds/ Greetings Raphael -- My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
Re: [Request] create ooo-disc...@incubator.apache.org mailing list
On 9 November 2011 07:26, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Nov 8, 2011, at 2:48 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote: As a mentor, I have two comments: - When requesting a new mailing list, it is critical to clearly define the focus and expected community that would use a list. In particular, showing specific threads on other lists that would be better moved to the new list is helpful to give others a detailed explanation of the kinds of things a new list proposer would expect to see on the new list. Creating new email lists is simple technically, but should be approached with caution in terms of the effects of splitting community energy. - I highly recommend that people view through the slides for the well-respected How Open Source Projects Survive Poisonous People set of slides: https://sites.google.com/site/io/how-open-source-projects-survive-poisonous-people The talk is worth watching, but for those short on time the slides are worth reading. In particular, the aspects about how communities of many different kinds of people (the vast majority who are not poisonous, by the way!) can effectively work together on public mailing lists. A key slide is pp 5, and pp7 as a followup: Attention and Focus These are your scarcest resources You must protect them The hour spent watching this will be worth hours in reclaimed time and productivity! +1000 This video really ought to be required watching for all subscribers to any open source mailing list. Ross -- Ross Gardler (@rgardler) Programme Leader (Open Development) OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
Re: Do recent bugs filed against Libre 3.4 need to be refiled with apache tracker?
I will certainly ignore it. Patches expressly submitted through our bugzilla are or our mailing list safely covered by AL2 section 5. While I *could* look at the issue and ask for permission to apply the the fix, or I *could* implement alternative fixes, I choose to work with our own community on issues that have been tested and proved here (and we are not running short on those). On the long run I think LO and AOOo will keep diverging more and more and the number of shared bugs will eventually vanish. This is my own position though. I don't pretend this to apply to others and certainly issue submitters can do their part of the homework when they submit issues by verifying if it has been solved elsewhere, what caused it and even if the author is OK with the patch being applied here: don't expect committers to do everything, we have a life too! best regards, Pedro. --- On Wed, 11/9/11, Regina Henschel rb.hensc...@t-online.de wrote: I do not understand, why you will ignore solutions found in LibreOffice. For example bug https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=115922 has a solution in https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32872. Why do you will ignore it? (Actually it is a simple typo FontWorkAlignmentController - FontworkAlignmentController) Even if you can not take the patch as it is, the bug report in LibreOffice might tell you the reason of the problem and it might contain valuable comments and test documents. Kind regards Regina
Re: representing OOo (was Re: [Request] create ooo-disc...@incubator.apache.org mailing list)
On 9 November 2011 05:07, Louis Suárez-Potts lsuarezpo...@gmail.com wrote: ... What I'll do is re-cast my shadow to be representing me, Louis, in personae Louis, and if my interests and those of Apache OOo coincide, then whoopee. Perfect! Thanks for understanding. Ross
Re: Crystal and Oxygen images (was Re: GPL'd dictionaries)
2011/11/9 Mathias Bauer mathias_ba...@gmx.net On 09.11.2011 03:20, Pedro Giffuni wrote: Hello guys; Ahem... I am afraid the external_images directory only contains copylefted content. I thought those corresponded to KDE themes, but they look very specific to OpenOffice.org. Is this also a big problem as it seems? Pedro. No, we can just leave them out. I don't think that many users will miss them. As KDE user I'll miss them...
Re: Crystal and Oxygen images (was Re: GPL'd dictionaries)
--- On Wed, 11/9/11, RGB ES rgb.m...@gmail.com wrote: ... No, we can just leave them out. I don't think that many users will miss them. As KDE user I'll miss them... I am a KDE user too. If this has content generated by the OOo community perhaps we can contribute this upstream? regards, Pedro.
Re: [DISCUSS]: new home for pre-built unowinreg.dll
2011/11/9 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com: On 11/5/11 1:30 PM, Mathias Bauer wrote: Am 01.11.2011 14:15, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt: Hi, for all unix builds it is possible to use a pre-built unowinreg.dll that is used in the SDK for Java client applications. Background: This dll contains some glue code that helps to find a default office installation on windows. This is used to bootstrap an UNO environment and establish a remote connection to an existing or new office instance from the Java client application that triggers this code. If is possible to cross compile this dll with mingw in some way but not really necessary. It was always possible to download a pre-built version and include it in the SDK on all plattforms expecting Windows where it is built always. I would suggest that we store this pre-built dll somewhere to ensure that this mechanism can be used or will work in the future as well. The URL to download the pre-built version is http://tools.openoffice.org/unowinreg_prebuild/680/unowinreg.dll The code is part of the odk module and is quite simple. Means it can be always checked what's in the dll. We can apply a md5 checksum to ensure that no manipulated dll is downloaded. Any ideas where we can store this dll in the future? In the build the unowinreg.dll is expected to be in external/unowinreg. Usually the developer needs to copy it there. We could just check it in there in case we wanted to stick with the binary. i think it is not allowed to check in binaries in the source tree, at least pre-built ones. I would be happy with this solution because it was the solution we had at the beginning ;-) The binary is Apache 2.0 license? If so, I think it is OK. At least no policy problem. It is odd from an engineering standpoint. But I see the argument: we are building a Java library that calls into a native method via a platform-specific native library. If we want to be able to build that SDK on Linux, then we need to be able to package the Windows DLL. This is because even if we build on Linux, the user of the SDK might run their code on any platform, including Windows. So we need to be able to package Windows native code on a Linux-built SDK. Checking in the Windows DLL seems to be the easiest solution. Maybe put a clear README file in that directory so other developers know what is going on and how to rebuild it. Is this code that almost never changes? Should we rebuild it for every official release? Juergen Regards, Mathias
Re: [OT] Progress in my fight to walking normal!!!
Hi Raphael-- Wishing you all the best on your road to recovery! On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Raphael Bircher r.birc...@gmx.ch wrote: Hi at all I make a big progress in my fight to walking normal. I won't going here in the medical details but one spastic muscle is now under much better control. This muscle was never active in sport activity, and his inactivity was the main reason why I'm about 1/3 slower in running as normal people. Last wekend this muscle take activity the first time during a run. Well, this is just the beginning. It will take about a year training to put the muscle to the same level as the other one. And I don't realy know how big the impact is. I will have to train hard in the next years. So please understand that I can't particip on events. I need to train realy frequently. Greetings Raphael -- My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/ -- MzK The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated. -- Mohandas Gandhi
Re: Do recent bugs filed against Libre 3.4 need to be refiled with apache tracker?
Hi again Regina: --- On Wed, 11/9/11, Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org wrote: ... being applied here: don't expect committers to do everything, we have a life too! I should've added a wink ( ;) ) here, as I didn't mean to be rude. I know perfectly well that you go very far in your testing activities and you are a great contributor here. Email is not a very good means of communication so by all means don't let my bad day get in your way and keep doing the great contributions that you do! best regards, Pedro. --- On Wed, 11/9/11, Regina Henschel rb.hensc...@t-online.de wrote: I do not understand, why you will ignore solutions found in LibreOffice. For example bug https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=115922 has a solution in https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32872. Why do you will ignore it? (Actually it is a simple typo FontWorkAlignmentController - FontworkAlignmentController) Even if you can not take the patch as it is, the bug report in LibreOffice might tell you the reason of the problem and it might contain valuable comments and test documents. Kind regards Regina
Re: [Request] create ooo-disc...@incubator.apache.org mailing list
Hi all, https://sites.google.com/site/io/how-open-source-projects-survive-poisonous-people I like this video too. :) If we try to build a strong community based on politeness, respect, trust and humility[slide p9], if we follow mailing list etiquette[p13], if you don't Don't[p30] and if you do Do[pp32, 33, 34], we won't need more English lists than ooo-...@incubator.apahce.org, ooo-us...@incubator.apache.org and ooo-market...@incubator.apache.org. I would like to tell the Japanese list these based on and etiquette and don't and do in Japanese when http://s.apache.org/D3a this question is solved and Japanese posts with Japanese subject get through on the list, ooo-general...@incubator.apache.org. :) Thanks, khirano -- I am a slow reader and a slow writer. :) Long and complicated English is a barrier. Short and simple English is a bridge. :) Please be friendly to non-English speakers on lists. :) Slow down. Make it short. Make it simple. No hurry. Read it again before you post. Then post it tomorrow. :)
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
On Nov 9, 2011, at 2:19 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: As many of you may know, per Dave's announcement about a week or so ago, we have a staging site of *MOST* (we're still finding areas that need to be re-pulled for one reason or another), of the (old) current OO.o site at: http://ooo-site.apache.org Right now, I have a question about the existing pl (Polish) site at http://pl.openoffice.org/ Does anyone on this list know anything about the history of the Polish site -- why this group decided to basically make a duplicate of the OpenOffice.org site but translated? None of the other N-L sites have gone to this length so I'm just curious about it. Is it bigger than the German site? Also, at this point in our migration plans, do we have anyone here who is willing to continue to maintain the pl site as it stands? I think we want to check it in, but then we may want to then remove most of each N-L site (they will be in SVN!) Also note, this site has not yet been ported over to the staging site. And finally, I am having a few problems getting my recent changes to the N-L page to actually publish so no fun link from the staging home page yet. http://ooo-site.apache.org/ I published these just now. Warning - using the webgui the first time on ooo-site it is suggested that you brew a cup of coffee and come back in 10 minutes. I've discussed the foo.openoffice.org/bar to www.openoffice.org/foo/bar permanent redirect for the ooo-site Virtual Host and openoffice.org DNS with Joe today - we should specify a full list of the subdomains that will fit this pattern and add it to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-3933 When the time comes to go live Infra will handle the rest of the detail. Regards, Dave -- MzK The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated. -- Mohandas Gandhi
Re: Foundation policy for email forwarding service
+1 On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 10:53 PM, Shane Curcuru a...@shanecurcuru.org wrote: To add onto this policy with my brand management hat, I would strongly advise the AOOo PPMC to choose to not provide mail forwarding addresses @ openoffice.org domain for project committers. All committers already have @apache.org email addresses, which would be the best way to for active committers to show their participation in this new project, working in the Apache Way, called Apache OpenOffice going forward. - Shane On 2011-11-08 3:32 PM, Greg Stein wrote: Hello everybody, At the Board's face-to-face meeting here in Vancouver, we discussed the issue of transferring [from Oracle to Apache] the set of email-forwards for usernames in the openoffice.org domain. There are certainly some legal concerns and some technical work to get through, and I know the podling is working through that. However, the Board felt it appropriate to set a general Foundation-wide policy in terms of email forwarding services using the Foundation's domains and brands. In short, *only* people directly affiliated with the Foundation as a committer or Member are eligible for email forwarding services using our domains. The core of this issue is based on avoiding confusion/misrepresentation based on sending email using our domains. Just as I can no longer send mail using my old gst...@google.com or gst...@microsoft.com addresses, we do not want to allow unaffiliated third parties to send email using our brands/domains. Email addresses using the @apache.org domain are provided for all committers once they are voted/approved by one of our Project Management Committees (PMC) and have returned an Individual Contributor License Agreement. Email forwarding addresses using our other domains (such as @subversion.com, @myfaces.org, or @openoffice.org) would be subject to all the above rules, along with technical input and support from Infrastructure. The PMCs associated with these extra domain(s) may set additional requirements/policies, but the general recommendation of the Board is to avoid all email forwarding services beyond @apache.org. If you have any questions, then please feel to contact myself or the Board. Cheers, Greg Stein Vice Chairman, Director, Apache Software Foundation
Re: Do recent bugs filed against Libre 3.4 need to be refiled with apache tracker?
On 11/09/2011 10:12 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: Hello David; If you find a bug in OpenOffice.org file it directly on Apache's bugzilla. Duplicate bug reports are fine, they really are. So far I am the only one in the business of actually committing fixes to issues, so trust me and ignore completely what Rob suggested. I will act with extreme prejudice ignoring any bug report linked to libreoffice on the principle that such contributions or the resulting followups are not made under a compatible license. I won't even look at them. best regards, Pedro. Hi Pedro, Rob, Always good to get the scoop 'straight from the horses mouth' so to speak :) There are a couple old OOO bugs that would be nice to get cleaned up. Specifically: #Issue: 81402 Tab Stops duplicate of: 21292 http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=21292 If we can get default tabs at .50 in the english release instead of .49 in., that would make life much better. Bug has only been around for about 7 years or so :) There is also some horrible default behavior in numbered paragraphs and copy/paste that should either be configurable as options or reworked: copy/paste default https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40558 Numbered Paragraph Bug https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40560 I have a couple more floating around I'll have to look up and get them registered with the AOO tracker. I should have time to enter them later this week or weekend. I'll also have to look up my earlier OOO bugs and revisit them as well. OOO 3.3 was in reasonable shape. It has some small, but very real annoyances, that with a little effort could really make the package shine. I use OOO exclusively in my office and I probably use an office suite to a much larger extent and degree than 99% of the normal Linux users (I'm a lawyer, documents and spreadsheets are my life) I'm also an engineer and Linux nut so I have a rather strange set of skills I bring to the table. I look forward to the AOO 3.4 release. The 3.X releases have been a bit rocky to date. (2.4.x was fantastic) Always remember -- make the core pieces of each app logical, efficient and bulletproof and always think of backwards compatibility (for the decade worth of prior documents that need seamless reproduction), then -- and only then -- worry about the gee-whiz new bells and whistles of the package. The core of a word processor, spreadsheet and presentation package should remain stable and without radical change in function or interface. New stuff should be added as options with user configurable options available to control new behavior. ( Remember - a new 'feature' is a 'bug' if you can't turn it off ) Thanks again for your tireless work to date and I look forward to working with AOO in the future. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
agg and epm are still in svn repo.
Hi, while porting AOOo to FreeBSD, pgf@ noticed that agg and epm are still in svn repo. is it correct? Should we remove them? thanks Nakata Maho
Re: [OT] Progress in my fight to walking normal!!!
Hi Raphael, I'm very pleased to hear that. Wish you all the best to be successful with your hard efforts. Kindest regards from Beijing, Peter On 11/9/2011 2:46 AM, Raphael Bircher wrote: Hi at all I make a big progress in my fight to walking normal. I won't going here in the medical details but one spastic muscle is now under much better control. This muscle was never active in sport activity, and his inactivity was the main reason why I'm about 1/3 slower in running as normal people. Last wekend this muscle take activity the first time during a run. Well, this is just the beginning. It will take about a year training to put the muscle to the same level as the other one. And I don't realy know how big the impact is. I will have to train hard in the next years. So please understand that I can't particip on events. I need to train realy frequently. Greetings Raphael
Re: agg and epm are still in svn repo.
Hi Maho; I personally didn't plan to remove agg. I like it as option and license wise it's OK so I have no pland to remove it, at least for now. I did notice it's still getting built on our port and I have to look at why. I think when I attempt to build AOOo from the tarball it doesn't get built but there are other ugly issues with icu there. About epm I don't know, I guess we can remove that directory now. Pedro. --- On Wed, 11/9/11, Maho NAKATA m...@apache.org wrote: From: Maho NAKATA m...@apache.org Subject: agg and epm are still in svn repo. To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Cc: p...@apache.org Date: Wednesday, November 9, 2011, 7:47 PM Hi, while porting AOOo to FreeBSD, pgf@ noticed that agg and epm are still in svn repo. is it correct? Should we remove them? thanks Nakata Maho
Re: Do recent bugs filed against Libre 3.4 need to be refiled with apache tracker?
Thanks; --- On Wed, 11/9/11, David C. Rankin drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com wrote: Hi Pedro, Rob, Always good to get the scoop 'straight from the horses mouth' so to speak :) There are a couple old OOO bugs that would be nice to get cleaned up. Specifically: #Issue: 81402 Tab Stops duplicate of: 21292 http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=21292 The new link for that is now this: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=21292 I added myself to this issue in case a fix for this appears. Sorry that I am busy with the FreeBSD and OS/2 ports at the moment :). Pedro.
Re: agg and epm are still in svn repo.
From: Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org Subject: Re: agg and epm are still in svn repo. Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 17:43:19 -0800 (PST) I personally didn't plan to remove agg. I like it as option and license wise it's OK so I have no pland to remove it, at least for now. I see. I did notice it's still getting built on our port and I have to look at why. I think when I attempt to build AOOo from the tarball it doesn't get built but there are other ugly issues with icu there. Looks like a bug. But it is reasonable if I read the configure.in. First, examine enabling agg or not. quoting from configure.in AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether to enable agg]) if test $enable_agg = yes; then AC_MSG_RESULT([yes]) AC_SUBST(ENABLE_AGG) ENABLE_AGG=YES AGG_VERSION=2400 else AC_MSG_RESULT([no]) ENABLE_AGG=NO dnl === dnl Check for system AGG dnl === AC_MSG_CHECKING([which AGG to use]) - but then, checks for system agg even though ENABLE_AGG=NO. thanks About epm I don't know, I guess we can remove that directory now. Pedro. --- On Wed, 11/9/11, Maho NAKATA m...@apache.org wrote: From: Maho NAKATA m...@apache.org Subject: agg and epm are still in svn repo. To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Cc: p...@apache.org Date: Wednesday, November 9, 2011, 7:47 PM Hi, while porting AOOo to FreeBSD, pgf@ noticed that agg and epm are still in svn repo. is it correct? Should we remove them? thanks Nakata Maho
Re: [VOTE] Trademark and Brand
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.comwrote: As promised, here's the ballot. Choose one, cast your vote. If none of them get more than 50% of the binding votes, we will start a ballot for the top two contenders. a) Apache OpenOffice.org +1 b) Apache OpenOffice c) Apache Open Office d) Apache Office The ballot is open for a full 7 day week closing 12:00 p.m. EST ( UTC - 5 ) on Wednesday, November 16, 2011. -- *Alexandro Colorado* *OpenOffice.org* Español http://es.openoffice.org fingerprint: E62B CF77 1BEA 0749 C0B8 50B9 3DE6 A84A 68D0 72E6
Re: [DISCUSS]+[VOTE] Trademark and Branding
Hello; An important question. The vote is for choosing the product name, can the project name be different? To make this clear: I would think it practical to keep option (a) for the product, but option (b) for the project. Just wondering if there will be a second vote for the project name. regards, Pedro. --- On Wed, 11/9/11, Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.com wrote: We've had a lengthy discussion on ooo-marketing regarding trademark and branding considerations and options. It's time we moved forward and made a decision in order to expedite the ongoing migration of the web site and to remove one more obstacle from the dev team. We want to preserve and protect the historic OpenOffice.org trademark. The choice of an Apache name and new trademark will not impact the historic mark as granted to the Apache Software Foundation for stewardship. Since this is a major decision we felt it important to bring it back to ooo-dev for final discussion then vote. We have the choices presented on the wiki[1] for your reference. [1]https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** Branding+Planninghttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Branding+Planning
Re: [DISCUSS]+[VOTE] Trademark and Branding
I must admit to wondering who we are in your statements, Donald. D On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org wrote: Hello; An important question. The vote is for choosing the product name, can the project name be different? To make this clear: I would think it practical to keep option (a) for the product, but option (b) for the project. Just wondering if there will be a second vote for the project name. regards, Pedro. --- On Wed, 11/9/11, Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.com wrote: We've had a lengthy discussion on ooo-marketing regarding trademark and branding considerations and options. It's time we moved forward and made a decision in order to expedite the ongoing migration of the web site and to remove one more obstacle from the dev team. We want to preserve and protect the historic OpenOffice.org trademark. The choice of an Apache name and new trademark will not impact the historic mark as granted to the Apache Software Foundation for stewardship. Since this is a major decision we felt it important to bring it back to ooo-dev for final discussion then vote. We have the choices presented on the wiki[1] for your reference. [1]https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** Branding+Planning https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Branding+Planning
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
Hi, On 9 November 2011 18:06, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Nov 9, 2011, at 2:19 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: As many of you may know, per Dave's announcement about a week or so ago, we have a staging site of *MOST* (we're still finding areas that need to be re-pulled for one reason or another), of the (old) current OO.o site at: http://ooo-site.apache.org Right now, I have a question about the existing pl (Polish) site at http://pl.openoffice.org/ Does anyone on this list know anything about the history of the Polish site -- why this group decided to basically make a duplicate of the OpenOffice.org site but translated? None of the other N-L sites have gone to this length so I'm just curious about it. Yes, I know much about it. Its history is complicated and its communities even more so. But its current lead (of PL group working on OOo, if not entirely only on OOo itself) has simplified things. Is it bigger than the German site? No. Also, at this point in our migration plans, do we have anyone here who is willing to continue to maintain the pl site as it stands? I can ask the former lead; cc'd here. He is Marcin Milkowski. I think we want to check it in, but then we may want to then remove most of each N-L site (they will be in SVN!) Yes. As the (former/current) lead of the N-L category, which I founded, I can surely help here in communicating to the interested leads the updates and plans. Also note, this site has not yet been ported over to the staging site. Noted. Do we have a schedule (that I've surely missed) of migrations/port? And finally, I am having a few problems getting my recent changes to the N-L page to actually publish so no fun link from the staging home page yet. http://ooo-site.apache.org/ I see. Sigh; sounds so much like old times. I published these just now. Warning - using the webgui the first time on ooo-site it is suggested that you brew a cup of coffee and come back in 10 minutes. I've discussed the foo.openoffice.org/bar to www.openoffice.org/foo/bar permanent redirect for the ooo-site Virtual Host and openoffice.org DNS with Joe today - we should specify a full list of the subdomains that will fit this pattern and add it to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-3933 Please. When the time comes to go live Infra will handle the rest of the detail. Okay, let's keep us all informed….. Regards, Dave Cheers, Louis -former this, that, and the other thing. Now, just former (un)king of the zombies? ;-)
Re: agg and epm are still in svn repo.
Hello Maho, On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 09:47:23AM +0900, Maho NAKATA wrote: Hi, while porting AOOo to FreeBSD, pgf@ noticed that agg and epm are still in svn repo. is it correct? Should we remove them? epm is needed to build deb and rpm packages for Linux (at least, didn't try BSD, etc). Now that copy-left is disabled by default, I'm building with --with-epm=/home/ariel/bin/epm --with-package-format=installed rpm and I find it nicer than building epm for every clean build. IMO it can be removed and made a build dependency. Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina pgpwmycy7pnZW.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [DISCUSS]+[VOTE] Trademark and Branding
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org wrote: Hello; An important question. The vote is for choosing the product name, can the project name be different? The vote is for the product name, if you wish to begin a [DISCUSSON] about the project name, is your choice. Be aware that we began the podling as described here: http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html To make this clear: I would think it practical to keep option (a) for the product, but option (b) for the project. Please cast your vote for the product only. That is the ballot. Just wondering if there will be a second vote for the project name. regards, Pedro. --- On Wed, 11/9/11, Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.com wrote: We've had a lengthy discussion on ooo-marketing regarding trademark and branding considerations and options. It's time we moved forward and made a decision in order to expedite the ongoing migration of the web site and to remove one more obstacle from the dev team. We want to preserve and protect the historic OpenOffice.org trademark. The choice of an Apache name and new trademark will not impact the historic mark as granted to the Apache Software Foundation for stewardship. Since this is a major decision we felt it important to bring it back to ooo-dev for final discussion then vote. We have the choices presented on the wiki[1] for your reference. [1]https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** Branding+Planning https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Branding+Planning
RE: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
Unfortunately[?], zombies.org is taken. But kingzombie.org seems to be available. Thanks for bringing playfulness to this place. You've been missed, Louis. - Dennis E. Hamilton tools for document interoperability, http://nfoWorks.org/ dennis.hamil...@acm.org gsm: +1-206-779-9430 @orcmid -Original Message- From: lui...@gmail.com [mailto:lui...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Louis Suárez-Potts Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 20:38 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Cc: milek...@o2.pl Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org [ ... ] Cheers, Louis -former this, that, and the other thing. Now, just former (un)king of the zombies? ;-) smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
RE: [VOTE] Trademark and Brand
b) Apache OpenOffice - Dennis -Original Message- From: Donald Harbison [mailto:dpharbi...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 19:47 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] Trademark and Brand As promised, here's the ballot. Choose one, cast your vote. If none of them get more than 50% of the binding votes, we will start a ballot for the top two contenders. a) Apache OpenOffice.org b) Apache OpenOffice c) Apache Open Office d) Apache Office The ballot is open for a full 7 day week closing 12:00 p.m. EST ( UTC - 5 ) on Wednesday, November 16, 2011.
Re: [VOTE] Trademark and Brand
Hi, Sorry, I'm unsure: the name you propose is for the sotfware or for the project ? Apologies for the misunderstanding, but this point is essential, and desserves to be clearly written. Thanks, Eric Bachard Le 10 nov. 11 à 04:47, Donald Harbison a écrit : As promised, here's the ballot. Choose one, cast your vote. If none of them get more than 50% of the binding votes, we will start a ballot for the top two contenders. a) Apache OpenOffice.org b) Apache OpenOffice c) Apache Open Office d) Apache Office The ballot is open for a full 7 day week closing 12:00 p.m. EST ( UTC - 5 ) on Wednesday, November 16, 2011. -- qɔᴉɹə Projet OOo4Kids : http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page L'association EducOOo : http://www.educoo.org Blog : http://eric.bachard.org/news
Re: [VOTE] Trademark and Brand
Hi, On 9 November 2011 22:47, Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.com wrote: As promised, here's the ballot. Choose one, cast your vote. If none of them get more than 50% of the binding votes, we will start a ballot for the top two contenders. a) Apache OpenOffice.org b) Apache OpenOffice c) Apache Open Office d) Apache Office The ballot is open for a full 7 day week closing 12:00 p.m. EST ( UTC - 5 ) on Wednesday, November 16, 2011. I vote for b) Apache OpenOffice. [OT, and surely dumb: what happens to the old name, OpenOffice.org? Apache now owns it, I believe. If the answer is long, and I expect it is, and if it's already been answered, then just point me away and I'll find it. If not, let's answer it? It needs address if only because there are *many* companies and orgs. using it.] -louis
Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org
Somehow the zombie metaphor is apt. The question is who does the voodoo that you do so well. Fugu? Or blowfish? Sent from my iPhone On Nov 9, 2011, at 9:26 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: Unfortunately[?], zombies.org is taken. But kingzombie.org seems to be available. Thanks for bringing playfulness to this place. You've been missed, Louis. - Dennis E. Hamilton tools for document interoperability, http://nfoWorks.org/ dennis.hamil...@acm.org gsm: +1-206-779-9430 @orcmid -Original Message- From: lui...@gmail.com [mailto:lui...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Louis Suárez-Potts Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 20:38 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Cc: milek...@o2.pl Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][WWW] Current Polish web site -- pl.openoffice.org [ ... ] Cheers, Louis -former this, that, and the other thing. Now, just former (un)king of the zombies? ;-)
Re: agg and epm are still in svn repo.
Hi Maho, Le 10 nov. 11 à 01:47, Maho NAKATA a écrit : Hi, while porting AOOo to FreeBSD, pgf@ noticed that agg and epm are still in svn repo. is it correct? Should we remove them? If this can help, I know how to build Debian archives using dh_make (this is the true debian way). The work is available as a script under GPL license, but needs some improvement (was initialy written by a student from epitech Paris, and I maintain it since one year). OpenBSD needs installed (I completed OpenBSD build for OOo4Kids some time ago). The last issue is rpm, but I bet this is similar to dh_make. On Mac OS X, everything is in XCode. Windows needs nsis + some strange blobs So at least epm can be removed from the repo, and kept (at the beginning) as build dependency, why not. About agg, I don't know exactly. I do builds without it, but I don't know what is the difference. Maybe use system agg as dependency could help if mandatory ? Regards, Eric -- qɔᴉɹə Projet OOo4Kids : http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page L'association EducOOo : http://www.educoo.org Blog : http://eric.bachard.org/news
Re: [VOTE] Trademark and Brand
On 2011-11-09 9:42 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote: ... [OT, and surely dumb: what happens to the old name, OpenOffice.org? Apache now owns it, I believe. If the answer is long, and I expect it is, and if it's already been answered, then just point me away and I'll find it. If not, let's answer it? It needs address if only because there are *many* companies and orgs. using it.] It's best to keep [VOTE] threads on topic. If there are other questions on related or unrelated topics, please start a new thread. (That is a good question, but it deserves it's own thread) - Shane, wearing a mentor hat
Re: [VOTE] Trademark and Brand
+1 a) Apache OpenOffice.org --- On Wed, 11/9/11, Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.com wrote: ... As promised, here's the ballot. Choose one, cast your vote. If none of them get more than 50% of the binding votes, we will start a ballot for the top two contenders. a) Apache OpenOffice.org b) Apache OpenOffice c) Apache Open Office d) Apache Office The ballot is open for a full 7 day week closing 12:00 p.m. EST ( UTC - 5 ) on Wednesday, November 16, 2011.
Re: [DISCUSS]+[VOTE] Trademark and Branding
Hi Shane; OpenOffice.org is a brand the ASF owns now and I don't want it diluted. I have also heard the name is in some countries' legislation. I think Apache OpenOffice is a better name for the project because it is shorter/simpler, and is more catchy. TBH I wouldn't complain if it's the name of the product too. I am aware of projects that have subprojects that later fork, maybe we will end up having, say Apache OO Spellchecker :-). cheers, Pedro. --- On Thu, 11/10/11, Shane Curcuru a...@shanecurcuru.org wrote: From: Shane Curcuru a...@shanecurcuru.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]+[VOTE] Trademark and Branding To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Date: Thursday, November 10, 2011, 12:57 AM On 2011-11-09 8:14 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: Hello; An important question. The vote is for choosing the product name, can the project name be different? To make this clear: I would think it practical to keep option (a) for the product, but option (b) for the project. One question: why would that be desirable? I.e. what is the benefit of having a separate project name (i.e. the name of the website and the PMC here) versus the product name (i.e. the actual downloadable releases in the future)? By way of comparison, all (I think) other Apache projects use the same terminology for the project name and the product name. I would expect that the product and project would use the same name (whatever it is) unless there is a strong and clear consensus among the PPMC to explicitly use different names. - Shane Just wondering if there will be a second vote for the project name. regards, Pedro. --- On Wed, 11/9/11, Donald Harbisondpharbi...@gmail.com wrote: We've had a lengthy discussion on ooo-marketing regarding trademark and branding considerations and options. It's time we moved forward and made a decision in order to expedite the ongoing migration of the web site and to remove one more obstacle from the dev team. We want to preserve and protect the historic OpenOffice.org trademark. The choice of an Apache name and new trademark will not impact the historic mark as granted to the Apache Software Foundation for stewardship. Since this is a major decision we felt it important to bring it back to ooo-dev for final discussion then vote. We have the choices presented on the wiki[1] for your reference. [1]https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** Branding+Planninghttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Branding+Planning
Re: [VOTE] Trademark and Brand
b) Apache OpenOffice ＋1 acolor...@gmail.com wrote on 11/10/2011 11:49:26 AM: From: Alexandro Colorado j...@openoffice.org To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org, Date: 11/10/2011 11:49 AM Subject: Re: [VOTE] Trademark and Brand Sent by: acolor...@gmail.com On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.comwrote: As promised, here's the ballot. Choose one, cast your vote. If none of them get more than 50% of the binding votes, we will start a ballot for the top two contenders. a) Apache OpenOffice.org +1 b) Apache OpenOffice c) Apache Open Office d) Apache Office The ballot is open for a full 7 day week closing 12:00 p.m. EST ( UTC - 5 ) on Wednesday, November 16, 2011. -- *Alexandro Colorado* *OpenOffice.org* Español http://es.openoffice.org fingerprint: E62B CF77 1BEA 0749 C0B8 50B9 3DE6 A84A 68D0 72E6
Re: [DISCUSS]+[VOTE] Trademark and Branding
On 2011-11-09 10:11 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: Hi Shane; OpenOffice.org is a brand the ASF owns now and I don't want it diluted. I have also heard the name is in some countries' legislation. I'm not following your point here. The project branding requirements mean that both the product and project names must start with Apache ..., so just OpenOffice.org is not an option as either name. The existing trademark registration is not an issue (or, should not be, in my opinion) in terms of choosing a name for the project going forward. I suggest that the PPMC needs to primarily think of what the future branding will be. In terms of keeping the existing registration, I would not worry about that now. My current thinking is that our keeping the domain name as a site that still distributes the past OpenOffice.org builds will be more than sufficient to defend that brand as long as will be pertinent for this project. - Shane I think Apache OpenOffice is a better name for the project because it is shorter/simpler, and is more catchy. TBH I wouldn't complain if it's the name of the product too. I am aware of projects that have subprojects that later fork, maybe we will end up having, say Apache OO Spellchecker :-). cheers, Pedro. --- On Thu, 11/10/11, Shane Curcurua...@shanecurcuru.org wrote: From: Shane Curcurua...@shanecurcuru.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]+[VOTE] Trademark and Branding To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Date: Thursday, November 10, 2011, 12:57 AM On 2011-11-09 8:14 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: Hello; An important question. The vote is for choosing the product name, can the project name be different? To make this clear: I would think it practical to keep option (a) for the product, but option (b) for the project. One question: why would that be desirable? I.e. what is the benefit of having a separate project name (i.e. the name of the website and the PMC here) versus the product name (i.e. the actual downloadable releases in the future)? By way of comparison, all (I think) other Apache projects use the same terminology for the project name and the product name. I would expect that the product and project would use the same name (whatever it is) unless there is a strong and clear consensus among the PPMC to explicitly use different names. - Shane Just wondering if there will be a second vote for the project name. regards, Pedro. --- On Wed, 11/9/11, Donald Harbisondpharbi...@gmail.com wrote: We've had a lengthy discussion on ooo-marketing regarding trademark and branding considerations and options. It's time we moved forward and made a decision in order to expedite the ongoing migration of the web site and to remove one more obstacle from the dev team. We want to preserve and protect the historic OpenOffice.org trademark. The choice of an Apache name and new trademark will not impact the historic mark as granted to the Apache Software Foundation for stewardship. Since this is a major decision we felt it important to bring it back to ooo-dev for final discussion then vote. We have the choices presented on the wiki[1] for your reference. [1]https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** Branding+Planninghttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Branding+Planning
Re: [VOTE] Trademark and Brand
+1 for Apache OpenOffice.org as product name Thanks, Eric Le 10 nov. 11 à 04:47, Donald Harbison a écrit : As promised, here's the ballot. Choose one, cast your vote. If none of them get more than 50% of the binding votes, we will start a ballot for the top two contenders. a) Apache OpenOffice.org b) Apache OpenOffice c) Apache Open Office d) Apache Office The ballot is open for a full 7 day week closing 12:00 p.m. EST ( UTC - 5 ) on Wednesday, November 16, 2011. -- qɔᴉɹə Projet OOo4Kids : http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page L'association EducOOo : http://www.educoo.org Blog : http://eric.bachard.org/news
