Build problem of aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.bz2
hi I have just trying to build aoo-3.4.0-incubating-src.tar.bz2. However, it seems to have a minor bug. when I trying to build... build -- version: 275224 Ambiguous paths for module l10n: /work/tinderbox-ligeti8amd64/portstrees/FreeBSD/ports/editors/openoffice-3/work/aoo-3.4.0/main/l10n and /work/tinderbox-ligeti8amd64/portstrees/FreeBSD/ports/editors/openoffice-3/work/aoo-3.4.0/extras/l10n at /work/tinderbox-ligeti8amd64/portstrees/FreeBSD/ports/editors/openoffice-3/work/aoo-3.4.0/main/solenv/bin/build.pl line 244 there are two 'l10n' directories. Can I remove aoo-3.4.0/main/l10n since it contains just a two shell script $ ls work/aoo-3.4.0/main/l10n/source/ fix_l10n.sh prepare_l10n.sh Moreover, vanilla checkout from svn doesn't contain main/l10n/. thanks -- Nakata Maho http://accc.riken.jp/maho/ , JA OOO http://ja.openoffice.org/ http://blog.goo.ne.jp/nakatamaho/ ,GPG: http://accc.riken.jp/maho/maho.pgp.txt
[VOTE][RESULT] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1
Hi, the preliminary vote result is identical with the final vote result. We had a further +1 (PPMC) vote on ooo-private but that can't be counted here. The ballot result was +34 including one IPMC member binding +1, 22 +1 votes fro PPMC members, one +1 from a committer, 8 +1 votes from community members and one PPMC abstentions (0). One -1 non-binding ballot were cast related the Finish translation that will be now not part of the release. Means we will not release a Finnish localized binary package. VOTE TALLY +1 Dave Fisher - IPMC (binding) 0 Dennis E. Hamilton (orcmid) +1 Pedro Giffuni - PPMC +1 Hagar Delest - PPMC +1 Ian Lynch - PPMC +1 Rob Weir - PPMC +1 RGB ES - PPMC +1 Zoltán Reizinger - PPMC +1 Donald Harbison - PPMC +1 Kay Schenk - PPMC +1 Armin Le Grand - PPMC +1 Herbert Duerr - PPMC +1 Carl Marcum - PPMC +1 Marcus Lange - PPMC +1 Regina Henschel - PPMC +1 Andrew Rist - PPMC +1 Andrea Pescetti - PPMC +1 Ariel Constenla-Haile - PPMC +1 Juergen Schmidt - PPMC +1 Oliver Rainer Wittmann - PPMC +1 Kazunaro Hirano - PPMC +1 Maho Nakato - PPMC +1 Andre Fischer - PPMC +1 Eric Bachard - PPMC +1 Raphael Bircher - PPMC +1 Drew Jensen - PPMC +1 Chritoph Jopp - PPMC +1 Yuri Dario -Committer +1 Larry Gusaas +1 Shen Feng Liu +1 Rory O'Farrell +1 Chao Huang +1 Albino Biasutti Neto +1 Peng Chen +1 Ying Sun +1 ZuoJun Chen -1 Risto Jääskeläinen, only for Finnish translation 35 Votes +1 1 Votes 0 1 Votes -1
Re: [VOTE][Preliminary RESULT] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1
On 4/26/12 6:34 AM, Anton Meixome wrote: 2012/4/26 Jürgen Schmidtjogischm...@googlemail.com: The vote period to release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1 is still ongoing for 2 hours but this preliminary result gives a short overview. Because of longer traveling activities and to start the IPMC vote on the RC1 I have already counted the votes that we have received so far. The ballot result was +34 including one IPMC member binding +1, 22 +1 votes fro PPMC members, one +1 from a committer, 8 +1 votes from community members and one PPMC abstentions (0). One -1 non-binding ballot were cast related the Finish translation that will be now not part of the release. Means we will not release a Finnish localized binary package. VOTE TALLY +1 Dave Fisher - IPMC (binding) 0 Dennis E. Hamilton (orcmid) +1 Pedro Giffuni - PPMC +1 Hagar Delest - PPMC +1 Ian Lynch - PPMC +1 Rob Weir - PPMC +1 RGB ES - PPMC +1 Zoltán Reizinger - PPMC +1 Donald Harbison - PPMC +1 Kay Schenk - PPMC +1 Armin Le Grand - PPMC +1 Herbert Duerr - PPMC +1 Carl Marcum - PPMC +1 Marcus Lange - PPMC +1 Regina Henschel - PPMC +1 Andrew Rist - PPMC +1 Andrea Pescetti - PPMC +1 Ariel Constenla-Haile - PPMC +1 Juergen Schmidt - PPMC +1 Oliver Rainer Wittmann - PPMC +1 Kazunaro Hirano - PPMC +1 Maho Nakato - PPMC +1 Andre Fischer - PPMC +1 Eric Bachard - PPMC +1 Raphael Bircher - PPMC +1 Drew Jensen - PPMC +1 Chritoph Jopp - PPMC +1 Yuri Dario -Committer +1 Larry Gusaas +1 Shen Feng Liu +1 Rory O'Farrell +1 Chao Huang +1 Albino Biasutti Neto +1 Peng Chen +1 Ying Sun +1 ZuoJun Chen -1 Risto Jääskeläinen, only for Finnish translation 35 Votes +1 1 Votes 0 1 Votes -1 +1 From Galician group We performed basics tests on Windows 7 and Ubuntu 11.10 thanks for pointing this out and give us feedback, but I think I can only count votes from single individuals not from a group. Anyway thanks a lot for the feedback and good to know that the Galician group can support the RC1 as a final release. Juergen
Re: [VOTE][RESULT] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1
Hi Jurgen, +1 Maho Nakato - PPMC - +1 Maho Nakata - PPMC thanks Nakata Maho From: Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com Subject: [VOTE][RESULT] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1 Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:05:14 +0800 Hi, the preliminary vote result is identical with the final vote result. We had a further +1 (PPMC) vote on ooo-private but that can't be counted here. The ballot result was +34 including one IPMC member binding +1, 22 +1 votes fro PPMC members, one +1 from a committer, 8 +1 votes from community members and one PPMC abstentions (0). One -1 non-binding ballot were cast related the Finish translation that will be now not part of the release. Means we will not release a Finnish localized binary package. VOTE TALLY +1 Dave Fisher - IPMC (binding) 0 Dennis E. Hamilton (orcmid) +1 Pedro Giffuni - PPMC +1 Hagar Delest - PPMC +1 Ian Lynch - PPMC +1 Rob Weir - PPMC +1 RGB ES - PPMC +1 Zoltán Reizinger - PPMC +1 Donald Harbison - PPMC +1 Kay Schenk - PPMC +1 Armin Le Grand - PPMC +1 Herbert Duerr - PPMC +1 Carl Marcum - PPMC +1 Marcus Lange - PPMC +1 Regina Henschel - PPMC +1 Andrew Rist - PPMC +1 Andrea Pescetti - PPMC +1 Ariel Constenla-Haile - PPMC +1 Juergen Schmidt - PPMC +1 Oliver Rainer Wittmann - PPMC +1 Kazunaro Hirano - PPMC +1 Maho Nakato - PPMC +1 Andre Fischer - PPMC +1 Eric Bachard - PPMC +1 Raphael Bircher - PPMC +1 Drew Jensen - PPMC +1 Chritoph Jopp - PPMC +1 Yuri Dario -Committer +1 Larry Gusaas +1 Shen Feng Liu +1 Rory O'Farrell +1 Chao Huang +1 Albino Biasutti Neto +1 Peng Chen +1 Ying Sun +1 ZuoJun Chen -1 Risto Jääskeläinen, only for Finnish translation 35 Votes +1 1 Votes 0 1 Votes -1
Re: [VOTE][RESULT] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1
Hi also +1 Kazunaro Hirano - PPMC - +1 Kazunari Hirano - PPMC
RE: Official Facebook Page is ready for promoting
Hi raphael, having not much time to spare, I wanted to do a simple think to promote AOO on facebook, the way everybody does that on facebook. Therefore I went to the facebook group and thought I'd like it. Well, this doesn't seem to work with a group. Then I began to think again. Though I don't want to question the usefulness of a facebook GROUP, it is not the first and best thing to do on facebook, I think - at least from a marketing perspective. Please compare these facebook pages: https://www.facebook.com/pages/OpenOfficeorg/153010651492897?ref=ts https://www.facebook.com/pages/Apache-OpenOffice/209053572542795 https://www.facebook.com/pages/OpenOfficeorg/252334251512786 Apparently, there is work to do to present AOO in a concise, unified way on facebook. A facebook GROUP is for discussion mainly. You need membership in the group, you need to be accepted. A normal facebook user, who wants to like, i.e. express her interest in, enthusiasm about, or support for Apache OpenOffice, does not need and will not want membership in a group. While a facebook group is certainly nice to have, presentation on facebook is a different kind of thing. At present, there are several ways or forums to discuss Apache OpenOffice, just another discussion group in just another social network may be ok, but not a pressing thing. On facebook, Apache OpenOffice should at least have a good presentational page, a place to come to for information and to like it, so your facebook friends see that you like AOO. That's the way facebook promotion really works. Kind regards, Hans Zybura -Original Message- From: Raphael Bircher [mailto:r.birc...@gmx.ch] Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 10:29 PM To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Official Facebook Page is ready for promoting Hi at all The official Facebook page from Apache OpenOffice is now ready for promoting. See http://www.facebook.com/groups/338330086179568/ Feel free to join and promote the group. Greetings Raphael -- My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
[RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Hi, to be prepared for the upcoming release I plan to use the following directory structure on https://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/ooo Existing 3.3 3.3/patches 3.3/patches/cve-2012-0037/... DATE KEYS New added: 3.4.0/source 3.4.0/windows/... 3.4.0/windows/languagepacks/... 3.4.0/macos/... 3.4.0/macos/languagepacks/... 3.4.0/linux-x86/... 3.4.0/linux-x86/languagepacks/... 3.4.0/linux-x86-64/... 3.4.0/linux-x86-64/languagepacks/... 16 languages: en-US ar cs de en-GB es fr gl hu it ja nl ru pr-BR zh-CN zh-TW Do we need to prepare or adapt the download page? Juergen
Re: RC candidate testing - status
Hi, 2012/4/26 drew jensen drewjensen.in...@gmail.com: Thu, 2012-04-26 at 01:11 +0900, Tsutomu Uchino wrote: Hi, drew 2012/4/25 drew jensen drewjensen.in...@gmail.com: Hi, snip But there is new version written from scratch for AOO 3.4 in Python. http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/node/5357 Yes that is the version I am using - [I downloaded all new files for the extensions I checked] - it does not work for me in either 32bit or 64bit Ubuntu 11.04 or 12.04 - it loads fine, jut doesn't respond. Anyway - working for you on Mint so it's some issue with my os configuration, it's all good. Now it should be fixed on: http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/node/5378 Thanks, //drew Thanks, Tsutomu
So, we have a RC1 ? (Was: Re: [VOTE][RESULT] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1)
Hi From: Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com Subject: [VOTE][RESULT] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1 35 Votes +1 1 Votes 0 1 Votes -1 Only for register: +1 (committer) So, we have a RC1? And a press release or note where we can translate? Best, Claudio
Re: So, we have a RC1 ? (Was: Re: [VOTE][RESULT] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1)
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Claudio Filho filh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi From: Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com Subject: [VOTE][RESULT] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1 35 Votes +1 1 Votes 0 1 Votes -1 Only for register: +1 (committer) So, we have a RC1? And a press release or note where we can translate? I believe we have the (3) +1 binding votes from the IPMC, but I haven't seen a formal announcement on that yet. Project blog post coming. Best, Claudio
Re: So, we have a RC1 ? (Was: Re: [VOTE][RESULT] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1)
On Friday, 27. April 2012 at 15:27, Donald Harbison wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Claudio Filho filh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi From: Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com Subject: [VOTE][RESULT] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1 35 Votes +1 1 Votes 0 1 Votes -1 Only for register: +1 (committer) So, we have a RC1? And a press release or note where we can translate? I believe we have the (3) +1 binding votes from the IPMC, but I haven't seen a formal announcement on that yet. Project blog post coming. well the IPMC voting started yesterday and I extended it until next week over the weekend. When everything goes well we an release next week. I will prepare a message for announce and also a blog post on Monday to have everything in place. I will definitely ask for feedback. Juergen Best, Claudio
Re: So, we have a RC1 ? (Was: Re: [VOTE][RESULT] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1)
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Claudio Filho filh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi From: Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com Subject: [VOTE][RESULT] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1 35 Votes +1 1 Votes 0 1 Votes -1 Only for register: +1 (committer) So, we have a RC1? And a press release or note where we can translate? The vote ends on Wed. Until then it is still possible for us to get -1 votes or for someone to change their vote. So we should not make any announcements yet. -Rob Best, Claudio
Distributing AOO 3.4: The 22 things we need to do before we announce
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Distribution+Tasks Please review this task list and see if anything is missing. It would be great to confirm that this list is complete and to have a volunteer's name listed against each one of these tasks. Note the additional complexity caused by having hard-coded download logic on the various NL pages. -Rob
Re: [WWW] two questions about DL button on home page...
On Apr 26, 2012, at 8:25 AM, Kay Schenk wrote: On 04/26/2012 07:02 AM, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Kay Schenkkay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On 04/25/2012 02:29 PM, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Kay Schenkkay.sch...@gmail.comwrote: On 04/25/2012 10:03 AM, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Kay Schenkkay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 6:48 AM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 04/24/2012 11:09 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On 04/24/2012 01:05 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 04/24/2012 07:54 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: Hi all-- Right now, when I click on I want to download OpenOffice, I don't the expanded green button I was getting last week, for example. I had made some changes to this a week or so ago, but the changes that I incorporated, and the green button itself were just fine after that. I think my current experience may be due to a problem with getting the mirror link but I need to confirm this in a bit. So, question #1. I would like someone else to try this and let the list know what your results are -- are you getting the expanded green button or being shuttled to /download/index.html instead? Question #2. If you're not getting the DL button, or even if you are, how strongly do you feel about having the expanding button, or would just a jump to /download/index.html be just as good? I know there was a LOT of discussion when this design first emerged, but, it would much much easier for changes in DL code -- Rob's proposal for unification of yesterday for instance -- if we could just dump this internal DL button on the home page. Yes, the buttons are the same to the eye anyway on both the main index.html page and /download/index.html but the html implementation is different, different enough that both these areas need to be changed when changes are needed. Additionally, dumping the generated button on the home page would allow us to standardize more easily on incorporating the DL button -- the code used on /download/index.html -- on other pages like the NL pages. Thanks for looking at this and responding. It seems Rob's last commit (r1329501 - Remove unneeded GA code) has removed accidently also the toggle mode for the download button. This is done via JavaScript, too. I've repaired it as the expanded donwload button is IMHO a nice feature. Marcus Marcus--Thanks for this...but...it would be really really helpful if we could just do away with this approach. I'm going to work on the underpinnings in /download today, and not the home page, so I'll wait to hear from a few others. So far, it looks like we've got 2 to remove/OK with removing it (me, Dave), and 1 not to remove (you). Of course we can remove the toggle feature for the green box. Lets see what others say. I've just re-enabled it because the effort was really minimal. What are the arguments for and against? For: I think the argument FOR the inclusion of the expanding DL button on the home page was the idea of having the DL available right there for them. Still, unlike other sites which would automatically display the appropriate DL immediately, the user must click on the DL area of the page to get the green DL button, so I question the former reasoning. From the homepage, it is the same number of mouse clicks to download either way, right?We don't save any clicks by dynamically expanding the DL button on the home page. yes...this is correct -- same number of clicks... On the against side. * We bring in a bunch of additional JS to the home page which we wouldn't need if the I want to download... simply went to download/index.html. * None of the other links on the home page work like this -- they all take you someplace else * In theory, editing changes to make download/index.html work should should port to the DL button on the home page, but for some reason, I, personally have had issues with this in the past, I don't remember why * You can not, based on how the button is currently constructed on the home page, just pop-in something to make this happen -- some of the JS needed must live on the home page to make things work. Well maybe you can and I just don't know how to do this. * Changes made to the current DL logic (and really this whole process in terms of coding REALLY needs further evaluation) like function names and arguments to them, etc. need to be ported to two areas rather than one. IMHO, if we have a a dedicated download page we can improve it over time. Having more screen real-estate would allow us to make install instructions more prominent and give other helpful information. Eventually
Re: Distributing AOO 3.4: The 22 things we need to do before we announce
On Apr 27, 2012, at 7:41 AM, Rob Weir wrote: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Distribution+Tasks Please review this task list and see if anything is missing. It would be great to confirm that this list is complete and to have a volunteer's name listed against each one of these tasks. Note the additional complexity caused by having hard-coded download logic on the various NL pages. I added a 23 regarding license and other links on the new download page. This should certainly be reviewed. If no one picks up their NL pages then I will handle the leftovers. Regards, Dave -Rob
Re: [WWW] two questions about DL button on home page...
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Apr 26, 2012, at 8:25 AM, Kay Schenk wrote: On 04/26/2012 07:02 AM, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Kay Schenkkay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On 04/25/2012 02:29 PM, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Kay Schenkkay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On 04/25/2012 10:03 AM, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Kay Schenkkay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 6:48 AM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 04/24/2012 11:09 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On 04/24/2012 01:05 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 04/24/2012 07:54 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: Hi all-- Right now, when I click on I want to download OpenOffice, I don't the expanded green button I was getting last week, for example. I had made some changes to this a week or so ago, but the changes that I incorporated, and the green button itself were just fine after that. I think my current experience may be due to a problem with getting the mirror link but I need to confirm this in a bit. So, question #1. I would like someone else to try this and let the list know what your results are -- are you getting the expanded green button or being shuttled to /download/index.html instead? Question #2. If you're not getting the DL button, or even if you are, how strongly do you feel about having the expanding button, or would just a jump to /download/index.html be just as good? I know there was a LOT of discussion when this design first emerged, but, it would much much easier for changes in DL code -- Rob's proposal for unification of yesterday for instance -- if we could just dump this internal DL button on the home page. Yes, the buttons are the same to the eye anyway on both the main index.html page and /download/index.html but the html implementation is different, different enough that both these areas need to be changed when changes are needed. Additionally, dumping the generated button on the home page would allow us to standardize more easily on incorporating the DL button -- the code used on /download/index.html -- on other pages like the NL pages. Thanks for looking at this and responding. It seems Rob's last commit (r1329501 - Remove unneeded GA code) has removed accidently also the toggle mode for the download button. This is done via JavaScript, too. I've repaired it as the expanded donwload button is IMHO a nice feature. Marcus Marcus--Thanks for this...but...it would be really really helpful if we could just do away with this approach. I'm going to work on the underpinnings in /download today, and not the home page, so I'll wait to hear from a few others. So far, it looks like we've got 2 to remove/OK with removing it (me, Dave), and 1 not to remove (you). Of course we can remove the toggle feature for the green box. Lets see what others say. I've just re-enabled it because the effort was really minimal. What are the arguments for and against? For: I think the argument FOR the inclusion of the expanding DL button on the home page was the idea of having the DL available right there for them. Still, unlike other sites which would automatically display the appropriate DL immediately, the user must click on the DL area of the page to get the green DL button, so I question the former reasoning. From the homepage, it is the same number of mouse clicks to download either way, right? We don't save any clicks by dynamically expanding the DL button on the home page. yes...this is correct -- same number of clicks... On the against side. * We bring in a bunch of additional JS to the home page which we wouldn't need if the I want to download... simply went to download/index.html. * None of the other links on the home page work like this -- they all take you someplace else * In theory, editing changes to make download/index.html work should should port to the DL button on the home page, but for some reason, I, personally have had issues with this in the past, I don't remember why * You can not, based on how the button is currently constructed on the home page, just pop-in something to make this happen -- some of the JS needed must live on the home page to make things work. Well maybe you can and I just don't know how to do this. * Changes made to the current DL logic (and really this whole process in terms of coding REALLY needs further evaluation) like function names and arguments to them, etc. need to be ported to two areas rather than one. IMHO, if we have a a dedicated download page we can improve it over time. Having more screen real-estate would allow us to make install instructions more prominent and give other helpful information. Eventually the
Re: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
2012/4/27 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com Hi, to be prepared for the upcoming release I plan to use the following directory structure on https://www.apache.org/dist/**incubator/ooohttps://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/ooo Existing 3.3 3.3/patches 3.3/patches/cve-2012-0037/... DATE KEYS New added: 3.4.0/source 3.4.0/windows/... 3.4.0/windows/languagepacks/..**. 3.4.0/macos/... 3.4.0/macos/languagepacks/... 3.4.0/linux-x86/... 3.4.0/linux-x86/languagepacks/**... 3.4.0/linux-x86-64/... 3.4.0/linux-x86-64/**languagepacks/... 16 languages: en-US ar cs de en-GB es fr gl hu it ja nl ru pr-BR zh-CN zh-TW Do we need to prepare or adapt the download page? Juergen Juergen-- This will considerably change the current logic being used. Is there some reason you don't want to use the existing setup of: root DL area/files/stable/3.4/... root DL area/files/localized/3.4/... see: http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/ -- MzK Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you And life has a funny way of helping you out Helping you out. -- Ironic, Alanis Morissette
Re: Distributing AOO 3.4: The 22 things we need to do before we announce
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 7:41 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Distribution+Tasks Please review this task list and see if anything is missing. It would be great to confirm that this list is complete and to have a volunteer's name listed against each one of these tasks. Hi Rob -- I just took a very quick look and added some verbiage to item #4. We need some test time after these changes are in place--maybe even a day. OK. On item #3-- Make a copy of the the older MirrorBrain-enabled download/index.html and download/other.html pages. Put them in a download/330 directory. Add a disclaimer notice that these are not Apache releases, but legacy releases under a different license. I don't see the need for a download/330/index.html. I think what you're getting at is a standalone page complete with the DL button generation for 3.3 which I feel is something we don't need for this earlier version. I would think just putting out a download/330/other.html. So It would probably be a good idea for this old other to at least provide links for release notes for it though. and linking people to that would be sufficient. I can see arguments either way. On the one hand, the OOo 3.3 downloads is merely for archival use. On the other hand, AOO 3.4 does not cover all languages supported by OOo 3.3, so we need some easy way for users to continue to get access. If you think a copy of the 3.3.0 version of other.html is sufficient, then let's go with that. Note the additional complexity caused by having hard-coded download logic on the various NL pages. -Rob -- MzK Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you And life has a funny way of helping you out Helping you out. -- Ironic, Alanis Morissette
Re: Distributing AOO 3.4: The 22 things we need to do before we announce
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 7:41 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Distribution+Tasks Please review this task list and see if anything is missing. It would be great to confirm that this list is complete and to have a volunteer's name listed against each one of these tasks. Hi Rob -- I just took a very quick look and added some verbiage to item #4. We need some test time after these changes are in place--maybe even a day. OK. On item #3-- Make a copy of the the older MirrorBrain-enabled download/index.html and download/other.html pages. Put them in a download/330 directory. Add a disclaimer notice that these are not Apache releases, but legacy releases under a different license. I don't see the need for a download/330/index.html. I think what you're getting at is a standalone page complete with the DL button generation for 3.3 which I feel is something we don't need for this earlier version. I would think just putting out a download/330/other.html. So It would probably be a good idea for this old other to at least provide links for release notes for it though. and linking people to that would be sufficient. I can see arguments either way. On the one hand, the OOo 3.3 downloads is merely for archival use. On the other hand, AOO 3.4 does not cover all languages supported by OOo 3.3, so we need some easy way for users to continue to get access. If you think a copy of the 3.3.0 version of other.html is sufficient, then let's go with that. sure--we can just make other.html into index.html for this new area. Note the additional complexity caused by having hard-coded download logic on the various NL pages. -Rob -- MzK Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you And life has a funny way of helping you out Helping you out. -- Ironic, Alanis Morissette -- MzK Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you And life has a funny way of helping you out Helping you out. -- Ironic, Alanis Morissette
Re: Distributing AOO 3.4: The 22 things we need to do before we announce
On Apr 27, 2012, at 8:59 AM, Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 7:41 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Distribution+Tasks Please review this task list and see if anything is missing. It would be great to confirm that this list is complete and to have a volunteer's name listed against each one of these tasks. Hi Rob -- I just took a very quick look and added some verbiage to item #4. We need some test time after these changes are in place--maybe even a day. OK. On item #3-- Make a copy of the the older MirrorBrain-enabled download/index.html and download/other.html pages. Put them in a download/330 directory. Add a disclaimer notice that these are not Apache releases, but legacy releases under a different license. I don't see the need for a download/330/index.html. I think what you're getting at is a standalone page complete with the DL button generation for 3.3 which I feel is something we don't need for this earlier version. I would think just putting out a download/330/other.html. So It would probably be a good idea for this old other to at least provide links for release notes for it though. and linking people to that would be sufficient. I can see arguments either way. On the one hand, the OOo 3.3 downloads is merely for archival use. On the other hand, AOO 3.4 does not cover all languages supported by OOo 3.3, so we need some easy way for users to continue to get access. If you think a copy of the 3.3.0 version of other.html is sufficient, then let's go with that. I think that this is an important point. NL users may not be able to read English well enough on the other.html page to find their language. I think we need to maintain the legacy index for that purpose. Regards, Dave Note the additional complexity caused by having hard-coded download logic on the various NL pages. -Rob -- MzK Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you And life has a funny way of helping you out Helping you out. -- Ironic, Alanis Morissette
Re: Distributing AOO 3.4: The 22 things we need to do before we announce
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Distribution+Tasks OK. I did #2 on the list. At the same time I added meta description and keywords, removed the unneeded scripts and cleaned up some XHTML validation errors. -Rob Please review this task list and see if anything is missing. It would be great to confirm that this list is complete and to have a volunteer's name listed against each one of these tasks. Note the additional complexity caused by having hard-coded download logic on the various NL pages. -Rob
Re: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
On 4/27/12 5:32 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: 2012/4/27 Jürgen Schmidtjogischm...@googlemail.com Hi, to be prepared for the upcoming release I plan to use the following directory structure on https://www.apache.org/dist/**incubator/ooohttps://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/ooo Existing 3.3 3.3/patches 3.3/patches/cve-2012-0037/... DATE KEYS New added: 3.4.0/source 3.4.0/windows/... 3.4.0/windows/languagepacks/..**. 3.4.0/macos/... 3.4.0/macos/languagepacks/... 3.4.0/linux-x86/... 3.4.0/linux-x86/languagepacks/**... 3.4.0/linux-x86-64/... 3.4.0/linux-x86-64/**languagepacks/... 16 languages: en-US ar cs de en-GB es fr gl hu it ja nl ru pr-BR zh-CN zh-TW Do we need to prepare or adapt the download page? Juergen Juergen-- This will considerably change the current logic being used. Is there some reason you don't want to use the existing setup of: root DL area/files/stable/3.4/... root DL area/files/localized/3.4/... see: http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/ I had a look to other projects in the dist folder on Apache and looked what we already have. From my point of view the old structure doesn't really make too much sense. Why should we for example put the localized bit in separate directories when we have the language Id as part of the name? And we have only stable releases in the future. Ok we will have archives of older versions but that's it. Do we have the time to adapt it to the new structure. We should do it ow if possible. What do others think? Juergen
Re: Distributing AOO 3.4: The 22 things we need to do before we announce
Am 04/27/2012 07:28 PM, schrieb Dave Fisher: On Apr 27, 2012, at 8:59 AM, Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Kay Schenkkay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 7:41 AM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Distribution+Tasks Please review this task list and see if anything is missing. It would be great to confirm that this list is complete and to have a volunteer's name listed against each one of these tasks. Hi Rob -- I just took a very quick look and added some verbiage to item #4. We need some test time after these changes are in place--maybe even a day. OK. On item #3-- Make a copy of the the older MirrorBrain-enabled download/index.html and download/other.html pages. Put them in a download/330 directory. Add a disclaimer notice that these are not Apache releases, but legacy releases under a different license. I don't see the need for a download/330/index.html. I think what you're getting at is a standalone page complete with the DL button generation for 3.3 which I feel is something we don't need for this earlier version. I would think just putting out a download/330/other.html. So It would probably be a good idea for this old other to at least provide links for release notes for it though. and linking people to that would be sufficient. I can see arguments either way. On the one hand, the OOo 3.3 downloads is merely for archival use. On the other hand, AOO 3.4 does not cover all languages supported by OOo 3.3, so we need some easy way for users to continue to get access. If you think a copy of the 3.3.0 version of other.html is sufficient, then let's go with that. I think that this is an important point. NL users may not be able to read English well enough on the other.html page to find their language. I think we need to maintain the legacy index for that purpose. Just to be clear: The index.html is also just in English. There is no translation. It's just that the user is offered a localized build - with English words. Marcus Note the additional complexity caused by having hard-coded download logic on the various NL pages. -Rob -- MzK Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you And life has a funny way of helping you out Helping you out. -- Ironic, Alanis Morissette
Re: Distributing AOO 3.4: The 22 things we need to do before we announce
Am 04/27/2012 06:29 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Kay Schenkkay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 7:41 AM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Distribution+Tasks Please review this task list and see if anything is missing. It would be great to confirm that this list is complete and to have a volunteer's name listed against each one of these tasks. Hi Rob -- I just took a very quick look and added some verbiage to item #4. We need some test time after these changes are in place--maybe even a day. OK. On item #3-- Make a copy of the the older MirrorBrain-enabled download/index.html and download/other.html pages. Put them in a download/330 directory. Add a disclaimer notice that these are not Apache releases, but legacy releases under a different license. I don't see the need for a download/330/index.html. I think what you're getting at is a standalone page complete with the DL button generation for 3.3 which I feel is something we don't need for this earlier version. I would think just putting out a download/330/other.html. So It would probably be a good idea for this old other to at least provide links for release notes for it though. and linking people to that would be sufficient. I can see arguments either way. On the one hand, the OOo 3.3 downloads is merely for archival use. On the other hand, AOO 3.4 does not cover all languages supported by OOo 3.3, so we need some easy way for users to continue to get access. If you think a copy of the 3.3.0 version of other.html is sufficient, then let's go with that. sure--we can just make other.html into index.html for this new area. If we have no real index.html, then we need no DL logic especially for OOo 3.3.0 as we can create hard-coded links in the download table, then we need no .js files, then we need no separate 3.3.0/ directory, so ... ;-) However, I would also prefer to keep the original index.html. It simply makes it easier for the user to download their (hopefully) favorite build. Marcus Note the additional complexity caused by having hard-coded download logic on the various NL pages. -Rob -- MzK Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you And life has a funny way of helping you out Helping you out. -- Ironic, Alanis Morissette
Re: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
Am 04/27/2012 08:49 PM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt: On 4/27/12 5:32 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: 2012/4/27 Jürgen Schmidtjogischm...@googlemail.com Hi, to be prepared for the upcoming release I plan to use the following directory structure on https://www.apache.org/dist/**incubator/ooohttps://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/ooo Existing 3.3 3.3/patches 3.3/patches/cve-2012-0037/... DATE KEYS New added: 3.4.0/source 3.4.0/windows/... 3.4.0/windows/languagepacks/..**. 3.4.0/macos/... 3.4.0/macos/languagepacks/... 3.4.0/linux-x86/... 3.4.0/linux-x86/languagepacks/**... 3.4.0/linux-x86-64/... 3.4.0/linux-x86-64/**languagepacks/... 16 languages: en-US ar cs de en-GB es fr gl hu it ja nl ru pr-BR zh-CN zh-TW Do we need to prepare or adapt the download page? Juergen Juergen-- This will considerably change the current logic being used. Is there some reason you don't want to use the existing setup of: root DL area/files/stable/3.4/... root DL area/files/localized/3.4/... see: http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/ I had a look to other projects in the dist folder on Apache and looked what we already have. From my point of view the old structure doesn't really make too much sense. Why should we for example put the localized bit in separate directories when we have the language Id as part of the name? And we have only stable releases in the future. Ok we will have archives of older versions but that's it. Do we have the time to adapt it to the new structure. We should do it ow if possible. What do others think? It won't work because the DL logic is working the old way, and only this way. ;-) The old structure has everything in a single directory. The only separation is for en-US only (stable) and all other languages (localized). When we change the structure now where the builds are physicaly existing, then we have to adapt the complete logic, too, which is an effort that I cannot predict. So, the best solution is to keep the old separation and think about to change this with a new release. Then I would prefer to have every install file for a specific version in a single directory. This makes it the easiest way to assemble download links: Example: root-path/files/3.4.0/... root-path/files/3.4.1/... root-path/files/3.5.0/... ... Marcus
Re: Distributing AOO 3.4: The 22 things we need to do before we announce
Am 04/27/2012 05:26 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 7:41 AM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Distribution+Tasks Please review this task list and see if anything is missing. It would be great to confirm that this list is complete and to have a volunteer's name listed against each one of these tasks. Hi Rob -- I just took a very quick look and added some verbiage to item #4. We need some test time after these changes are in place--maybe even a day. On item #3-- Make a copy of the the older MirrorBrain-enabled download/index.html and download/other.html pages. Put them in a download/330 directory. Add a disclaimer notice that these are not Apache releases, but legacy releases under a different license. I don't see the need for a download/330/index.html. I think what you're getting at is a standalone page complete with the DL button generation for 3.3 which I feel is something we don't need for this earlier version. I would think just putting out a download/330/other.html. It would probably be a good idea for this old other to at least provide links for release notes for it though. and linking people to that would be sufficient. I'll start with the complete package. Then we can srill decide later on to delete and/or rename some webpages. Compromise? ;-) Marcus
Re: Distributing AOO 3.4: The 22 things we need to do before we announce
Am 04/27/2012 04:41 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Distribution+Tasks Please review this task list and see if anything is missing. It would be great to confirm that this list is complete and to have a volunteer's name listed against each one of these tasks. Note the additional complexity caused by having hard-coded download logic on the various NL pages. I'll try to setup the separation for the OOo 3.3.0 download links. Marcus
Re: [Proposal] Official Google+ Page for Apache OpenOffice
Hi. 2012/4/26 Albino Biasutti Neto biasut...@gmail.com Hi. 2012/4/23 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 3:24 AM, xia zhao lilyzh...@gmail.com wrote: please add me lilyzh...@gmail.com Done. -Rob Lily 2012/4/19 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org Like Twitter and Facebook, Google+ is a good way to engage with users and the larger OpenOffice ecosystem. Unlike Twitter, Google+ has some enhanced capabilities, such as ease of sharing pictures and video and chat hangouts. The user base is slightly different as well. Google+ is more cutting edge at present, compared to Twitter, and has more early adopters. An important capability from the perspective of the PPMC is that Google+ has built in support for allowing multiple account managers, allowing us to put an account under PPMC control and share responsibilities for maintaining it. I'm proposing that we make this Google+ account into the official Google+ account for the project. I'd be happy to add any PPMC members who are willing to help me with it. Just send me your Google ID and I will add you. snip https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/114598373874764163668/114598373874764163668/about /snip -Rob Join! :) Best, Albino @bino28 Officialy page identi.ca and twitter ! @apacheoo but used hastag: #aoo #apacheoo Tks, Albino @bino28
Re: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
On Apr 27, 2012, at 12:12 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 04/27/2012 08:49 PM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt: On 4/27/12 5:32 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: 2012/4/27 Jürgen Schmidtjogischm...@googlemail.com Hi, to be prepared for the upcoming release I plan to use the following directory structure on https://www.apache.org/dist/**incubator/ooohttps://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/ooo Existing 3.3 3.3/patches 3.3/patches/cve-2012-0037/... DATE KEYS New added: 3.4.0/source 3.4.0/windows/... 3.4.0/windows/languagepacks/..**. 3.4.0/macos/... 3.4.0/macos/languagepacks/... 3.4.0/linux-x86/... 3.4.0/linux-x86/languagepacks/**... 3.4.0/linux-x86-64/... 3.4.0/linux-x86-64/**languagepacks/... 16 languages: en-US ar cs de en-GB es fr gl hu it ja nl ru pr-BR zh-CN zh-TW Do we need to prepare or adapt the download page? Juergen Juergen-- This will considerably change the current logic being used. Is there some reason you don't want to use the existing setup of: root DL area/files/stable/3.4/... root DL area/files/localized/3.4/... see: http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/ I had a look to other projects in the dist folder on Apache and looked what we already have. From my point of view the old structure doesn't really make too much sense. Why should we for example put the localized bit in separate directories when we have the language Id as part of the name? And we have only stable releases in the future. Ok we will have archives of older versions but that's it. Do we have the time to adapt it to the new structure. We should do it ow if possible. What do others think? It won't work because the DL logic is working the old way, and only this way. ;-) The old structure has everything in a single directory. The only separation is for en-US only (stable) and all other languages (localized). When we change the structure now where the builds are physicaly existing, then we have to adapt the complete logic, too, which is an effort that I cannot predict. So, the best solution is to keep the old separation and think about to change this with a new release. Then I would prefer to have every install file for a specific version in a single directory. This makes it the easiest way to assemble download links: Example: root-path/files/3.4.0/... root-path/files/3.4.1/... root-path/files/3.5.0/... ... We can only keep the most current version in Apache dist. All older versions go to the archive. Regards, Dave Marcus
Re: Pages in the social media
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Albino Biasutti Neto biasut...@gmail.com wrote: Hi. For organize pages in the social medias: The master list is here: http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/social.html identi.ca and twitter: @apacheoo Yes. Google Plus: plus.google.com/u/0/114598373874764163668 Yes. What pages in Facebook ? All. https://www.facebook.com/pages/OpenOfficeorg/153010651492897?ref=ts https://www.facebook.com/pages/Apache-OpenOffice/209053572542795 https://www.facebook.com/pages/OpenOfficeorg/252334251512786 None of these are run by the project, as far as I know. Group in fbook: http://www.facebook.com/groups/338330086179568/ This is the one that Raphael has set up. It is a FB group, not a page. I don't understand the difference well. Best, Albino @bino28
Re: [Proposal] Official Google+ Page for Apache OpenOffice
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Albino Biasutti Neto biasut...@gmail.com wrote: Hi. 2012/4/26 Albino Biasutti Neto biasut...@gmail.com Hi. 2012/4/23 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 3:24 AM, xia zhao lilyzh...@gmail.com wrote: please add me lilyzh...@gmail.com Done. -Rob Lily 2012/4/19 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org Like Twitter and Facebook, Google+ is a good way to engage with users and the larger OpenOffice ecosystem. Unlike Twitter, Google+ has some enhanced capabilities, such as ease of sharing pictures and video and chat hangouts. The user base is slightly different as well. Google+ is more cutting edge at present, compared to Twitter, and has more early adopters. An important capability from the perspective of the PPMC is that Google+ has built in support for allowing multiple account managers, allowing us to put an account under PPMC control and share responsibilities for maintaining it. I'm proposing that we make this Google+ account into the official Google+ account for the project. I'd be happy to add any PPMC members who are willing to help me with it. Just send me your Google ID and I will add you. snip https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/114598373874764163668/114598373874764163668/about /snip -Rob Join! :) Best, Albino @bino28 Officialy page identi.ca and twitter ! @apacheoo but used hastag: #aoo #apacheoo OK. I listed those hashtags now on our webpage: http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/social.html Thanks, -Rob Tks, Albino @bino28
Re: RC Readmes point to Wiki ML Page that needs Update
On 24/04/2012 Jürgen Schmidt wrote: The source is in readlicense_oo/docs/readme/readme.xrm. I would suggest that we define first how we want handle it in the future. And a translated version of the README is from my perspective a very useful. The README is already localized; at least, in the Italian version I still see the text that we translated years ago, and that anyway is badly outdated now, like the English version analyzed by Dennis at https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119217 Regards, Andrea.
Re: [RELEASE]: proposed directory structure on dist
On 04/27/2012 12:47 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 04/27/2012 09:34 PM, schrieb Dave Fisher: On Apr 27, 2012, at 12:12 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 04/27/2012 08:49 PM, schrieb J�rgen Schmidt: On 4/27/12 5:32 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: 2012/4/27 J�rgen Schmidtjogischm...@googlemail.com Hi, to be prepared for the upcoming release I plan to use the following directory structure on https://www.apache.org/dist/**incubator/ooohttps://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/ooo Existing 3.3 3.3/patches 3.3/patches/cve-2012-0037/... DATE KEYS New added: 3.4.0/source 3.4.0/windows/... 3.4.0/windows/languagepacks/..**. 3.4.0/macos/... 3.4.0/macos/languagepacks/... 3.4.0/linux-x86/... 3.4.0/linux-x86/languagepacks/**... 3.4.0/linux-x86-64/... 3.4.0/linux-x86-64/**languagepacks/... 16 languages: en-US ar cs de en-GB es fr gl hu it ja nl ru pr-BR zh-CN zh-TW Do we need to prepare or adapt the download page? Juergen Juergen-- This will considerably change the current logic being used. Is there some reason you don't want to use the existing setup of: root DL area/files/stable/3.4/... root DL area/files/localized/3.4/... see: http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/ I had a look to other projects in the dist folder on Apache and looked what we already have. From my point of view the old structure doesn't really make too much sense. Why should we for example put the localized bit in separate directories when we have the language Id as part of the name? And we have only stable releases in the future. Ok we will have archives of older versions but that's it. Do we have the time to adapt it to the new structure. We should do it ow if possible. What do others think? It won't work because the DL logic is working the old way, and only this way. ;-) The old structure has everything in a single directory. The only separation is for en-US only (stable) and all other languages (localized). When we change the structure now where the builds are physicaly existing, then we have to adapt the complete logic, too, which is an effort that I cannot predict. So, the best solution is to keep the old separation and think about to change this with a new release. Then I would prefer to have every install file for a specific version in a single directory. This makes it the easiest way to assemble download links: Example: root-path/files/3.4.0/... root-path/files/3.4.1/... root-path/files/3.5.0/... ... We can only keep the most current version in Apache dist. All older versions go to the archive. Oh yes, right, then it's only one directory. Marcus right now -- especially with the desire to continue to serve up friendly dl logic in the new /download/3.3.0 directory, this is really and truly critical. Yes, it's true, given the Apache current release dictum, we will only have one directory setup -- /dist/incubator/ooo/files/3.4.0/stable /dist/incubator/ooo/files/3.4.0/localized Seriously, once we get past this release, we could and should discuss this some more, but for now...we don't really have time to re-do the logic for a different directory setup -- MzK Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you And life has a funny way of helping you out Helping you out. -- Ironic, Alanis Morissette
Re: Distributing AOO 3.4: The 22 things we need to do before we announce
oh boy...I guess I should just take #4 since I've done quite a bit of work already, but I will only agree to take ownership of this if: * the directory structure for the new release is the same as in the past -- re Jurgen's recent post , and * I have a co-pilot who will contact infra and get more information from them on why we shouldn't user closer.cgi and what's involved with an alternate choice for Apache downloads. So I am not putting my name next to this one until I hear more about these two issues. On 04/27/2012 12:29 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 04/27/2012 04:41 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Distribution+Tasks Please review this task list and see if anything is missing. It would be great to confirm that this list is complete and to have a volunteer's name listed against each one of these tasks. Note the additional complexity caused by having hard-coded download logic on the various NL pages. I'll try to setup the separation for the OOo 3.3.0 download links. Marcus -- MzK Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you And life has a funny way of helping you out Helping you out. -- Ironic, Alanis Morissette
Re: Pages in the social media
Tks. :) Send by Android. Mensagem enviada via Android. Albino @bino28 Em 27/04/2012 16:42, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org escreveu: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Albino Biasutti Neto biasut...@gmail.com wrote: Hi. For organize pages in the social medias: The master list is here: http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/social.html identi.ca and twitter: @apacheoo Yes. Google Plus: plus.google.com/u/0/114598373874764163668 Yes. What pages in Facebook ? All. https://www.facebook.com/pages/OpenOfficeorg/153010651492897?ref=ts https://www.facebook.com/pages/Apache-OpenOffice/209053572542795 https://www.facebook.com/pages/OpenOfficeorg/252334251512786 None of these are run by the project, as far as I know. Group in fbook: http://www.facebook.com/groups/338330086179568/ This is the one that Raphael has set up. It is a FB group, not a page. I don't understand the difference well. Best, Albino @bino28
Re: Distributing AOO 3.4: The 22 things we need to do before we announce
On Apr 27, 2012, at 1:12 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: oh boy...I guess I should just take #4 since I've done quite a bit of work already, but I will only agree to take ownership of this if: * the directory structure for the new release is the same as in the past -- re Jurgen's recent post , and * I have a co-pilot who will contact infra and get more information from them on why we shouldn't user closer.cgi and what's involved with an alternate choice for Apache downloads. I will co-pilot this one, but may not have time until Monday. Joe wanted you to hop on the Infra IRC which is something I need to learn anyway. So I am not putting my name next to this one until I hear more about these two issues. Regards, Dave On 04/27/2012 12:29 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 04/27/2012 04:41 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Distribution+Tasks Please review this task list and see if anything is missing. It would be great to confirm that this list is complete and to have a volunteer's name listed against each one of these tasks. Note the additional complexity caused by having hard-coded download logic on the various NL pages. I'll try to setup the separation for the OOo 3.3.0 download links. Marcus -- MzK Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you And life has a funny way of helping you out Helping you out. -- Ironic, Alanis Morissette
Re: [RELEASE] new DL test...needs review and comments, and probably correction
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: Kay Schenk wrote: Please take a look at and give feedback on a test page for the new /download/index.html page at: http://www.openoffice.org/download/test/index_new_dl.html Yes, it's a bit strange with lots of nonsense at the top that I wanted you to see, but will of course go away in production. The page is nice, but it's the concept that leaves me dubious. We have another thread http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.incubator.ooo.devel/16219 where there seems to be consensus towards a solution that: 1) Uses SF (and possibly Apache) for the web-based downloads 2) Does not phase out MirrorBrain, and uses it for the updates (i.e., downloads initiated by OpenOffice with the Look for updates function) That's what I understand as well. The possibly Apache in 1) is due to the fact that I haven't understood yet what technology Apache will be using and if Apache will distribute only sources or binaries too (it's obvious that we as a project will release sources and binaries, but I'm not 100% sure that Apache wants to put binaries on its mirrors too: I think so). Fact is, we should avoid the random selection as much as possible, mainly to be able to quickly identify problems, and you will see details in that thread. The cleaner separation we can get, the better. So how about something very simple: 1) AOO 3.4 downloads use SourceForge by default from the /download/index.html page. Just like they are doing today. But we also have a links there that point to Apache mirrors for: a) Hashes and detached signatures b) source distribution c) a link to the full release tree In other words, no rolling the dice, noting fancy. 100% of normal users will download from SF. 2) When we enable the automated updates, in a week or two, then we decide what we want to do. Maybe we do it via SF. Maybe MirrorBrain. Maybe a mix, On the other side, release time is approaching and I can only hope that talks between Peter Poeml (MirrorBrain author) and Apache Infra, that had started on this list, are progressing now. I think it is too late for any of those talks to influence how we deal with AOO 3.4 initial downloads. But maybe the update downloads in a couple of weeks. -Rob Regards, Andrea.
Re: [RELEASE} a few DL questions...
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Roberto Galoppini rgalopp...@geek.net wrote: On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: I've been working on a prototype of the DL button in the /download/test area given our discussions about split mirror setup for 3.4 etc. I have a few more edits to do before sending out a notification about final review (later today). But...I have a few questions for this release. * The DL scripts have a good amount of logic surrounding the naming/download of 3.2 and 3.1 releases-- the old naming schema. Since we won't be providing friendly DL buttons for these anymore, is it safe to pull this stuff out? * DL locations for Mac PPC and FreeBSD are as follows (excuse wrapping): var MIRROR_MAC_PPC_URL = http://ooopackages.good-day.net/pub/OpenOffice.org/contrib/macosppc/;; var MIRROR_FREEBSD32_URL = http://ooopackages.good-day.net/pub/OpenOffice.org/contrib/freebsdx86/;; var MIRROR_FREEBSD64_URL = http://ooopackages.good-day.net/pub/OpenOffice.org/contrib/freebsdx86-64/;; Will this still be the case or will all versions be served from either Apache or SourceForge? The DL logic needs to be changed if this alternate URL is not used. I think the main download link should only provide links to official AOO releases. We could have another section (maybe in other.html) where we can point to third party binaries and ports. But we should have a disclaimer making it clear that these packages are not official releases. I also agree that we should not inter-mix 3.3 and 3.4 downloads. Another thing to consider is how we actually invoke the download. Right now we simply link to the SF site. So after the download is done the user is left sitting at SF. This is not ideal. I wonder whether it would be better to load the SF page in a new page, via target=_blank and then refresh our download.html to contribute.html so after the download is done, and the user closes the SF page, they are back in the openoffice website with a thanks for downloading messsage and followup info to engage the user in the community. Actually to avoid to open new pages we did modify the download page by adding all info previously available. We have been beta testing for over a week, and is now live. Hope this will remove the need to open new pages. Hi Roberto, So what we have today looks like this: http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/stable/3.3.0/OOo_3.3.0_Win_x86_install-wJRE_en-US.exe/download After the download, on the left, are some boxes that contain all the info that we used to show to the user here: http://www.openoffice.org/download/contribute.html That is good, since it gives several different ways for the user to engage with the project, etc. However, it is less prominent than before and does require additional mouse clicks to navigate the different sections. I think it is less effective than what we had before. For example, I'm seeing only 47 referrals since April 11th from SF to our Get Involved paged, the first link given. We used to get hundreds of these from the old contribute.html page. I wonder if simpler would be better? So instead of the pop-up page which I suggested before, and which is annoying for some users, maybe keep the SF as it is, but make the content simpler, with the aim of referring users back to contribute.html. So something like this: Thanks for downloading Apache OpenOffice, the free and open productivity suit. We invite you to learn more about how to enhance your experience with OpenOffice, sign up to receive important notifications and learn how you can contribute to make the next version of OpenOffice even better. If we make it short and sweet like that, maybe even use some of the AOO graphical elements, then mayb we can improve the engagement? But I'm not a web UI/marketing expert. Maybe someone has some other ideas. Working on it, it will be operative by next Monday. Roberto -Rob Roberto -Rob Thanks for your time. -- MzK Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you And life has a funny way of helping you out Helping you out. -- Ironic, Alanis Morissette This e- mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. It may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail and any attachment(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any attachment(s) from your system. Thank you. This e-
Re: [RELEASE] new DL test...needs review and comments, and probably correction
On Apr 27, 2012, at 1:46 PM, Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: Kay Schenk wrote: Please take a look at and give feedback on a test page for the new /download/index.html page at: http://www.openoffice.org/download/test/index_new_dl.html Yes, it's a bit strange with lots of nonsense at the top that I wanted you to see, but will of course go away in production. The page is nice, but it's the concept that leaves me dubious. We have another thread http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.incubator.ooo.devel/16219 where there seems to be consensus towards a solution that: 1) Uses SF (and possibly Apache) for the web-based downloads 2) Does not phase out MirrorBrain, and uses it for the updates (i.e., downloads initiated by OpenOffice with the Look for updates function) That's what I understand as well. The possibly Apache in 1) is due to the fact that I haven't understood yet what technology Apache will be using and if Apache will distribute only sources or binaries too (it's obvious that we as a project will release sources and binaries, but I'm not 100% sure that Apache wants to put binaries on its mirrors too: I think so). Fact is, we should avoid the random selection as much as possible, mainly to be able to quickly identify problems, and you will see details in that thread. The cleaner separation we can get, the better. So how about something very simple: 1) AOO 3.4 downloads use SourceForge by default from the /download/index.html page. Just like they are doing today. But we also have a links there that point to Apache mirrors for: a) Hashes and detached signatures Hashes and detached signatures are hosted elsewhere in Apache releases. Not on the mirrors. http://poi.apache.org/download.html http://tomcat.apache.org/download-60.cgi http://httpd.apache.org/download.cgi Joe has suggested that we follow a cgi approach for Apache mirrors. Kay asked for help with this approach. I hope to have time next Monday/Tuesday to dialog with Infra on this. b) source distribution c) a link to the full release tree In other words, no rolling the dice, noting fancy. 100% of normal users will download from SF. What Kay has done can be adapted in any direction. Let's learn how to do the Apache CGI approach and then make a decision by Tuesday? If we allow more than one mirroring system then the user should be able to choose for themselves... BUt we already have Marcus, Rob, Kay, Peter, Infra and SF cooking in this kitchen. We can't keep redefining the problem. Regards, Dave 2) When we enable the automated updates, in a week or two, then we decide what we want to do. Maybe we do it via SF. Maybe MirrorBrain. Maybe a mix, On the other side, release time is approaching and I can only hope that talks between Peter Poeml (MirrorBrain author) and Apache Infra, that had started on this list, are progressing now. I think it is too late for any of those talks to influence how we deal with AOO 3.4 initial downloads. But maybe the update downloads in a couple of weeks. -Rob Regards, Andrea.
Re: [RELEASE] new DL test...needs review and comments, and probably correction
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Apr 27, 2012, at 1:46 PM, Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: Kay Schenk wrote: Please take a look at and give feedback on a test page for the new /download/index.html page at: http://www.openoffice.org/download/test/index_new_dl.html Yes, it's a bit strange with lots of nonsense at the top that I wanted you to see, but will of course go away in production. The page is nice, but it's the concept that leaves me dubious. We have another thread http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.incubator.ooo.devel/16219 where there seems to be consensus towards a solution that: 1) Uses SF (and possibly Apache) for the web-based downloads 2) Does not phase out MirrorBrain, and uses it for the updates (i.e., downloads initiated by OpenOffice with the Look for updates function) That's what I understand as well. The possibly Apache in 1) is due to the fact that I haven't understood yet what technology Apache will be using and if Apache will distribute only sources or binaries too (it's obvious that we as a project will release sources and binaries, but I'm not 100% sure that Apache wants to put binaries on its mirrors too: I think so). Fact is, we should avoid the random selection as much as possible, mainly to be able to quickly identify problems, and you will see details in that thread. The cleaner separation we can get, the better. So how about something very simple: 1) AOO 3.4 downloads use SourceForge by default from the /download/index.html page. Just like they are doing today. But we also have a links there that point to Apache mirrors for: a) Hashes and detached signatures Hashes and detached signatures are hosted elsewhere in Apache releases. Not on the mirrors. http://poi.apache.org/download.html http://tomcat.apache.org/download-60.cgi http://httpd.apache.org/download.cgi Joe has suggested that we follow a cgi approach for Apache mirrors. Kay asked for help with this approach. I hope to have time next Monday/Tuesday to dialog with Infra on this. b) source distribution c) a link to the full release tree In other words, no rolling the dice, noting fancy. 100% of normal users will download from SF. What Kay has done can be adapted in any direction. Let's learn how to do the Apache CGI approach and then make a decision by Tuesday? Do we really want to beta test new Apache CGI code? Or do we want to go with what we've been testing live since April 11th, namely SF. If we allow more than one mirroring system then the user should be able to choose for themselves... Users want a download that works. They have no reason to chose from equally opaque alternatives. BUt we already have Marcus, Rob, Kay, Peter, Infra and SF cooking in this kitchen. We can't keep redefining the problem. I'd say stick with SourceForge as we originally agreed to. Remember, they need to balance their books on the traffic. They did the analysis, and incurred initial costs. This was based on assumptions of traffic that they would be handling. Don't assume that giving them less traffic saves them money. It might actually do the opposite, especially if they have contracted for the bandwidth and now find they are serving up far few ads because our cooks have decided to play with MirrorBrain or whatever. We should be a good partner here and stick to what we agreed with. Otherwise, if we start being flaky, we're less likely to see such help in the future. -Rob Regards, Dave 2) When we enable the automated updates, in a week or two, then we decide what we want to do. Maybe we do it via SF. Maybe MirrorBrain. Maybe a mix, On the other side, release time is approaching and I can only hope that talks between Peter Poeml (MirrorBrain author) and Apache Infra, that had started on this list, are progressing now. I think it is too late for any of those talks to influence how we deal with AOO 3.4 initial downloads. But maybe the update downloads in a couple of weeks. -Rob Regards, Andrea.
Re: [RELEASE] new DL test...needs review and comments, and probably correction
Am 04/27/2012 01:40 AM, schrieb Kay Schenk: Please take a look at and give feedback on a test page for the new /download/index.html page at: http://www.openoffice.org/download/test/index_new_dl.html Yes, it's a bit strange with lots of nonsense at the top that I wanted you to see, but will of course go away in production. Basically, choosing the DL site -- Apache or SourceForge (as I believe we agree on for 3.3) is based on selection option #1, so I wanted you to see the results of that. If do a bunch of reloads --shift + browser reload button -- you may eventually see changes to the outcome. Right now this is setup with 75% to Apache, 25% to SourceForge. I don't know if it's just me but I also get a layer message with: New mirror: http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/; Is this intended? Wouldn't it be better to show it directly on the webpage? So, we concentrate on the point #1 and let #2 and #3 beside for the moment/the coming release, right? OK, way down below, you will see the normal generated big green DL button. Of course the link will not work (but oddly Apache is very nice and gives us a page to select from at the outset anyway), but you'll observe the link for the chosen DL site. Yes, the variation works for me. Other things to note: * the DL links assume the current location of /files/stable/VERSION/... from the top of DL URL area. IF this is not the case for Apache, please let me know * Joe Schaefer said via e-mail that we couldn't use the normal closer.cgi http://www.apache.org/dev/mirrors.html#use for this and I needed to consult with infra on this which I have NOT done yet, so things may change a bit. I hope not drastically * if we DO use closer.cgi as per usual for Apache mirrors, I am fairly certain the target=_blank to open up the actual DL will not work as what we are doing is running a script, and not really opening up a page directly * didn't even try the redirect to contribute.html do to above consideration with closer.cgi It seems Roberto can help here, too. See his post in the other thread. * I will be modifying the option area to allow folks to get to the current other.html for 3.3 (all from MirroBrain as recently agreed on) and maybe a link on that to OOo older archives. I will also handle this with my separation task. So, lets see how this will fit together. * I did quite an edit job on the old languages.js. See revision at: http://www.openoffice.org/download/test/languages_new_dl.js To keep the overview I would suggest to put all needed languages for AOO 3.4 on top and move these that were not needed to the bottom and keep commented out. OK, I guess that's enough for now I guess. My time will be limited on doing much more on this until Sunday. But PLEASE join in to help with this effort if you can! I'm sure we've got some JS wonks out there! Thanks for your work. I promise to offer help were I can and when my spare time allows. :-) Marcus
Re: [RELEASE] new DL test...needs review and comments, and probably correction
On Apr 27, 2012, at 2:14 PM, Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Apr 27, 2012, at 1:46 PM, Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: Kay Schenk wrote: Please take a look at and give feedback on a test page for the new /download/index.html page at: http://www.openoffice.org/download/test/index_new_dl.html Yes, it's a bit strange with lots of nonsense at the top that I wanted you to see, but will of course go away in production. The page is nice, but it's the concept that leaves me dubious. We have another thread http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.incubator.ooo.devel/16219 where there seems to be consensus towards a solution that: 1) Uses SF (and possibly Apache) for the web-based downloads 2) Does not phase out MirrorBrain, and uses it for the updates (i.e., downloads initiated by OpenOffice with the Look for updates function) That's what I understand as well. The possibly Apache in 1) is due to the fact that I haven't understood yet what technology Apache will be using and if Apache will distribute only sources or binaries too (it's obvious that we as a project will release sources and binaries, but I'm not 100% sure that Apache wants to put binaries on its mirrors too: I think so). Fact is, we should avoid the random selection as much as possible, mainly to be able to quickly identify problems, and you will see details in that thread. The cleaner separation we can get, the better. So how about something very simple: 1) AOO 3.4 downloads use SourceForge by default from the /download/index.html page. Just like they are doing today. But we also have a links there that point to Apache mirrors for: a) Hashes and detached signatures Hashes and detached signatures are hosted elsewhere in Apache releases. Not on the mirrors. http://poi.apache.org/download.html http://tomcat.apache.org/download-60.cgi http://httpd.apache.org/download.cgi Joe has suggested that we follow a cgi approach for Apache mirrors. Kay asked for help with this approach. I hope to have time next Monday/Tuesday to dialog with Infra on this. b) source distribution c) a link to the full release tree In other words, no rolling the dice, noting fancy. 100% of normal users will download from SF. What Kay has done can be adapted in any direction. Let's learn how to do the Apache CGI approach and then make a decision by Tuesday? Do we really want to beta test new Apache CGI code? Or do we want to go with what we've been testing live since April 11th, namely SF. I personally want to test the Apache CGI method. Kay asked for help. I won't consider my time to be wasted whether it is used by the project or not. If we allow more than one mirroring system then the user should be able to choose for themselves... Users want a download that works. They have no reason to chose from equally opaque alternatives. You are suggesting a single mirror - SF. I only suggested that users be offered a choice if we have more than one mirror available. It would also really help to have a choice on the TEST page until everyone is happy. It can only be good to have alternative mirrors tested. Whether or not users get that choice. BUt we already have Marcus, Rob, Kay, Peter, Infra and SF cooking in this kitchen. We can't keep redefining the problem. I'd say stick with SourceForge as we originally agreed to. Remember, they need to balance their books on the traffic. They did the analysis, and incurred initial costs. This was based on assumptions of traffic that they would be handling. Don't assume that giving them less traffic saves them money. It might actually do the opposite, especially if they have contracted for the bandwidth and now find they are serving up far few ads because our cooks have decided to play with MirrorBrain or whatever. I was not thinking one way or another about SF's business model. It is merely a technical issue. We should be a good partner here and stick to what we agreed with. Otherwise, if we start being flaky, we're less likely to see such help in the future. As I said We can't keep redefining the problem. But let's be sure we are on target. Marcus, Kay and Roberto along with you, Rob, have been doing this work. I'm trying to stay out of the way here. Regards, Dave -Rob Regards, Dave 2) When we enable the automated updates, in a week or two, then we decide what we want to do. Maybe we do it via SF. Maybe MirrorBrain. Maybe a mix, On the other side, release time is approaching and I can only hope that talks between Peter Poeml (MirrorBrain author) and Apache Infra, that had started on this list, are progressing now. I think it is too late for any of those talks to influence how we deal with AOO 3.4 initial downloads. But maybe the update downloads
Re: [RELEASE} a few DL questions...
On 04/27/2012 01:57 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote: On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Roberto Galoppinirgalopp...@geek.net wrote: On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Kay Schenkkay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: I've been working on a prototype of the DL button in the /download/test area given our discussions about split mirror setup for 3.4 etc. I have a �few more edits to do �before sending out a notification about final review (later today). But...I have a few questions for this release. * The DL scripts have a good amount of logic surrounding the naming/download of 3.2 and 3.1 releases-- the old naming schema. Since we won't be providing friendly DL buttons for these anymore, is it safe to pull this stuff out? * DL locations for Mac PPC and FreeBSD are as follows (excuse wrapping): var MIRROR_MAC_PPC_URL � � �= http://ooopackages.good-day.net/pub/OpenOffice.org/contrib/macosppc/;; var MIRROR_FREEBSD32_URL � �= http://ooopackages.good-day.net/pub/OpenOffice.org/contrib/freebsdx86/;; var MIRROR_FREEBSD64_URL � �= http://ooopackages.good-day.net/pub/OpenOffice.org/contrib/freebsdx86-64/;; Will this still be the case or will all versions be served from either Apache or SourceForge? The DL logic needs to be changed if this alternate URL is not used. I think the main download link should only provide links to official AOO releases. � We could have another section (maybe in other.html) where we can point to third party binaries and ports. �But we should have a disclaimer making it clear that these packages are not official releases. I also agree that we should not inter-mix 3.3 and 3.4 downloads. Another thing to consider is how we actually invoke the download. Right now we simply link to the SF site. �So after the download is done the user is left sitting at SF. �This is not ideal. � �I wonder whether it would be better to load the SF page in a new page, via target=_blank and then refresh our download.html to contribute.html so after the download is done, and the user closes the SF page, they are back in the openoffice website with a thanks for downloading messsage and followup info to engage the user in the community. Actually to avoid to open new pages we did modify the download page by adding all info previously available. We have been beta testing for over a week, and is now live. Hope this will remove the need to open new pages. Hi Roberto, So what we have today looks like this: http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/stable/3.3.0/OOo_3.3.0_Win_x86_install-wJRE_en-US.exe/download After the download, on the left, are some boxes that contain all the info that we used to show to the user here: http://www.openoffice.org/download/contribute.html That is good, since it gives several different ways for the user to engage with the project, etc. However, it is less prominent than before and does require additional mouse clicks to navigate the different sections. � �I think it is less effective than what we had before. �For example, I'm seeing only 47 referrals since April 11th from SF to our Get Involved paged, the first link given. �We used to get hundreds of these from the old contribute.html page. I wonder if simpler would be better? �So instead of the pop-up page which I suggested before, and which is annoying for some users, maybe keep the SF as it is, but make the content simpler, with the aim of referring users back to contribute.html. So something like this: Thanks for downloading Apache OpenOffice, the free and open productivity suit. � We invite you to learn more about how to enhance your experience with OpenOffice, sign up to receive important notifications and learn how you can contribute to make the next version of OpenOffice even better. If we make it short and sweet like that, maybe even use some of the AOO graphical elements, then mayb we can improve the engagement? But I'm not a web UI/marketing expert. �Maybe someone has some other ideas. Working on it, it will be operative by next Monday. Roberto I love what SourceForge has done here by the way! Very nice! and very creative from the norm. -Rob Roberto -Rob Thanks for your time. -- MzK Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you �And life has a funny way of helping you out �Helping you out. � � � � � � � � � � � � � �-- Ironic, Alanis Morissette This e- mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. It may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail and any attachment(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and delete the
Re: Distributing AOO 3.4: The 22 things we need to do before we announce
On 04/27/2012 01:23 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: On Apr 27, 2012, at 1:12 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: oh boy...I guess I should just take #4 since I've done quite a bit of work already, but I will only agree to take ownership of this if: * the directory structure for the new release is the same as in the past -- re Jurgen's recent post , and * I have a co-pilot who will contact infra and get more information from them on why we shouldn't user closer.cgi and what's involved with an alternate choice for Apache downloads. I will co-pilot this one, but may not have time until Monday. Joe wanted you to hop on the Infra IRC which is something I need to learn anyway. OK -- I'm going to add it as a separate item. I tired to get to infra on freenode.net (as instructions say), not freenode.org, the day he sent this but it seemed to have connectivity problems. Thanks for doing this...I'll add it as an item take the liberty of putting your name by it. So I am not putting my name next to this one until I hear more about these two issues. Regards, Dave On 04/27/2012 12:29 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 04/27/2012 04:41 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Distribution+Tasks Please review this task list and see if anything is missing. It would be great to confirm that this list is complete and to have a volunteer's name listed against each one of these tasks. Note the additional complexity caused by having hard-coded download logic on the various NL pages. I'll try to setup the separation for the OOo 3.3.0 download links. Marcus -- MzK Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you And life has a funny way of helping you out Helping you out. -- Ironic, Alanis Morissette -- MzK Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you And life has a funny way of helping you out Helping you out. -- Ironic, Alanis Morissette
Re: Pages in the social media
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Albino Biasutti Neto biasut...@gmail.com wrote: Hi. For organize pages in the social medias: identi.ca and twitter: @apacheoo Also @openofficeorg Google Plus: plus.google.com/u/0/114598373874764163668 https://plus.google.com/110957008676542606262 What pages in Facebook ? All. https://www.facebook.com/pages/OpenOfficeorg/153010651492897?ref=ts https://www.facebook.com/pages/Apache-OpenOffice/209053572542795 https://www.facebook.com/pages/OpenOfficeorg/252334251512786 https://www.facebook.com/ApacheOpenOffice Group in fbook: http://www.facebook.com/groups/338330086179568/ Best, Albino @bino28
Re: [RELEASE] new DL test...needs review and comments, and probably correction
On 04/27/2012 02:20 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 04/27/2012 01:40 AM, schrieb Kay Schenk: Please take a look at and give feedback on a test page for the new /download/index.html page at: http://www.openoffice.org/download/test/index_new_dl.html Yes, it's a bit strange with lots of nonsense at the top that I wanted you to see, but will of course go away in production. Basically, choosing the DL site -- Apache or SourceForge (as I believe we agree on for 3.3) is based on selection option #1, so I wanted you to see the results of that. If do a bunch of reloads --shift + browser reload button -- you may eventually see changes to the outcome. Right now this is setup with 75% to Apache, 25% to SourceForge. I don't know if it's just me but I also get a layer message with: New mirror: http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/; Is this intended? Wouldn't it be better to show it directly on the webpage? no --it's not just you. :/ I did this to verify that I was getting reasonable right before the actual download. This, of course, will go away. So, we concentrate on the point #1 and let #2 and #3 beside for the moment/the coming release, right? OK, way down below, you will see the normal generated big green DL button. Of course the link will not work (but oddly Apache is very nice and gives us a page to select from at the outset anyway), but you'll observe the link for the chosen DL site. Yes, the variation works for me. Other things to note: * the DL links assume the current location of /files/stable/VERSION/... from the top of DL URL area. IF this is not the case for Apache, please let me know * Joe Schaefer said via e-mail that we couldn't use the normal closer.cgi http://www.apache.org/dev/mirrors.html#use for this and I needed to consult with infra on this which I have NOT done yet, so things may change a bit. I hope not drastically * if we DO use closer.cgi as per usual for Apache mirrors, I am fairly certain the target=_blank to open up the actual DL will not work as what we are doing is running a script, and not really opening up a page directly * didn't even try the redirect to contribute.html do to above consideration with closer.cgi It seems Roberto can help here, too. See his post in the other thread. yes, what SF ahs done is great! But, it doesn't do us any good if we also use the Apache distribution mechanism. i.e. if you get the Apache mirrors rather than SF. * I will be modifying the option area to allow folks to get to the current other.html for 3.3 (all from MirroBrain as recently agreed on) and maybe a link on that to OOo older archives. I will also handle this with my separation task. So, lets see how this will fit together. I'll just put a link in the options when I get back to to this that will say something like -- Older stable 3.3 release -- and pop them to /download/3.3.0 * I did quite an edit job on the old languages.js. See revision at: http://www.openoffice.org/download/test/languages_new_dl.js To keep the overview I would suggest to put all needed languages for AOO 3.4 on top and move these that were not needed to the bottom and keep commented out. OK, that sounds like a good idea. I'm all for better organization. OK, I guess that's enough for now I guess. My time will be limited on doing much more on this until Sunday. But PLEASE join in to help with this effort if you can! I'm sure we've got some JS wonks out there! Thanks for your work. I promise to offer help were I can and when my spare time allows. :-) Thanks for this. After this release, I will definitely put more effort into paramterizing the DL scripts. Marcus -- MzK Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you And life has a funny way of helping you out Helping you out. -- Ironic, Alanis Morissette
Re: [RELEASE] new DL test...needs review and comments, and probably correction
On 04/27/2012 01:46 PM, Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Andrea Pescettipesce...@apache.org wrote: Kay Schenk wrote: Please take a look at and give feedback on a test page for the new /download/index.html page at: http://www.openoffice.org/download/test/index_new_dl.html Yes, it's a bit strange with lots of nonsense at the top that I wanted you to see, but will of course go away in production. The page is nice, but it's the concept that leaves me dubious. We have another thread http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.incubator.ooo.devel/16219 where there seems to be consensus towards a solution that: 1) Uses SF (and possibly Apache) for the web-based downloads 2) Does not phase out MirrorBrain, and uses it for the updates (i.e., downloads initiated by OpenOffice with the Look for updates function) That's what I understand as well. oh -- OK. I thought we were going to use MirrorBrain for 3.3 DLs as well -- i.e. what Marcus will be working on. I know right now, we're using SourceForge for that though. The possibly Apache in 1) is due to the fact that I haven't understood yet what technology Apache will be using and if Apache will distribute only sources or binaries too (it's obvious that we as a project will release sources and binaries, but I'm not 100% sure that Apache wants to put binaries on its mirrors too: I think so). Well it's not all that complicated actually. Take a look at the security patch info page... http://www.openoffice.org/security/cves/CVE-2012-0037.html and you can see what the link looks like. Actual source/binaries are, for us, put in: http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/ooo/ This said, you could be right in having issues tracking down problems. Right now, the SF setup is more user friendly in my opinion. I thought we were *required* to use Apache for downloads, but maybe we've gotten a dispensation for this release. Though I didn't think is was 100% someplace else. I admit I haven't kept up as much as I should have though. The other issue is how will it LOOK to users -- one moment they may be one place; if they happen to do a shift-reload, they may go someplace else with an entirely different look and feel. Fact is, we should avoid the random selection as much as possible, mainly to be able to quickly identify problems, and you will see details in that thread. The cleaner separation we can get, the better. So how about something very simple: 1) AOO 3.4 downloads use SourceForge by default from the /download/index.html page. Just like they are doing today. This WOULD make things a lot simpler. But we also have a links there that point to Apache mirrors for: a) Hashes and detached signatures b) source distribution c) a link to the full release tree Well, SF will need to implement in their sidebar or the main page for openoffice.org they have, right? Anyway, good conversation. In other words, no rolling the dice, noting fancy. 100% of normal users will download from SF. 2) When we enable the automated updates, in a week or two, then we decide what we want to do. Maybe we do it via SF. Maybe MirrorBrain. Maybe a mix, On the other side, release time is approaching and I can only hope that talks between Peter Poeml (MirrorBrain author) and Apache Infra, that had started on this list, are progressing now. I think it is too late for any of those talks to influence how we deal with AOO 3.4 initial downloads. But maybe the update downloads in a couple of weeks. -Rob Regards, Andrea. -- MzK Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you And life has a funny way of helping you out Helping you out. -- Ironic, Alanis Morissette
Re: SPI
On 27 April 2012 23:47, Wolf Halton wolf.hal...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Ross, I sent them a request for an update on the progress. Would you happen to know the address or paypal account to which the funds should be sent? There is a PayPal account but I suspect that since this is a largish sum it would make more sense to use a wire transfer. I'll mail the appropriate list (fundraising@) and copy you in for the reply. Thanks, Ross Wolf http://sourcefreedom.com Apache developer: wolfhal...@apache.org On Apr 18, 2012 2:54 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: On the ASF side silence is approval, on the SPI side I'd have expected a response by now. Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity. On Apr 18, 2012 3:41 AM, Wolf Halton wolf.hal...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 8:56 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: treasu...@spi-inc.org Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity. On Feb 22, 2012 4:33 AM, Wolf Halton wolf.hal...@gmail.com wrote: That is a good point. It will be included in the proposal. On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 11:27 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: Just one thought. I don't think the consensus is *just* travel assistance. There needs to be an event to travel to, that will cost money too. I figured the proposal would be for event + travel. there is a hope that Co-location will mean event costs will be very low, but this may not be possible. Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity. On Feb 21, 2012 8:08 PM, Wolf Halton wolf.hal...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Ross, I made a proposal and let it rock for 10 days. We have a general consensus on openoffice-dev that the monies should be going to travel-assistance, so how do I proceed from here? Wolf I haven't heard anything about this issue since I sent off the proposal a month ago. Is this a reasonable time period of silence or is it time to nudge somebody again? Wolf -- This Apt Has Super Cow Powers - http://sourcefreedom.com Advancing Libraries Together - http://LYRASIS.org -- Ross Gardler (@rgardler) Programme Leader (Open Development) OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
Re: Distributing AOO 3.4: The 22 things we need to do before we announce
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Distribution+Tasks Please review this task list and see if anything is missing. It would be great to confirm that this list is complete and to have a volunteer's name listed against each one of these tasks. I added a new task, now #2. Once we have the final files approved we should whitelist' them with Symantec, so users will get fewer false-hits from anti-virus. https://submit.symantec.com/whitelist/isv/new/ Among the information they need is URL and SHA256 hash. It looks like each language will need to be submitted separately. I'm assuming only Windows. Or is Symantec used on MacOS as well? -Rob Note the additional complexity caused by having hard-coded download logic on the various NL pages. -Rob
Re: Pinterest
Nancy, I like your idea very much! Currently Pinterest is very popular in Social media and Social business in the world. More and more enterprise, community etc use it to promote their product and business. Surely we can use it to promote AOO 3.4 and further release. I am writing one paper about From Social Media to Social Business these days and is thinking how to promote AOO to the world except for the ways we used before. Except Pinterest, Youtube is one good way we can use, I suggest we record some video to doom AOO 3.4 and do something funny about the release etc. And promote it to Youtube. We may work together. And anyone else has interesting? With AOO 3.4 is released I suppose we should have some promotion activities. Best regards, Lily 2012/4/26 Nancy K nancythirt...@yahoo.com Hi! I attended an hour webinar highlighting the use of Pinterest for businesses - B2C, B2B and also personal. I learned that in less than a year, this social media format has surpassed youtube, google+, linkedin - and is now number 3 in usage under facebook and twitter (not sure which one of the latter is first). Terminology - PINS are images that you post on your BOARDS - like you would post picture cards on an office bulletin board. The thing is that pins can be linked to a landing page, folks can 'REPIN' your pin (with its image and links) to their own Boards. They can 'like', 'comment', REPIN. I can imagine ways that this could be used - for instance a separate BOARD for Writer,Draw, etc. Each board could have its own tutorial 'pin' with a link to the respective landing page. Their could be a board for the history, another for people behind the scenes, the imagination can go on - the webinar suggested using up to 32 boards, but you can have more. Each board displays 5 pins. Look at General Electrics site ( pinterest.com/generalelectric)- notice how the images on their boards entice people to look around and create a bold statement (especially the first board). Another idea would be to reward those that contribute to openoffice by placing a 'I helped too' kind of board, people could repin their award on their own boards and their friends could see what they have been up to. Because this is increasing in popularity, and a great way to spread branding, I suggest reserving the openoffice username even if no one plans to use Pinterest yet. Starbucks (pinterest.com/starbucks)has reserved their name, but does not use it yet. I have just signed up to use pinterest, and have not added anything to my boards yet. I do not know the way to get analytics yet, still reading about it, but the webinar mentioned this is available, as well as tracking keywords that are working for the competitors. So far it is by invitation from another pinterest user to set up an account. By the way, check out /microsoft - everyone is starting out, it seems. Nancy Nancy Web Design Free 24 hour pass to lynda.com. Video courses on SEO, CMS, Design and Software Courses
