Re: Redirects vs. SYMPA
TJ Frazier wrote: SYMPA sends me these messages, but when I try to follow the links, I get a 404 on the Apache server. Perfectly reasonable, since I need to reach Kenai/SYMPA. Does somebody have to play with the redirects, or can I do something in my hosts file (I'm probably the only one who needs this)? Honestly I never tried to access pages to manage bouncing subscribers, but you can manage subscribers (after making the obvious replacements) at addresses like http://openoffice.org/projects/it/lists/qa/subscribers (replace it - documentation and qa - authors or whatever you need). This still doesn't answer your question completely, because it lists all subscribers and not only the bouncing ones. But you won't need any tweaks to your hosts file to reach this page. Regards, Andrea.
Re: admin permissions on old OOo
On 30/01/2012 Dave Fisher wrote: Is it time to remove the old OOo? Not without proper notice. At least, there are still active mailing lists there and the corresponding moderation web panels under http://openoffice.org still work. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Default values on Writer
On 22/01/2012 RGB ES wrote: == Context sensitive toolbars == Context sensitive toolbars are a really useful feature but new users tend to not like them because by default they appear on not so useful places... like on top of the table you are trying to edit. IMHO, anchoring by default those toolbars on the bottom of the window will give better user experience. Yes. Even better would be anchoring them on the right hand side, but the page will redraw when they move out of the object... Anyway, I agree that toolbars that get in the way are a common annoyance for users, so they should be anchored by default. == Autocorrect options == There are several autocorrect options that create confusion among new (and not so new) users. On this one I'm less sure: there are probably as many (if not more) users who do rely on these features, and if we disbale them by default we will see a lot of requests on how to enable them. Probably the only one that can be safely considered annoying is Number Recognition in tables. == Word Completion == ... Checking under Tools → AutoCorrect Options → Word Completion tab the option Show as a tip provides a far better user experience and make it more clear that this is a suggestion and not something imposed by Writer. Indeed, this one should really be changed for better usability. == Toolbar buttons == Do we need a Zoom button when we have a nice Zoom toolbar bottom right on the window? Well, not everybody is familiar with the slider, and I don't find it so annoying. What do you think? Better defaults are indeed low-hanging fruits that can make the difference in usability. If we have consensus in changing at least the items listed here, this would already be nice. Regards, Andrea.
Re: OpenOffice Template Website Problems
On 24/01/2012 Rupert wrote: I am writing to let you know that I am currently not able to log in to the OpenOffice template website (I do have a valid user name password) ... Also, while it is possible to download templates, often the website page needs refreshing several times before it appears. Dear Rupert, both problems are known and are expected to be addressed in time for the 3.4 release. Specifically, the instability has been discussed for several months, while the user login problems are possibly related to the DNS migration done in the last days of 2011 (you will see that your password still works on http://openoffice.org/people/login but of course this doesn't give you access to the Templates site). Although we are speaking of two completely different sites, the problems of the Extensions and Templates sites are usually lumped together, and referred to as problems with the Extensions site: you will find many messages in the mailing list archives about this. Regards, Andrea.
Re: External libraries
On 20/01/2012 Andre Fischer wrote: It's done. I just checked in the CoinMP replacement of the former lp_solve library. Thanks! I updated https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/IP_Clearance+Impact to reflect this and other recent changes. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [CODE] update services
On 27/01/2012 Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: this is actually implemented. Nice to know! I updated http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Update_Notification_Protocol with this remark. a dummy http://people.apache.org/~arielch/ProductUpdateService/check.Update will indicate every OOo version that it is up-to-date (we may not want this - an OOo 3.2 will not be seen as un update to an OOo 3.1, for example). In theory this would indeed happen, but in practice OpenOffice.org 3.3 has been out for exactly one year, so the vast majority of people who are interested in updates should now be running version 3.3. Those who haven't updated their old OpenOffice.org for more than one year can likely wait for Apache OpenOffice 3.4 to be released. So even this dummy file reporting that no updates are available would be a significant improvement over the current error message. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [ooo-site] ALL THE OO EXTENSIONS SUBDOMAIN IS BROKEN AND DOWN 404 HELP!!
Jim Sanders wrote: The extensions website is kaputski mate! Dear Jim, this is a well-known problem that is expected to be solved by the moment version 3.4 is released, in the next few months. In the meantime, reloading the pages several times will often work. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Trying to add more quality to openoffice
On 16/01/2012 p.a.sa.h. wrote: Still not knowing how to find an OpenOffice more appropriate contact, this is the most immediate i found, so please forward it to someone who can really do something. I'm sending two files that weren't opened correctly by your application software: the two originally contain a cover sheet from the Microsoft word (latest version i guess) library, but openoffice does not show that cover sheet, only the body of the text. Hi Paulo, I had a look at the problems you describe, but perfect compatibility with the Microsoft Office formats is hard to achieve. We are still unable to offer complete support for VBA macros (the problem you described for your earlier Shoe.xls file); this is a known limitation and it won't be solved immediately. As for your other problem (cover sheet in Word not displayed in OpenOffice.org) this seems like a bug that should be tracked. The most appropriate way to do so is that you create an account at https://issues.apache.org/ooo/ and that you enter a new bug for the Word processor component; there are many fields, but just make sure to write a concise summary (like DOCX compatibility: cover sheet not shown), a detailed description and attach your sample document (and possibly screenshots). There is no guarantee that your problem will be fixed immediately (actually, there are many bugs that have been open for months, even for years), but your report is much more likely to be considered if you use Bugzilla instead of this mailing list. Regards, Andrea.
Re: New feature: Drawing thick lines with line caps
On 16/01/2012 Regina Henschel wrote: I have added a Wiki page about it https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Release+Notes Thanks Regina (and Armin for technical details and integration work), this is a very nice description! Just a question: does this new feature introduce new strings? If so, then we might need to start a separate discussion on how to manage translations of new strings. Regards, Andrea.
Re: i18nregexp replaced with ICU regexp = heads up
On 04/01/2012 Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 1/4/12 4:26 PM, Herbert Duerr wrote: For the specific example of the RE-extension \ the more common syntax for it is \b and that is also understood by almost all regex engines including the ones used in old and new OOo. We should keep this in mind for the release notes and should update the docu, help as soon as possible I tried to add a paragraph summarizing this thread to the Release Notes: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Release+Notes Of course, feel free to improve accuracy/contents/language. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Next step: fonts
On 18/01/2012 Pedro Giffuni wrote: I will take a stab at bringing back the Gentium font and I will bring in the ChromeOS fonts that will replace the Liberation fonts we used to carry. Since they are metrically equivalent, can the font substitution table be updated with the same changes? I.e., it used to contain Times New Roman - Liberation Serif (meaning: if Times New Roman is not available on the system, then use Liberation Serif in its place) and it should now contain something like Times New Roman - Tinos Liberation Serif - Tinos to allow best compatibility for those who don't have the fonts installed. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [BUILD]: propose new Developer snapshot builds based on revision r1231878
Jürgen Schmidt wrote: If Windows, Linux and Mac versions are available I would like to drop a short mail on our announce mailing list if we all think that it is a good idea to promote this unofficial snapshot builds to a broader audience. We can only benefit from this and will hopefully can early feedback. Any opinions on the announcement part? I don't know how the port to CoinMP is progressing, but I would prefer to wait that the Solver is back in before making an announcement: we've seen enough attention and enough misunderstandings to be sure that if the Solver is still disabled then journalists and bloggers will get it wrong. Same would go for integrating dictionaries back in Language packs. At the very least, the wiki page https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Unofficial+Developer+Snapshots should list the parts that are intentionally disabled in these builds: it is important that people understand that there will be no dropped features (except for obsolete functionality or very rare use cases) from OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 to Apache OpenOffice 3.4. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Double dictionaries for languages
On 07/01/2012 Marco A.G.Pinto wrote: Portuguese has suffered a language agreement and now there are two kinds of my language: - pre-agreement - post-agreement... The language is still the same and just the dictionary is changed. Could this be implemented into AOO? I think (but I haven't checked with a recent build, and I'm not 100% sure) that multiple dictionaries for the same language are supported and are merged (i.e., if you enable both an old spelling and a new spelling dictionary, words of either dictionary will be accepted). As for switching between dictionaries, the easiest way I see is installing separate extensions: there is no suitable user interface yet, unfortunately. There's always the hack of defining two separate locales and assigning one to the old spelling and one to the new spelling to change them in real time like American English and British English, but forcing this configuration would break interoperability. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Resolving MS Word Binary File Format
On 09/01/2012 Liang Weike wrote: I'm making an investigation of OpenOffice processing the documents of MS Office's binary file formats. ... So, has OpenOffice improved the flow and construction of resolving MS Office's binary file formats after MS offered the specification? As far as I know, no substantial rewriting of the filters for doc/xls/ppt files happened after Microsoft released the specification: I've seen several incremental improvements over the years, but never a complete rewrite. I don't actually know if Microsoft released the specification in a form that would make it easy to write an import filter from scratch. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Seeking Bugzilla Admin Volunteers
Rob Weir wrote: Did you read anyone say that current privileges are going to be dropped? I certainly did not say that. No, but that was a doubt I had: in the process of granting new privileges, it might be that someone notices that a lot of people already have high privileges, and that this group includes people currently unaffiliated with the project. I was just making sure that current privileges are not dropped now: this will still be an issue, but it can be dealt with separately. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [BUG]AOO in Asia Language word's counts calculate is wrong
On 01/01/2012 L'oiseau de mer wrote: I test the lastest version AOO, and noticed the problem. This a old problem since past openoffice.org. I hope this problem can be solved in new AOO. Because this different mathod calculated between Asia Language word's counts and Europe or Western. For the record, this seems to be https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=17964 It is said to be solved in Lotus Symphony and it is marked as a Release Blocker for OpenOffice.org 3.4 (yes, for OpenOffice.org 3.4, not for Apache OpenOffice 3.4; I'm not sure whether Release Blockers for OpenOffice.org 3.4 apply to Apache OpenOffice 3.4 too). Notice that I have to trust comments in the issue: I have no specific knowledge regarding support for Asian languages, and thus I cannot be 100% sure that this is the same problem you describe. Scroll down the comments since the issue initially had a different focus. Regards, Andrea.
Broken authentication in the current Extensions website
The authentication in the current Extensions website is broken, possibly due to DNS migration (but possibly not!). I reported it in http://s.apache.org/iTr but it probably got buried in that thread. If you open http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/user (reload until it shows) you will get The login is currently not possible: http://eis.services.openoffice.org/ - HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found Does this have anything to do with the DNS migration? I noticed it the day after the DNS migration, but a quick investigation shows that eis.services.openoffice.org is an alias for tools.services.openoffice.org and that its IP address is 192.18.197.110 which is in the Oracle network, so I'm not sure it is related to migration. Fact is: login at http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/user is broken, while login (with the same single-sign-on backend) at https://openoffice.org/people/login works normally. This means that extensions authors haven't been able to update their extensions for at least a couple of weeks. Regards, Andrea.
Re: May I use OpenOffice.org and Apache Incubator logos on OpenOffice.org CD
On 12/01/2012 Donald Whytock wrote: On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 5:35 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: The old policy, if I recall correctly, was to allow this kind of usage and a generic usage for community activities. Would you want people to notify the list if/when it happens? Yes, maybe some lightweight process like this; but I understand that, especially before and around the first release, the project might want to have better control over the brand and logo usage. Regards, Andrea.
Re: New feature: Drawing thick lines with line caps
On 13/01/2012 Armin Le Grand wrote: again updated to trunk (after some Svg fixes) and built. Find the linecap install sets under: Win: http://people.apache.org/~alg/linecap/wntmsci12/ Linux64bit: http://people.apache.org/~alg/linecap/unxlngx6/ Have fun checking out the LineCap feature! Thanks Regina, Armin, but would it be possible to have just a couple screenshots with Before and After the Linecap feature, for those who are not familiar with terminology and can't install the builds you provided? It's all stuff that we will need to reuse in the release notes anyway, and useful information for potential testers. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Java 7 and Apache OpenOffice
On 13/01/2012 Rob Weir wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Wasn't the cycle something like the following? - Developer thinks the bug is fixed and marks issue as RESOLVED FIXED. - QA engineer sets to VERIFIED, then to CLOSED. ... The value of having a QA engineer test a bug fix is they also test around the fix, to make sure related areas are not broken. If we want CRT, then maybe it is a good thing if the person doing the review is not the same person who did the commit? Sure, but the review (by someone else than the developer) would be the step from RESOLVED FIXED to VERIFIED. When Ariel fixes something, the issue status should change to something different than STARTED (i.e., to RESOLVED FIXED), otherwise there will be no way for QA volunteers to find the RESOLVED FIXED issues and verify that they have actually been fixed properly. At least this was my understanding of the VERIFIED status in Bugzilla. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Seeking Bugzilla Admin Volunteers
On 12/01/2012 Rob Weir wrote: I'll enter a JIRA issue asking that myself, and whichever other committers want to be included, be added to a group that will have the following additional Bugzilla permissions: - editbugs - editcomponents - canconfirm - editkeywords I still have extended permissions (on bugs, not on users) that were preserved with the Bugzilla migration. They come handy from time to time, so please do not drop them (or just re-add me to the list). User pescetti AT apache.org Thanks, Andrea.
Re: Category-B tarballs in SVN (was Re: External libraries)
Pedro Giffuni wrote: --- Gio 12/1/12, Rob Weir ha scritto: Also, the MPL license requires that we make our modified files available electronically for 12 months. Thank you for pointing this out. This sounds pretty much unacceptable for Apache policies Anyway this could be solved by the MPL 2.0 if it is really problematic: section 6 of MPL 1.1 allows to upgrade to MPL 2.0 and with MPL 2.0 rather than exactly specifying the amount of time source code must be available, the source code must simply be made available when the executable is made available. At least that is my reading of http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/Revision-FAQ.html Regards, Andrea.
Re: How to provide Linguistic Tools replacements after the removal of GPL'd modules
On 10/12/2011 Andrea Pescetti wrote: On 04/12/2011 Andrea Pescetti wrote: After coordinating with Gianluca about some details, I've just opened the issue at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-117 As you can see at the link above, we won't get an answer before the end of 2011. This is reasonable, the issue is complex And, always at the link above, you can now see that it seems there's enough consensus for approving the bundle of GPL dictionaries; unless some last-minute objections extend the discussions, the final approval will happen next week. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Java 7 and Apache OpenOffice
Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: Now I'm uncertain about what to do in these cases. In OpenOffice.org times, the developer who fixed the issue didn't resolve it as fixed. Someone else had to do the QA in order to confirm the fix and change the issue status. Wasn't the cycle something like the following? - Developer thinks the bug is fixed and marks issue as RESOLVED FIXED. - QA engineer sets to VERIFIED, then to CLOSED. The workflow you describe seems overly complex, but indeed you may well be right: it wouldn't be the only overly complex procedure in the old OpenOffice.org... I'm not sure what the new rules are, so I will wait to resolve this as fixed until someone can confirm it is actually fixed. So the VERIFIED and CLOSED status would be for further verification? Or maybe for the moment when the fix can be independently verified in a developer snapshot? Leaving a resolved issue as STARTED seems like a suboptimal workflow. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Java 7 and Apache OpenOffice
Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 06:01:59PM +0100, Oliver Brinzing wrote: seems lo fixed this issue. me, I haven't seen it. LO has a different license, so AOO can not take its code. This leads to duplication, as we must find our own way to fix it. This applies to actual code, but I don't see anything wrong in avoiding duplicate investigations or development discussions; i.e., reading issue discussions in the LibreOffice Bugzilla, or even discussing together with LibreOffice developers bugs and strategies to fix them is not hampered by incompatible licensing and in some cases will probably make sense. That said, thanks for fixing this in Apache OpenOffice too! Regards, Andrea.
Re: EN Forum Activity Summary
On 06/01/2012 Hagar Delest wrote: Here is a proposal. Nice post; just a few remarks. After 4 years of existence, the Community Forum has moved on the ASF servers end of October 2011. Since the situation is already confusing enough, I would spell out that ASF is Apache Software Foundation, so that readers can connect it immediately with the new name Apache OpenOffice. And also, as Andrew suggested, insert the full URL to the Forum: http://user.services.openoffice.org Some history first. ... So the forum is really managed by a group of users helping other users (for free, on their spare time). As others wrote, I would also be for removing the history paragraph. But its last sentence, the one I quote above, is interesting and should be kept somewhere. Nothing else: I hope that you get a blog account soon and that you can post your article as soon as possible! Regards, Andrea.
Re: Extensions hosting
On 04/01/2012 Roberto Galoppini wrote: 2012/1/4 Jürgen Schmidt: We should keep in mind that for many extension developers it's probably ok to create a SF, GoogleCode or whatever project to host the extension code and the binary. But i believe that there are also many developers who simply want to put there macro collection in an extension container with the necessary meta data and want share it with others. Means they simply want to upload it for broader availability without creating their own project or the necessity to have their own webspace for hosting the binary extension. The SourceForge proposed solution would support this in exactly the way the current system does Perfect, and this addresses one of my few concerns with the (otherwise good, in my opinion) proposal from SourceForge. So it would possible to just upload an extension/template without turning it into a SF project. First, what we're proposing in the short term is to migrate and stabilize the current drupal instance using the sourceforge.net Secure Project Web infrastructure. This would give selected members of the team SSH access to the server space where it's hosted, and full access to both the code and database content. Sounds good. The stabilization phase can be done anywhere, but as Rob wrote if we cannot keep the current repository as part of the project anyway, it makes sense to do it as part of a larger effort. Middle term we would love to work with you to have this site become the center of a federated extensions community. Again nice, but here I have a few issues: 1) The proposed Drupal 5 to Drupal 7 migration would indeed yield, if done properly, a template site that can be installed anywhere with the same capabilities. Would it be possible to design it so that as a result we have a ready-to-deploy extension repository website, under a proper free license, that can be installed in several places? This has partly been covered in other parts of the thread, but the key point here is to design the site to be flexible from the beginning: for example, the current Templates sites was developed this way (i.e., you can reinstall it and get a new Templates site) but the current Extensions site wasn't (i.e., to reinstall it you need to copy over the whole extensions database too and then try and clean it up properly). 2) For those preferring to use other tools than Drupal, the protocol should still allow others to build their repositories/catalogs with tools of their choice, but it would be good and helpful to provide the Drupal 7 site as reference implementation and document it properly. 3) The community would need free access to statistics. It is very important for us to know how extensions are downloaded and updated. The current statistics are not very reliable due to caching and the multiple attempts needed to download an extension. Would SourceForge be available to share download figures and other statistics with the community? Regards, Andrea.
Re: /usr/bin/openoffice.org
Jürgen Schmidt wrote: I think we want have a good relation to them and we should potentially send a friendly reminder that we see a problem here. As a user I would expect that I get the latest OOo 3.3 version. And in the future we would like to use it to get an AOO with some explanation. Sure. However, Ubuntu and the vast majority of distributions always shipped ooo-build calling it OpenOffice.org, and it is reasonable that when ooo-build became LibreOffice (thus a fork instead of a patchset) they decided to minimize the effect of the name change. But now it would make sense that the openoffice/openoffice.org namespace is left free for Apache OpenOffice. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [BUILD] Linux buildboot set up and configure switches
On 03/01/2012 Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: you have to add localized builds, as Oliver pointed out. Localized builds everyday will be an overhead for the build boots, for example, my build on 6 cores computer takes less than 1:30 hr with no languages, and circa 3 hrs with en-US, de, es, fr, it, ja. In this case, a weekly developer snapshot build makes more sense than daily builds. I agree: daily localized builds would be too much (especially because new languages are invariably added and this would use a lot of resources), but it would be nice to have some periodic (every one or two weeks, say) snapshots that are offered with multiple localizations. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [BUG] AOO cannot be installed
Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: On Mon, Jan 02, 2012 at 10:32:10AM +0100, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: Normally the office would come via the distro and would have been build for the distro and the specific versions of the system libraries. This is much easier and i hope we can achieve this state in the future... I doubt this is going to happen. linux distros have switched to LO, and I guess Canonical, RedHat, Suse, ..., have interest in building a brand, so you cannot expect their interest in supporting packaging and distributing AOO; in conclusion, AOO relies on a universal Linux package. I expect that some Linux-based distributions will continue shipping LibreOffice by default (or what they call LibreOffice; in most cases this was simply a name change, since they were actually distributing ooo-build, closer to LibreOffice than to OpenOffice.org but different from both, under the name OpenOffice.org and later under the name LibreOffice; I think they are progressively aligning with LibreOffice now, which is good since users were often confused by customizations). But there is no reason to think that Apache OpenOffice will be kept out of the official repositories; most distributions already offer a dozen browsers and half a dozen office programs, so it is surely possible to get Apache OpenOffice in the most common distributions. Regards, Andrea.
Re: About the Former Native Language projects
On 13/12/2011 Ross Gardler wrote: On 13 December 2011 11:33, Kazunari Hirano wrote: This is great. Where is the pootle server? https://translate.apache.org/projects/OOo/ It's only just gone live so your guidance on how the AOO project should engage with it will be most appreciated. The Pootle server is issuing warnings because of an expired SSL certificate: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4274 Anyway, content is not yet there since migration from (a backup of) the old Pootle server is being discussed in other threads, so this is not particularly urgent. Regards, Andrea.
Re: draft - Website migration(+) announcement - draft
On 31/12/2011 Rob Weir wrote: HTML is not very reliable in email. But maybe we could do this: Create the newsletter as a webpage, either on the wiki, or via mdtext or the blog. That has the full text of the newsletter. Then for the announce list, we just include the table of contents or the first paragraph or some other enticing lead-in, and then link to the full newsletter. We could also send the whole HTML newsletter with the usual initial link If the newsletter does not display correctly, click here for the Web version, or similar text. This initial line could also be used to say that translated versions of the newsletter exist. They would not be sent until the time this project has native-language announce lists, but they would be linked from the online version. Regards, Andrea.
Re: 3.4 release plan
On 30/12/2011 Rob Weir wrote: So now on to a 3.4 release, our first Apache release. I've started a wiki page to track the top-level tasks that we'll need to address before we can have a release. I've certainly missed some things, so please feel free to enhance. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Release+Plan By the way, the old OpenOffice.org 3.4 Release Plan http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/OOoRelease34 was still around and outdated. I added a couple notices pointing to the new AOO 3.4 Release Plan and to the project blog. Feel free to improve it and to find/update the other wiki pages that may still be interpreted as (misleading!) evidence that development has stopped. Regards, Andrea.
Re: EN Forum Activity Summary
Rob Weir wrote: A question for you: Are you getting any feedback on the 3.4 beta release? Or are you only getting questions on the 3.3.0 release? OpenOffice.org usually didn't put a lot of emphasis on beta releases, so we (I mean, Italian lists, including the new one at Apache, and the Italian forum) still receive comments and questions only on 3.3.0 or older releases. The target public for beta releases is usually power users, but those that I know are able to file bugs in BugZilla themselves, and likely already did so. If we just listened to posts here we'd get the impression that the only thing users care about is the color of the icons. It's one of the few features that 100% of users notice... Is there any easy way to gather this kind of info from the forum members? No, but getting back the TCM (manual testing) testcases and starting some QA would surely help. At this point, however, it seems that OOo 3.4 beta (the LGPL one from April 2011) is not the best one to base a QA session on. Regards, Andrea.
Re: 3.4 release plan
Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: Specifically I get comments from friends that the Check for Updates from the Help menu no longer functions due to URL update changes. Are there similar areas that we need to document? Is this an issue with OOo 3.3? The earlier 3.4 beta? Or with the recent AOO 3.4 test builds? The only place where this is an issue is OpenOffice.org 3.3. I don't know about OpenOffice.org 3.4 beta, but update notifications do not make much sense in (unfrequent) beta releases anyway. The recent Apache OpenOffice dev builds do not support notifications: the menu item is not there. By the way, the problem users experience is not related to code changes but to infrastructure changes: the update notifications server is unreachable since it was not migrated together with the other *.services.openoffice.org services. I usually answer users along the lines of The update server is unavailable due to migration; it's not important to restore it now since there would be no update to announce anyway; it might be that things change when a stable release is out (I remember Martin Hollmichel or some other well-known guy saying that in principle it would be possible to get that service running again). To anybody not familiar with the concept: update notifications are not product updates (don't think Firefox); the command just tells the user No updates available or A new version of OpenOffice.org is available, please open www.openoffice.org and download it. So it seems feasible to replace it. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Replacement for Liberation Fonts (was Re: Font related questions)
Pedro Giffuni wrote: Apparently they are improved versions of the Liberation fonts, which Redhat what licensed from the same designers. The key feature of Liberation fonts is that they are metrically equivalent to the corresponding Microsoft core fonts: i.e., any given glyph (character) in Liberation Sans size 12 has exactly the same width, height and spacing that it has when rendered in Arial size 12, even though the font design is different. This allows to avoid interoperability issues due to the different width/height of fonts. If the fonts you propose have the same feature, it would definitely be interesting to include them in the suite. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [WWW] Changeover is Close - Final Tasks!
On 26/12/2011 Andrea Pescetti wrote: I still can't help you since I haven't got access so far. Anyway, even if it breaks, given the current status of Extensions and Templates I believe that broken authentication will just be a minor annoyance. Unfortunately it seems that authentication on the Extensions site is broken at the moment. I don't know if this is the result of some undisclosed maintenance work (the site is much more responsive than usual) or of the DNS migration, but the timing is worth a check. http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/user dies with --- The login is currently not possible: http://eis.services.openoffice.org/ - HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found --- so the URL we were wondering about is probably somewhere under eis.services.openoffice.org Regards, Andrea.
Product name on the new website
First of all, thanks to everybody involved in the website migration, it was a huge task and the vast majority of pages seems to have been migrated just fine. What should we use as a product name on http://www.openoffice.org/it/ and related pages? Shall we just keep the OpenOffice.org name (without Apache) until there is some public beta of an Apache-branded product? Shall we change the name to Apache OpenOffice? I would avoid to replace all occurrences with the cumbersome Apache OpenOffice[.org] (incubating) except for a few of them. Thanks, Andrea.
Re: draft - Website migration(+) announcement - draft
On 29/12/2011 drew wrote: During this migration period community developers also made great progress with the application code. Ariel Constenla-Haile, one of the community developers, generated binary packages, suitable for early testing purposes, from the current Apache OpenOffice code repository. Available for download at http://people.apache.org/~arielch/packages I wouldn't send out public announcements about Ariel's builds. The interest is huge, and people might download them just out of curiosity and damage their existing OpenOffice.org installation and extensions. It's probably better to announce, at due time, development builds that won't interfere with the installed version (and ideally, not even with the user profile if the BerkeleyDB removal has implications on that). Regards, Andrea.
Re: Announce list is live
Simon Phipps wrote: I suggest the smartest thing to do is to subscribe the annou...@openoffice.org to ooo-annou...@incubator.apache.org so that everyone hears the news from this project I agree; for an announcement list the only downside I see is that someone might receive duplicate messages (but for the very small traffic on the announce list this should be negligible); this way it would be possible to ask subscribers to resubscribe and, at the same time, make sure that everybody still gets the important news. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [WWW] Changeover is Close - Final Tasks!
On 22/12/2011 Andrea Pescetti wrote: On 22/12/2011 Dave Fisher wrote: The email subscribes, unsubscribes and links have been updated for: ... ooo-utenti for utenti@oo.o (is this correct? it should be ooo-utenti-il...) I will take care of checking/redoing the last one. I replaced links to the Italian users list utenti on the then-live site (I mean it.openoffice.org linked to the Kenai SVN repository) about 24 hours ago and I'll port the patch to the new www.openoffice.org when it goes live. I've just replaced in the Italian site (in the Apache SVN) all legacy institutional addresses historically used by the Italian N-L Project (like aziende, scuole, soho, stampa AT openoffice.org) with addresses we actually control. Same for mailing lists, now redirected to http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-utenti-it/ Note that I found (and fixed within the it site) references to ooo-market...@apache.org which are probably not correct: the lists are still on incubator.apache.org only, right? Regards, Andrea.
Re: [WWW] Changeover is Close - Final Tasks!
On 23/12/2011 03:15, Dave Fisher wrote: On Dec 22, 2011, at 2:16 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: got some information about Extensions and Templates clarifying that the authentication depends on http://openoffice.org/something and not on a to-be-migrated subdomain, right? I don't have that confirmation. Just that it makes sense from the clear distinction - show me where extensions.services.oo.o does its login now. I still can't help you since I haven't got access so far. Anyway, even if it breaks, given the current status of Extensions and Templates I believe that broken authentication will just be a minor annoyance. So I will just try to authenticate there after the migration has been completed and see if it is OK; if not, there will be time to fix it. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Too many lists
On 15/12/2011 Shane Curcuru wrote: Suggestion: instead of creating two Italian lists, create only the users-italian@ (whatever name) one. OK, and this is what we did. Then create the i10n@ list, and use that for the dev-italian@ work - or any other development work in different languages. That way, people working on code or translations in different languages all have one home for the time being. ... Just a suggestion... not sure if it works, but it's worth thinking about. I thought a bit about this, but I don't think it will work. N-L communities are interested in end-users discussions, generic support, and a series of activities, like localization, QA, marketing, education. I see more reasonable and more focused that we group those activities by language (or by geography when it makes sense) and that we rely on liaison persons that will be the contacts between localized lists and this list. This way, for example, a translation deadline could be communicated here and forwarded to a hypothetical Italian activities list, and conversely a suggestion discussed on that list could be reported here. It is much more likely than, say, an Italian volunteer helps with both localization and QA of the Italian version rather than an Italian localization volunteer helps with the French localization; this is why I would separate by language rather than by type of activity. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Ip Clearance: 1st version of Svg replacement available
On 19/12/2011 Armin Le Grand wrote: as mentioned in [1] I have now finished and reintegrated the first version of the Svg replacement from the branch Very good stuff, really. I can only blame you for not turning this into a blog post! Really, all it would take is a copy and paste of the message you wrote, with a couple of screenshots and BugZilla links from Eric's nice post http://eric.bachard.org/news/index.php?post/2011/12/03/In-progress-%3A-native-support-of-the-SVG-graphic-format-in-Apache-OpenOffice.org and, if you wish to ask volunteers to test, a link to a development build with this feature enabled and some public repositories of SVG files for testing. So far there is nothing on https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/ explaining users what to expect for Apache OpenOffice 3.4. If developers don't post interesting information like this announcement there, most users will never get (directly or indirectly) information about it. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Accepting WhiteLabel Office Bug Reports?
Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: I notice that a bugzilla report on WhiteLabel Office 3.3.1 was received and closed as invalid: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=118695. ... Can it be found in our hearts to accepts these and be gentler with them and the users who go to the trouble to submit them? WhiteLabel Office 3.3.1 does not exist. A release candidate is by no means a final release and it is only meant for testing; this is another of the details that the TeamOpenOffice.org press release did not stress adequately. Clearly, there are TOO folks who could handle them if they are WLO-only defects. Sure, but release candidates should be announced properly (i.e., not with a widely circulated press release). My proposal would be to add a keyword named external to BugZilla and tag all related reports with it, and then at due time close all open issues with that keyword as Invalid (if indeed White Label Office 3.3.1 is released as a separate product) or deal with them (if something special happens and White Label Office 3.3.1 is released with a proper name, proper QA and proper collaboration). Regards, Andrea.
Re: Early User-QA Engagement (was RE: Ip Clearance: 1st version of Svg replacement available)
Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: So what does version58 mean? Where did that come from? If it is fixed in another build, how is that identified? version58 just happens to be the last in alphabetical order, but I doubt it is correct. It is probably useful to write the SVN revision number in the comments, I just did so in https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=118698 (actually when people do QA on branches this won't work, but for the trunk it should be OK). Regards, Andrea.
Re: Team OpenOffice White Label Office (powered by Apache Open Office)
On 22/12/2011 Pavel Janík wrote: I think the core issue here is responsibility to users, credibility of the product and bridging the gap between the last OOo and the first AOOo. Exactly. And it could be that it's Christmas and good sentiments prevail, but I still see possible that this project and TeamOpenOffice.org find a common understanding and fix the issues before a stable version 3.3.1. As shown by reactions to the (quite unfortunate) press release, Apache OpenOffice and TeamOpenOffice.org can be either significantly useful to each other or significantly harmful to each other. Their shared interests are so many that they can't ignore each other. Let's try to be mutually useful then. TeamOpenOffice.org can bring a lot to the Apache OpenOffice project with little effort: - Turn the Pootle server back on and allow migration of data - Use their Kenai roles (or just knowledge) to help us in completing the infrastructure migration - Find the much-needed TCM testcases so that, after checking with Oracle, we can use them for QA activities - Tell us all details about the Single-sign-on at openoffice.org - A lot more... And, once the issues related to trademarks and misleading communication have been fixed, we could work towards OpenOffice.org 3.3.1 together. I'm not saying that Apache OpenOffice should authorize TeamOpenOffice.org to use the trademark for an external release, I'd just prefer to use this (easy) release as an exercise for the Apache OpenOffice 3.4 release: it wouldn't be a waste of time, since we probably have several QA volunteers that need something to test before becoming involved with the project and we need to develop some lightweight QA processes, which could be faster if we have an actual version to release. In the end this would allow: - Users to get an intermediate OpenOffice.org 3.3.1 with security fixes and a transitional Apache branding (like OpenOffice.org powered by Apache OpenOffice), and be confident that they can migrate successfully to Apache OpenOffice 3.4 at due time. - Apache OpenOffice to build a QA team and processes on the basis of some actual work to do, and use the TeamOpenOffice.org expertise for the many small tasks above. - TeamOpenOffice.org to have a prominent role in this release and fix their communication campaign. Of course I'm ignoring a couple of significant problems (licensing and hosting) which would need to be addressed, but the starting fresh concept can't work for a product with such a large user base. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [WWW] Changeover is Close - Final Tasks!
On 22/12/2011 Dave Fisher wrote: The email subscribes, unsubscribes and links have been updated for: ooo-users for user@oo.o ooo-dev for dev@*oo.o and discuss@oo.o ooo-announcefor announce@oo.o ooo-marketing for d...@marketing.oo.o ooo-utenti for utenti@oo.o (is this correct? it should be ooo-utenti-il...) I will take care of checking/redoing the last one. I replaced links to the Italian users list utenti on the then-live site (I mean it.openoffice.org linked to the Kenai SVN repository) about 24 hours ago and I'll port the patch to the new www.openoffice.org when it goes live. By the way, the correct list name is ooo-utenti-it@i.a.o as Dennis observed. And thanks for your efforts! Regards, Andrea.
Re: [WWW] Changeover is Close - Final Tasks!
On 22/12/2011 Dave Fisher wrote: Website migration is decoupled from the following other issues: - Mailing List cutover. (ooo-site should avoid allowing users to subscribe to the old lists.) - @openoffice.org forwarder cut-off. - openoffice.org ids and extensions and templates access. OK, so if I get correctly from this and the other messages we will still be able to moderate legacy lists (actually, other volunteers do it much more often than I do) at http://openoffice.org/projects/it/lists/ (which is good) and you got some information about Extensions and Templates clarifying that the authentication depends on http://openoffice.org/something and not on a to-be-migrated subdomain, right? Thanks, Andrea.
Re: old colored vs new monochrome icons
On 22/12/2011 Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: It would help us to actually know which old icons are being discussed here. Can they be seen somewhere? This is by no means the full set, but the most visible icons in a typical use case are shown at http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/3623/ooomedie.png http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/2883/odfmedie.png (not my work; I think it's an old screenshot by a long-time Italian OpenOffice.org enthusiast named Renzo). Regards, Andrea.
Re: [WWW] Changeover is Close - Final Tasks!
Kay Schenk wrote: [...] I left the N-L contacts alone for now, since I don't know what the status of that is. It is equally outdated, but it would probably be better to write Contact instead of Project Lead in the table header at http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/projects/native-lang.html While still being wrong in quite a few cases, this at least doesn't suggest that there is an organized hierarchy in the Apache OpenOffice subprojects/teams. I'm not changing this myself to avoid commit conflicts during migration. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Where are we on the website migration, ooo-site - openoffice.org?
On 11/12/2011 Dave Fisher wrote: On Dec 11, 2011, at 11:00 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: If the web services (or LDAP authentication, I don't know how it works internally) are not preserved, something will break for sure: Extensions, Templates, the (now defunct anyway) QATrack and I don't know what else. Exactly what URL do the extensions and templates use for LDAP? I haven't got access yet, so I can't check it. I assume that URL is somewhere under openoffice.org or kenai.com, but it is just an assumption. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?
On 17/12/2011 eric b wrote: the french version pretends Apache OpenOffice.org ( http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenOffice.org ) is a fork We probably should take an eye on the Italian and the German versions. The Italian one has a terse but accurate description. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [PROPOSAL] Setup of ooo-users-it and ooo-project-it mailing lists
On 11/12/2011 Andrea Pescetti wrote: For the time being, we would map the existing (12) Italian lists to - A support list, ... - A project list, ... If there are no objections to the above proposal within 72 hours, I will invoke Lazy Consensus and will create a JIRA issue. In the end I see consensus was not reached, unfortunately. So I kept only the uncontroversial part of my original request (nobody objected to create one list, which seems still better than zero especially given the recent problems with the Oracle infrastructure) and I asked for creation of one list only: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4223 This means we will (for the time being!) only proceed to half of the planned migration, focusing on migrating three existing user-focused lists to that one. Migration of the other lists will be kept pending; at this moment the project list wouldn't be used anyway, since we have no localized builds to test and no translation work to do; all options remain open, inside and outside Apache, and I'm confident we will soon be able to evaluate properly what the best solution would be. Regards, Andrea.
Re: old colored vs new monochrome icons
On 14/12/2011 Rob Weir wrote: On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 7:38 PM, Andrea Pescetti But can someone explain why the icons were changed in the first place? Surely, someone had an argument for this at the time? In the wiki page Pedro linked there's a further link to the official explanation page, now dead but still on archive.org at http://web.archive.org/web/20091004033006/http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/unified_odf_icons Comments are worth reading too, but the ideas were: making unified ODF icons as Herbert wrote (good, but hasn't happened) and get rid of the curve in the old icons (you can still find them at http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/3623/ooomedie.png ) which supposedly was an S and meant Sun; honestly, users couldn't care less about the S. You mention flamewars. That suggests there were two points of view. It is hard to have a flamewar where eveyone agrees. ;-) It was mostly Oracle vs rest-of-the-world (even though probably a large percentage of users didn't care much). Especially irritating to critics was seeing that the redesign effort http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/ODF_icons_i-team (this is the redesign effort started AFTER complaints were made, so the redesign of the new icons) started with the premise that colors wouldn't come back and tried variants on the monochrome design, thus persisting in a widely criticized attitude. It was, in a way, a clear fracture between Oracle and the community, even if one sees it from a non-political point of view. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Proposal: ooo-announce list
On 13/12/2011 Michael Meeks wrote: On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 16:14 +0100, Andrea Pescetti wrote: http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=cf5d0e20f2ba5a71f9ca2ed78a1b24841c97bb06 ... it doesn't seem particularly hidden... Sure - that is because this CVE is already public, presumably because the bug it is related to is also public cf. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=765812 and associated links. In the CVE database it isn't public yet: http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2011-4599 But indeed both Caolán and Red Hat have enough experience and reputation in handling issues to make it unlikely that this is a dangerous or careless disclosure. I'm confident that, if the issue affects OpenOffice.org or Apache OpenOffice too, it has been notified to the appropriate lists. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Problems with OpenOffice.org mailing lists
On 13/12/2011 Marcus (OOo) wrote: In the last ~24h I got more than a dozend spam messages in my inbox for moderation. So, something *is* actually working again. Same for me, it seems delivery is mostly OK now and some (but not all, or not all yet) messages from December have been delivered. Regards, Andrea.
Re: old colored vs new monochrome icons
On 13/12/2011 Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 12/13/2011 06:12 PM, schrieb Gianluca Turconi: I can only say that a colored icon set for OO is the second most wanted feature in the usenet Italian community. ... So, you think that a big hint like 3.4 will be with the old b/w icons but we will do everything to give you back the long-wished colored icons with the next but one release [3.5 or 4.0] is not good enough and the people cannot wait for the next but one release? Gianluca is right. For some reason the blue icons were perceived by some (who were possibly right!) as a sign of Oracle's stubbornness in dictating the direction of OpenOffice.org; going back to the colored icons would be, to them, a sign that Apache OpenOffice cares about complaints from the community (and probably the others would see it as a usability improvement anyway). And, considering the flamewars we have seen on the issue on other lists, being able to restore the colored icons back without too much discussion or formality would be an even better sign. P.S. to whom is interested, the most wanted future by the usenet Italian community (IMO) is font inclusion in OO Writer documents... Do you really mean ODF file or maybe PDF files? It's ODF. But I've seen too many messages about this over the years too... Regards, Andrea.
Re: [PROPOSAL] Setup of ooo-users-it and ooo-project-it mailing lists
On 13/12/2011 Shane Curcuru wrote: How much traffic do the existing Italian lists get? The ones that we would map to the users list got a bit more than 1000 messages in 2011 so far; the ones that we would map to the projects list got about 300, but OpenOffice.org is a mostly inactive project, so when there is something to do for volunteers (read it as: strings to translate for localizers and need for pre-release tests for QA volunteers) in Apache OpenOffice we will see far more activity in the projects list, so it would be good to have it from the beginning. While I definitely understand the desire to have some user focus to some of the lists (who are probably not very tolerant of lots of technical discussions), and have a place to discuss project issues, I'm really concerned that we're simply making more and more lists, and will end up like OOo was with too many lists. Well, 12 to 2 is already a significant reduction in the number of lists. The main problem is that we have two large, distinct, memberships: the overlap between the peer support (users) lists and the volunteers (project) lists is limited to a few dedicated people, the others belong to either the users or the project area and merging the groups doesn't make a lot of sense, regardless of the traffic. It would be, obvious differences aside, like merging the Italian and French lists because the combined traffic is not huge. So I'd still prefer that we map the existing dichotomy to two different lists, but if you or anyone else have a strong preference that we start with one list only, we can start with a users list and try to replace only a subset of the current Italian lists. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [PROPOSAL] Setup of ooo-users-it and ooo-project-it mailing lists
On 14/12/2011 Rob Weir wrote: Maybe things are simpler with a user list? I see that the legacy utenti list still gets a lot of traffic and has a lot of subscribers. The dev list, not so much. The (Italian) dev list is for mutual support between developers of macros (yes I know the name is misleading and the focus is narrow) and it would be part of the lists to be replaced by the users list, actually. Italian developers will work in English on the global lists. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Proposal: ooo-announce list
On 11/12/2011 Rob Weir wrote: Tthe practice is to check in such fixes without making it evident to the observer that it is security-related. So don't expect SVN comments to give it away. Like this? http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=cf5d0e20f2ba5a71f9ca2ed78a1b24841c97bb06 I know the example is from LibreOffice (even though the bug might be shared with OpenOffice.org or Apache OpenOffice) but I just happened to spot it and it doesn't seem particularly hidden... Such a policy would have to apply to all related projects (again, I totally don't know if this bug is related to Apache OpenOffice too, I'm just discussing the issue in general). Regards, Andrea.
Re: Rationalizing two OpenOffice websites
On 28/11/2011 Pedro Giffuni wrote: ps. Andrea, please do link the document in the new site :). Done some days ago in revision 1212124, but it doesn't show up on the live instance. And actually I can't see the previous commit by you either (revision 1203948), so I'm probably looking at the wrong pages or I didn't trigger some update procedure. My revision 1212124 modified the SVN file https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ooo-site/trunk/content/it/doc/manuali/index.html and I expected the new guide (Guida al DataPilot) to appear in http://ooo-site.apache.org/it/doc/manuali/index.html Similarly, Pedro's revision 1203948 modified https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ooo-site/trunk/content/it/contribuire/legale.html but I don't see the change (Protezione dei Dati su Apache OpenOffice) at http://ooo-site.apache.org/it/contribuire/legale.html Should I use a different URL? Regards, Andrea.
[PROPOSAL] Setup of ooo-users-it and ooo-project-it mailing lists
The Italian OpenOffice.org community relies on mailing lists (some with several hundreds subscribers) for user support, discussions and project coordination. While these are a legacy asset, I see it necessary that Apache OpenOffice provides a replacement for these lists as part of the infrastructure migration. Depending on the situation on Oracle servers, we might start using the new lists gradually or immediately. For the time being, we would map the existing (12) Italian lists to - A support list, named ooo-users-it at incubator.apache.org - A project list, named ooo-project-it at incubator.apache.org We will revise the list names when the project graduates; for the time being, I propose to use the ooo prefix for continuity and consistency with the existing lists, and to use ooo-project-it instead of ooo-general-it since it is much easier to understand for us. The three moderators of the Italian OpenOffice.org lists are available to continue their tasks in the new infrastructure: - Davide Dozza - Andrea Pescetti - Paolo Pozzan If there are no objections to the above proposal within 72 hours, I will invoke Lazy Consensus and will create a JIRA issue. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Problems with OpenOffice.org mailing lists
On 11/12/2011 Rob Weir wrote: On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 7:05 PM, Rob Weir... wrote: On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Andrea Pescetti ... wrote: If indeed delivery has stopped and no technical support is available, then the mailing list migration would escalate in priority... I tried a test post to the user list. Nothing showed up. Two messages from 30 Nov that I approved only yesterday were delivered; but none of three messages I sent in the last three days, nor any messages from other frequent posters that contacted me in private about the issue, were delivered. It really seems that some prominent (or most, or all) OpenOffice.org mailing lists haven't delivered messages since December 1st. If this can't be resolved, replacing them becomes a priority. I've just sent a proposal for two Italian mailing lists to be created; we will start using them immediately if the Oracle infrastructure is not fixed. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [PROPOSAL] Setup of ooo-users-it and ooo-project-it mailing lists
Il 11/12/2011 Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Andrea Pescetti ... wrote: - A support list, named ooo-users-it at incubator.apache.org - A project list, named ooo-project-it at incubator.apache.org I wonder if ooo-general-it.i.a.o might be possible, instead of ooo-project-it.i.a.o? It would be possible but suboptimal, as general is not general for us, since most people will want to subscribe to users and the project list would be specific (i.e., for volunteers) and not general. This is why I wrote: I propose to ... use ooo-project-it instead of ooo-general-it since it is much easier to understand for us. Then we could revise the names at graduation time; it might well be that the Japanese list is renamed too. Anyway it's clear that neither of ooo-general-it and ooo-project-it would be a final list name, since the ooo acronym will much likely disappear upon graduation. I was merely trying to get names a bit more in the right direction. If ooo-project-it is not OK, settling on ooo-general-it will surely be better than leaving several hundreds people waiting for a solution. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Rationalizing two OpenOffice websites
Dave Fisher wrote: On Dec 11, 2011, at 6:03 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: but I don't see the change (Protezione dei Dati su Apache OpenOffice) at http://ooo-site.apache.org/it/contribuire/legale.html Should I use a different URL? Try http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/ The publish step has not been applied. Thanks, that one works and I see my changes correctly under that URL. Publication is not urgent for me, I just needed a way to check that the changes were applied correctly. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Where are we on the website migration, ooo-site - openoffice.org?
Dave Fisher wrote: (1) Finish wrapping with breadcrumbs, topnav and folder specific topnav. Also license/copyright. (2) Approval from Trademarks. (3) Redirection list for subdomains. Kay you could help with this. (4) Participate link. Then co-ordination with Infra to do these: (a) Publish build for ooo-site. (b) Build VirtualHosts for subdomains. (c) Change public DNS for OOo. What about web services? I assume that the single-sign-on in place at http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/ , for example, depends on something that is currently served from the openoffice.org domain (the same accounts are used for https://openoffice.org/people/login but they won't probably be used in the migrated site). If the web services (or LDAP authentication, I don't know how it works internally) are not preserved, something will break for sure: Extensions, Templates, the (now defunct anyway) QATrack and I don't know what else. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Extensions and templates
On 09/12/2011 Dave Fisher wrote: Send an email to supp...@osuosl.org and start a conversation with Lance Albertson. He's willing to tell you all about it. The short answer is that Oracle was making changes when the plug was pulled on OOo. They left it broken. Done. I hope that I will be able to share some details publicly, otherwise everybody will have to e-mail Lance! Regards, Andrea.
Re: Extensions and templates
On 10/12/2011 Gavin McDonald wrote: From: Ross Gardler Can anyone state that we are legally able to take the Drupal code? ... I checked, got a very clear 'no problem, no issues, please take it' I assume this is enough for us to start looking at the code, even though I would appreciate a public comment by Oracle about this. So you can count me in, my initial focus being on the following two issues: 1) On the existing site, find out what web services / servers in the openoffice.org infrastructure we depend on for authenticating users, and check that authentication can go on even if the main OOo site is migrated. This must be checked before the main OOo infrastructure is moved to Apache. Shell access (or access to the site code anyway) would be best. 2) Once the site clone is ready, disconnect it from the single-sign-on and migrate all accounts by notifying users properly. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Extensions and templates
Gavin McDonald wrote: You should have read my reply to the above email first. Please do not bother Lance or OSUOSL with this again, I have access and I have it in hand. I had read your reply of course, but having it in hand does not imply you know all history, and I was interested in knowing what happened. Anyway, I won't expect to receive answers from OSUOSL then, that's fine. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Extensions and templates
Gavin McDonald wrote: You don't need a public comment from Oracle, the answer I got was from Oracle. Thanks for sharing this further bit of information. I confirm I volunteer for the two tasks I leave below. Regards, Andrea. So you can count me in, my initial focus being on the following two issues: 1) On the existing site, find out what web services / servers in the openoffice.org infrastructure we depend on for authenticating users, and check that authentication can go on even if the main OOo site is migrated. This must be checked before the main OOo infrastructure is moved to Apache. Shell access (or access to the site code anyway) would be best. 2) Once the site clone is ready, disconnect it from the single-sign-on and migrate all accounts by notifying users properly.
Problems with OpenOffice.org mailing lists
It seems something is broken on the OpenOffice.org mailing lists. For example, the Italian user list archives and the global user list archives seem to stop at November 30th: http://openoffice.org/projects/it/lists/utenti/archive http://openoffice.org/projects/www/lists/users/archive and the Italian list, that I could investigate more deeply since I'm a moderator there, did not receive any normal messages or spam messages (in moderation queue) in December. I sent a couple messages this weekend and they were not delivered. Did anyone notice similar problems on other lists? I'm not subscribed to the OpenOffice.org global users list (I'm subscribed to the one at Apache) so I can't be sure that message delivery has stopped there too. If indeed delivery has stopped and no technical support is available, then the mailing list migration would escalate in priority... Regards, Andrea.
Re: (Draft) Email forwarding public announcement
Rob Weir wrote: On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Andrea Pescettipescetti@... wrote: This means that extension publishers can be contacted only through their @openoffice.org address; the first thing to do in the possible future clones of the Extensions and Templates site would thus be to disable the single-sign-on (unfortunately) and send out password reset links before the @openoffice.org addresses and the single-sign-on expire, otherwise extension publishers will lose access to the website. A password reset doesn't fix it.We need users to specify a different email address, right? Is that even possible? Does the app have a separate user-id and email address field? Or does it assume they are always the same? I was skipping some steps. Again, I don't have access to the code, but the standard way of implementing in Drupal what the Extensions site does would be: - All passwords are validated on the OOo single-sign-on in Kenai - Upon successful validation, a local user is created on the Extensions site (i.e., after I login correctly as pescetti@ooo the user pescetti is created on the Extensions site, with e-mail set to pescetti@ooo; of course this is only done at the first login). - I assume that passwords are not stored in the local database, since anyway they are always validated on the single-sign-on. But other user data are persistent. Steps to do would thus be: 1) Disconnect Extensions from single-sign-on ; all users will still be there, but we only have their @openoffice.org e-mail address; so user pescetti will still exist, with the e-mail field set to pescetti@ooo and the password set to something meaningless. 2) Send a password reset link to all users; this will be notified to them through their @openoffice.org address and would include information on how to reset both the password and the e-mail address; possibly, the form validation would forbid to leave the e-mail address set to someth...@openoffice.org 3) People will then be able to login with the username they are using now (like pescetti) and the new password. This can only be done until OpenOffice.org addresses are in place. As asked by Dave, I'll send a link to this thread in the one where Gavin is discussing migration, so it doesn't get lost. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Extensions and templates
On 09/12/2011 Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 12/9/11 1:06 AM, Gavin McDonald wrote: I already have access and have been speaking with Lance over this over the past week. It is in hand, as they say. This is great. One to-do is definitely the upgrade to a newer Drupal version. I completely agree, but I see this as a medium-term TODO, but not as the first thing, since upgrading from a heavily customized Drupal 5 to Drupal 7 is tedious and difficult and the most urgent issues are in reachability and user handling. For those who are not following the thread about legacy @openoffice.org addresses: the Extensions site migration will need to be coordinated with the strategy for @openoffice.org addresses, see http://s.apache.org/l7 http://s.apache.org/vMW and the discussion around them. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Legacy openoffice.org email addresses in the legacy website
On 09/12/2011 Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Gianluca Turconi public@... wrote: Please, double check the cancellation of the luctur alias because I still receive few spam messages from that address... The openoffice.org email address aliases are still active. We have not disabled them yet. Sure. But Gianluca thought he had deleted his account years ago (so something totally unrelated to the future migration), which is strange because as far as I know there was no Delete my account functionality on the old openoffice.org infrastructure (but I might be wrong; I never tried to delete my account). Indeed it seems that Gianluca's account is still there; at least, I tried sending e-mail to luctur@ooo yesterday and it didn't bounce back. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [DISCUSS]: Bugzilla default owners
On 18/11/2011 Jürgen Schmidt wrote: Currently we have for all bug categories default owners. Most often this owners are not longer active on the project... For example i would volunteer for all issues related to api, sdk, and extensions with their sub categories for now (maybe more later) Any opinions? I haven't seen much development on this discussion, but I'm already the default owner for the (few, and often misplaced) issues in the it category, and I can surely volunteer for continuing to handle them. Regards, Andrea.
Re: How to provide Linguistic Tools replacements after the removal of GPL'd modules
On 04/12/2011 Andrea Pescetti wrote: After coordinating with Gianluca about some details, I've just opened the issue at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-117 As you can see at the link above, we won't get an answer before the end of 2011. This is reasonable, the issue is complex and in other occasions (with Sun) the discussions lasted several months. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Extensions and templates
Gavin McDonald wrote: From: Andrea Pescetti On 29/11/2011 Rob Weir wrote: ==Option 1: Remain at OSUOSL== We could remain with OSUOSL hosting. However, the existing site is very unstable. This would be best both for short and long term. ... Sorry, OSUOSL don’t want anything to do with these any longer As I wrote, Options 1 and 3 (i.e., staying with OSUOSL or cloning to another host) are fundamentally equivalent to me. My point is that the best first step is starting from the current websites or a clone of them. The hosts themselves cannot cope with all the memory and cpu these are consuming all the time, let alone the bandwidth. Then someone should explain why they were absolutely stable in 2010, with a traffic that can be safely assumed to be similar to the one they are receiving in 2011. Something broke, and since the Drupal code hasn't changed I still think that the malfunctioning components are somewhere else (or, if in Drupal, not in the site itself but in the interface to caching engines). I've had a look around the drupal sites and it is not optimal to say the least. It would be helpful to know what level of access you obtained to make this assessment. Could you read the site code, or did you receive administrator credentials for the website, or did you get shell access to the machine? That the sites are not optimal is fairly obvious, especially considering that Extensions is a Drupal 5 site and thus creates sessions even for anonymous users; Drupal 7 is much better in this respect and offers more scalability out of the box and better integration with caching engines, so it seems a natural candidate for medium-term and long-term improvements (Option 5). ==Option 2: Move Critical extensions to stable host== Indeed, as you write, this would be an extreme option. More extreme would be to do nothing, as you'll end up with nothing. Of course. What I meant to say was: cherry-picking important extensions and creating a repository for them from scratch is more or less the same work of Option 1 or 3 (i.e., fix the current site or a clone of it) for a much less interesting result. ==Option 3: Clone OSUOSL repositories to another host== This is not significantly different from Option 1; i.e., if there are other hosting options available the mere cloning of the site would not take long, but again the problem is not with the site but with caching. Do not blame caches for poor performance. the caches are improving a bad situation OK, no matter what we think about the root cause for the current bad performance it seems that we both agree that cloning the site will give us the possibility to tweak it (or the environment) and improve performance. Since I've seen it working perfectly in 2010, I'm confident this is achievable. ==Option 4: Host repositories elsewhere, using new UI== As I used to say, everybody who thinks that the Extensions or Templates sites can be replaced easily has never tried submitting a template! Thorsten did a lot of customization work on the two sites; any replacement would provide a largely inferior user experience. I think you don’t think very highly of other peoples abilities, a poor outlook. That was just a warning: people should know (and they would know, if they had ever uploaded a template...) that the sites extract and use a lot of information specific to OpenOffice.org and ODF files. This is often overlooked when people see these sites as some form of file repositories and propose to rely on different solutions: they should be aware that, to provide an optimal user experience for our use case, a significant amount of custom code must be added. ==Option 5: Re-architect the Repositories== This is the option I personally favor for long term. ... OK, it seems we have agreement, at least at broad scope, that the long-term solution will be along the lines of Option 5 (i.e., encourage or enforce external hosting; allow for a scenario involving several different repositories). here is the route I intend to take: 1. Move the services to a newer more modern host at the ASF (temporary) 2. BandAid the installation to stabilise it for the short term (this is still more work than it sounds) So it seems we agree on these steps, and it's great (for planning Step 1) that you have access to information that is not available to me. 3. Stick Apache TrafficServer in front (not varnish) to improve response times / caching. I don't have enough knowledge on Apache TrafficServer to comment on this specific step. 4. Go with the choice of Option 5. that is, to allow the hosting and downloading of the templates and extensions to be with the 3rd party authors. It's already allowed; it is just not enforced. I mean, it already happens that some extensions form the Extensions site are downloaded from external sites like SourceForge. the status quo can not continue, for benefit of all. Help welcomed at any
Re: Legacy openoffice.org email addresses in the legacy website
On 21/11/2011 Rob Weir wrote: A sorted list of the most frequently mentioned addresses can be found by: grep -o -r -i --no-filename --include=*.html [[:alnum:]+\.\_\-]*@openoffice.org . | sort | uniq -c | sort -n -r I see the following. But I cannot easily tell what is a name versus an official address. Thanks for the list. Some of the addresses are related to the Italian community, so we will be able to handle them as follows. 74 stampa@openoffice... 7 scuole@openoffice... 5 soho@openoffice... 5 aziende@openoffice... These addresses were used by PLIO (the Italian N-L project) for its press releases, for educational activities and for providing support. All occurrences are in the Italian site. We will take care of replacing them on the web pages. 18 sanavia@openoffice... 7 luctur@openoffice... 3 ddozza@openoffice... 1 pescetti@openoffice... 1 paolomantovani@openoffice... These addresses are used by individuals from the Italian community and (except mine) they appear in the Italian site only. I contacted all of them and we will take care of replacing them on the web pages, as well as checking what happened to the luctur alias (that was used by Gianluca, as he wrote), but should be currently unused. Regards, Andrea.
Re: (Draft) Email forwarding public announcement
On 30/11/2011 Rob Weir wrote: Some specific points that could use more detail include project services (lists, wikis, Bugzilla, etc.) that would be very commonly used with openoffice.org email addresses. I think I listed them all. But can you think of others? I just checked and I confirm what I wrote some days ago: the Extensions and Templates sites use single-sign-on with the @openoffice.org addresses, so only their @openoffice.org e-mail address is available in the system. This means that extension publishers can be contacted only through their @openoffice.org address; the first thing to do in the possible future clones of the Extensions and Templates site would thus be to disable the single-sign-on (unfortunately) and send out password reset links before the @openoffice.org addresses and the single-sign-on expire, otherwise extension publishers will lose access to the website. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Extensions and templates
On 29/11/2011 Rob Weir wrote: ==Option 1: Remain at OSUOSL== We could remain with OSUOSL hosting. However, the existing site is very unstable. This would be best both for short and long term. In the short term, it provides continuity of service and it doesn't break existing links. In the long term, the Drupal instance can be updated and extended (it's not easy, but it is something that would have fairly high chances of success) to get it to be something like the new model (distributed repositories) you describe in step 5. An important point that everybody seems to miss is that the instability of the current Extensions site http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/ is, very likely, unrelated to Drupal. The underlying Drupal instance is rather sound (and it perfectly managed to sustain the traffic in 2010, which should not be significantly different from 2011); from the behavior of the site, it definitely seems to me that the instability is due to other components, like the caching server (Varnish) in front of it or other caching mechanisms. A second very important point is that we need to get the Extensions and Templates source code (two different codebases) under the SGA; while Drupal itself is GPL, Thorsten Bosbach while working at Oracle created a lot of custom PHP code for the two sites. This code, as far as I know, has never been released. Access to the source code is a prerequisite for any possible analysis/improvement of the website. ==Option 2: Move Critical extensions to stable host== Indeed, as you write, this would be an extreme option. ==Option 3: Clone OSUOSL repositories to another host== This is not significantly different from Option 1; i.e., if there are other hosting options available the mere cloning of the site would not take long, but again the problem is not with the site but with caching. Note that, since the Templates site has already been ported to Drupal 6 using the so called code-driven development technique, that source code would allow to install an empty pre-configured clone of the Templates site anywhere. This would be extremely useful for testing. ==Option 4: Host repositories elsewhere, using new UI== As I used to say, everybody who thinks that the Extensions or Templates sites can be replaced easily has never tried submitting a template! Thorsten did a lot of customization work on the two sites; any replacement would provide a largely inferior user experience. ==Option 5: Re-architect the Repositories== This is the option I personally favor for long term. ... This would allow multiple repositories to look and behave identically from the data perspective. This is an interesting long term solution indeed, but I see it feasible as a (complex) version of Option 1-3; i.e., we obtain the current codebase with the aim of updating it and extending it in this direction. The other thing this approach does is separate the extension metadata from the actual licensed extension. If we wanted to have a canonical repository of registered extensions, but without actually hosting or storing the extensions, then that should be OK. We're hosting URL's to resources. We're not distributing code. This would offer some advantages, but I see advantages in offering hosting for extensions too. The current Extensions site offers both options (host there or externally), but if I recall correctly some automatic mechanisms, like autogeneration of the update URL, only work if the local hosting is used. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Who knows Apache OO 3.4 Test Cases and Old Test Plan?
On 15/11/2011 Peter Junge wrote: Am 12.11.2011 20:14, schrieb Uwe Altmann: Once there was http://www.sunvirtuallab.com:8001/tcm2/opensource/tcm_index.cgi?tcm_config=newooo as a home of tcm (test case management) - there have been a lot of test cases for manual tests we used especially for L10n checks. Obviously, the site can been reached no longer. ... I guess Andrew Rist should be able to answers that. Yes, it would be very nice to get Oracle to include all the TCM test cases (that were assumed to be proprietary, even though in most cases they had been translated by the native-lang communities) in the SGA, or to provide them to the community in some form. The TCM platform itself can probably be replaced, but having the test cases database available would drastically reduce the effort needed for building a QA platform. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Moved over the old OOo archive
On 04/12/2011 Dave Fisher wrote: I was not aware that Infrastructure added OOo legacy downloads to http://archive.apache.org/dist/incubator/ooo/ So, I guess the question is what procedure should be used to update the archive with the missing versions from: http://archive.apache.org/dist/incubator/ooo/localized/it/ Actually the question is how I can submit to either of those archives (which actually seem to have the same content, as far as the legacy Italian build are concerned) some even older builds that were removed a long time ago from the archives to save space but that are still requested from our users. These builds are now located in a private PLIO (Italian Native-Lang Project) archive. Looks like there may be an Infrastructure issue. OK, thanks. I've opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4190 as a request, considering Marcus' comment too. Regards, Andrea.
Re: How to provide Linguistic Tools replacements after the removal of GPL'd modules
On 30/11/2011 Gianluca Turconi wrote: Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org ha scritto: That is worth a try. Someone would need to enter a JIRA issue for this ... If we do that, we'll have an answer within a week or two. Andrea Pescetti could have already done it. He should give more details here. After coordinating with Gianluca about some details, I've just opened the issue at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-117 Since we've already discussed this issue in detail on this list, the picture should now be clear enough; anyway, feel free to integrate the JIRA issue if I missed anything relevant, because obtaining a green light would really make life easier both for developers and for native-language communities. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Moved over the old OOo archive
On 06/11/2011 Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 11/05/2011 03:02 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti: the archive is missing old builds (i.e., 2.3.0). They were removed from the archive to save space. If space now allows, I can provide the older builds that had been removed from the archive (or at least a complete history of Italian stable versions). ... if you think that this is not enough and the localized releases are still needed (you are right, I cannot imagine it ;-) ) and Infra is fine to provide more space, then why not. After just addressing a request from an 81-year-old user who was looking for his beloved OpenOffice.org 1.1.4 in Italian (yes, I knew you couldn't imagine...) I now have all old Italian versions available at a non public download location. What should I do to have them added back to the archive then? Should I open an Infrastructure JIRA issue maybe? Regards, Andrea.
Re: [DISCUSS]: hosting of source code that doesn't belong to the office directly
On 30/11/2011 Jürgen Schmidt wrote: On 11/30/11 1:31 PM, Rob Weir wrote: Maybe just call it extensions ? This could be the root for standard extensions that are produced by this project. Some might be app dev related. But we might have other standard extensions in the future, e.g., a CMIS extension using Apache Chemistry. i thought about extensions but in this particular case it is not an extension in the classical manner. But it is a developer tool for extensions and could be of course hosted there as well. Then it would be clearer to use extensions for stuff that will eventually be packaged into .oxt files, and tools or devtools for the current use case, which is much more relaed to development than to extensions. Not that I have a strong opinion on this; extensions just seems potentially confusing for an editor plugin. Regards, Andrea.
Re: GPL'd dictionaries (was Re: ftp.services.openoffice.org?)
On 29/11/2011 Andre Fischer wrote: I have now a patch for removing the dictionaries module. ... So now would be the time to raise objections to this and provide alternative solutions. I had set https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=117605 as a blocker issue for this, since we still had important fixes to the README files of the Italian dictionaries to check in. I've just committed the fixes, which means that if the dictionaries module is resurrected it contains clear information about the history of the Italian dictionary, contributors and versions. Thanks Andre for your patience. I now have no objections to the dictionaries module being deleted/frozen/moved for the time being, while legal issues or ideas for replacement are discussed. Regards, Andrea.
Re: What about BrOffice?
Jomar Silva wrote: We had to use BrOffice as the product name because OpenOffice was a registered trademark in Brazil, and AFAIK Apache OpenOffice will not have problems here. If I recall correctly, the issue about OpenOffice being a registered trademark (by some entity different than OpenOffice.org/Oracle) in Brazil had been solved in recent times, but the Brazilian community had preferred to keep the BrOffice name since it was a stronger brand (even though, apparently, they did get rid of the BrOffice name later). So Apache OpenOffice should not be problematic, since even the mere OpenOffice should be OK for Brazil now (provided I recall correctly some discussions from last year). Regards, Andrea.
Re: [CODE] configure.in: yes/no messages swapped in --enable-copyleft
On 22/11/2011 Andre Fischer wrote: On 21.11.2011 19:59, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Thanks for the information, but since configure is writing a wrong (and potentially confusing) message, and the fix I sent is trivial and totally harmless, why not just fix it? ... You are absolutely right, and I would have applied the patch but I do not yet have commit rights. Now both of us do have commit rights... I committed this trivial, risk-free fix to test my SVN access, everything OK. If that section of configure.in is going to be rewritten in the next few days, it's absolutely no problem for me. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Proposal for retirement of openoffice.org email forwarder
Rob Weir wrote: So what systems do you think might be sending a lot of emails at once to openoffice.org email addresses? 1) Legacy OpenOffice.org mailing lists 2) Bugzilla? Any others? I think Bugzilla is the one more likely to send mass e-mails to openoffice.org addresses; I've seen that now Bugzilla e-mails come from a no-reply address, so the bounce messages would probably bounce back, but I'm sure system administrators are savvy enough to do the right thing. Mailing lists shouldn't be very problematic since a fraction of users use their openoffice.org address for mailing lists, and many of them do it because thay are involved with the project, so they are likely to be informed. However, it would be very annoying that everybody sending a mail to a mailing lists receives a bounce message back; but, again, this can probably be handled when the bounce mechanism is configured. Extensions and templates should be considered too: right now, authentication on both sites relies on openoffice.org addresses, see https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Extensions+and+templates The system might thus store the openoffice.org forwarder as the extension publisher's e-mail, so it might happen (I can't check it) that if the openoffice.org e-mail forwarders are shut down, then it becomes impossible to contact publishers of any extensions/templates. Whatever the destiny of the extensions/templates sites will be, it would be important to keep the possibility to contact all of their users (i.e., extensions/templates publishers) at due time. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Rationalizing two OpenOffice websites
On 24/11/2011 Dave Fisher wrote: Yes and I would avoid doing anymore N-L projects. Since Khirano is willing to do a translation of the new main site. If Pedro and the other Italians and MArcus and the other Germans. Plus Alexandro and the Spanish are in Consensus to do translations of the new main (Am I missing any other active N-L projects?) then I am for removing all N-L now. No, please don't! First of all let me congratulate with you for solving most remaining bugs with the Italian site import, that the last time I checked had no major display issues on the Apache infrastructure. Coming to the removal of N-L sites, we do have content that is specific: for example, I've just published a link on http://it.openoffice.org to a new guide, in Italian, about how to use the DataPilot/Pivot Tables; this was provided by an Italian public institution and its natural place would be on the Italian N-L site rather than somewhere on the wiki. So, even though an update (even a major update) of the Italian site and of some other N-L sites is acceptable and, I'd say, badly needed, I would still keep the possibility for the N-L sites to provide content that is language-specific and not a translation of content from the English site. Regards, Andrea.
Re: GPL'd dictionaries (was Re: ftp.services.openoffice.org?)
Gianluca Turconi wrote: Il 24/11/2011 17.39, Ariel Constenla-Haile ha scritto: Dictionaries are developed by individuals/entities outside OOo, they were never developed inside the OOo source tree. I'm not sure what was the procedure (sure Gianluca can comment), but it seems like these dictionaries were updated on request, not developed by OOo. Surely, the community developed the dictionaries and there were specific *external* projects that worked on several dictionaries. Yes, so in a sense they were developed by OOo, meaning by the OpenOffice.org community, but development happened (happens!) outside the OpenOffice.org code repository and the sources are periodically synchronized with the external repositories, usually before a release. My main worry is to provide to the users, at *download time*, *all* tools they may need for a functional Office Suite, without forcing them to browse one or more external websites for important add-ons like the linguistic tools. This would be a start, but (not talking licenses here, we have plenty of other discussions about that!) providing the users at INSTALLATION time with a dictionary or the way to obtain it is equally important to me; we could easily do both, anyway. Of course this mainly concerns Windows users. An official binary release without the three linguistic components is a NO-GO (IMO). a big +1 from me. Sure. I don't even know if all thesauri can work properly without Hunspell being enabled and the corresponding spellchecker working. I never tried building without Hunspell, but I think that the English thesaurus relies on the English spellchecker to perform advanced operations, i.e., given that feline is a synonym of cat deducing (by Hunspell rules) that felines is a synonym of cats. I've always assumed this depends on Hunspell, but, again, I never tried building without Hunspell and I would be curious to know if it breaks in that case. Regards, Andrea.
Re: GPL'd dictionaries (was Re: ftp.services.openoffice.org?)
On 25/11/2011 Gianluca Turconi wrote: Il 24/11/2011 23.53, Mathias Bauer ha scritto: It seems that you don't get the point. I just wanted to mention that the dictionary files we have in svn can be seen as and*end product* and so probably(!) are comparable more with a binary file than with a source file. Very smart. Indeed, dictionaries can be considered to be both in source and binary form, and this could be used conveniently for those dictionaries (not all, but some) that can be distributed in binary form only per the current Apache policy. I think this was the main reason why Andrea Pescetti quoted the FSE answer about mere aggregation of GPLed dictionary. One of the reasons indeed, but not the main reason. The main reason for it was that, unlike what would happen when using a GPL library (i.e., that the virality of GPL would mean that the GPL applied to the program as a whole), using a GPL dictionary won't impact on the copyleft status of the other code. This is possible since the office suite is totally independent from the dictionary; packaging both OpenOffice.org (LGPL, but would work with Apache License too) and the Italian dictionary (GPL) in the same installer file is just a matter convenience; and the installer can install both, just like any installer for a Linux-based system would install many programs stored on the same physical DVD and having mutually incompatible licenses. OpenOffice.org and the Italian dictionary are merely aggregated in the same package, like Apache httpd and the GIMP are merely aggregated on an installation DVD. This took some years, but was eventually clarified for good. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Proposal for retirement of openoffice.org email forwarder
On 21/11/2011 Rob Weir wrote: Please note: I don't want to discuss here the merits of shutting down or not shutting down such a forwarding service. That discussion was made moot by an ASF Board decision against hosting such a general-access email forwarding service like the legacy OOo had. OK, I've read it and I still believe it was probably a bad choice, but we will have to respect it. We didn't create this problem, but we're the best ones to help reduce the pain of this shutdown. Sure. And I would actually turn your proposal in something less negative; say, I would add that people who believe that an e-mail address is important for community building can become Apache OpenOffice committers by meritocracy and obtain an @apache.org e-mail address (or forwarder, or whatever it is). 4) Work with Infra@ on a custom bounce notification that would be sent in response to all openoffice.org emails. It would link to the wiki page from step #3. Coordinate this so it is ready on or before the forwarder shutdown date. Here it will be important to avoid that someone receives a deluge of notifications by some automated system that is still in place in the complex OpenOffice.org infrastructure. So this has to be handled carefully, but I'm in favor of an automated response. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [DISCUSS]: content of the about dialog box
Rob Weir wrote: So in total, maybe something like: = Copyright © 2011 Apache Software Foundation. All rights reserved. I'm not sure about this. Is there any code that is under the Apache copyright? As far as I know, the copyright still belongs to Oracle and third-party contributors. Regards, Andrea.
Re: [CODE] configure.in: yes/no messages swapped in --enable-copyleft
Andre Fischer wrote: good point but please keep in mind that this is a temporary workaround. Much work is currently being done ... the --enable-copyleft switch will not live for very long. Thanks for the information, but since configure is writing a wrong (and potentially confusing) message, and the fix I sent is trivial and totally harmless, why not just fix it? It takes less to fix it than to discuss it by e-mail, and people experimenting with the --enable-copyleft switch will be reassured if configure gives them the proper feedback. And since I think that the new --enable-x-license (or whatever it is) section in configure.in will be copied and pasted from --enable-copyleft, it is probably good to get it right there even if it is going away soon. Regards, Andrea.
[CODE] configure.in: yes/no messages swapped in --enable-copyleft
It seems that the yes and no messages corresponding to the --enable-copyleft option are swapped in configure.in; this has no impact on the build, but it gives the user a wrong feedback about the options he specified. The fix would just consist in swapping the yes and no messages; for those who prefer to see it in the form of a (trivial) patch, here it is. --- Index: configure.in === --- configure.in(revision 1204230) +++ configure.in(local copy) @@ -1233,37 +1233,37 @@ AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether to enable copyleft components]) if test $enable_copyleft != yes; then enable_mozilla=no enable_nss_module=no enable_gstreamer=no with_myspell_dicts=no DISABLE_HUNSPELL=TRUE DISABLE_HYPHEN=TRUE DISABLE_SAXON=TRUE BUILD_EPM=NO - AC_MSG_RESULT([yes]) + AC_MSG_RESULT([no]) else DISABLE_HUNSPELL= DISABLE_HYPHEN= DISABLE_SAXON= - AC_MSG_RESULT([no]) + AC_MSG_RESULT([yes]) fi AC_SUBST(DISABLE_HUNSPELL) AC_SUBST(DISABLE_HYPHEN) AC_SUBST(DISABLE_SAXON) AC_SUBST(BUILD_EPM) AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether to enable native CUPS support]) if test $test_cups = yes -a \( $enable_cups = yes -o $enable_cups = TRUE \) ; then ENABLE_CUPS=TRUE AC_MSG_RESULT([yes]) else ENABLE_CUPS= --- Regards, Andrea.
Re: Mailing list user migration: Staging and volunteers
On 25/10/2011 Rob Weir wrote: Process for getting a new mailing list created is here: http://www.apache.org/dev/committers.html#new-mailing-list Probably makes sense to start with the largest NL communities first? I had a look at this and at the mentioned EZMLM Moderator's and Administrator's Manual to have an idea, and it seems that the moderator role and its processes are quite different from what we are used to at openoffice.org. While I do have a general understanding now, I still miss some information on how the lists are actually configured at Apache: - Must all moderation happen by e-mail through the -accept address and similar? Isn't a web interface available? - The distinction between a Moderator and an Administrator is new to me, and I realized that at it.openoffice.org I act much more as an Administrator than a Moderator. My most frequent task is a user asking me to change his e-mail address, which I have to do in two steps (automatically subscribe the new address, then remove the old one; he could do it himself of course, but often he experienced difficulties while trying). Can this be done on the Apache lists too? - Can a lists be set up so that it automatically rejects posts from non-members, sending a (possibly configurable) standard reply? - Can subject tags and e-mail footers be customized? Thanks, Andrea.
Re: GPL'd dictionaries (was Re: ftp.services.openoffice.org?)
Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: A rough analysis http://people.apache.org/~arielch/dictionaries.ods shows that more than half language packs didn't distribute the three DICT, HYPHEN and THES dics. Thanks Ariel for the useful data. By crossing it with data from http://download.services.openoffice.org/files/localized/ we can conclude that 96% of the localized full versions of OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 come with at least a spell-checking dictionary for their main language. So removing dictionaries does seem a scary option. Note that full builds were only provided for languages that had attained a satisfactory ( 80% ) percentage of interface translation. The other languages relied on language packs only, but my concern is mostly for users who download their localized version of OpenOffice.org as an all-in-one package. The 96% figure above is 22/23, where the missing one is the cs_CZ dictionary, the only case of a full build missing a dictionary. And of course I am not able to evaluate the quality of included dictionaries. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Ohloh
On 11/11/2011 Rob Weir wrote: On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: Apache OOo is correct (Kudos to arist@) but it is reported as a duplicate and will be deleted. When it is deleted actually means it is merged, along with its history, with the OpenOffice project. OK, and this is good! But still, it won't happen that http://www.ohloh.net/p/openoffice displays the pre-2011 history together with the Apache era history, right? Regards, Andrea.
