Re: [DISCUSS] RE: SVN and bringing the total end-to-end OOo project under Configuration Management
Rob Weir wrote: Much clipped to save space. Look at http://www.oooforum.org They get tons of traffic though they are independent of the OOo and get no advantage from the URL or any official relationship to the project. If you look on the support page at OOo you will find the oooforum listed as The (unofficial) OpenOffice forum. The Official forum is not listed. Andy
Re: [DISCUSS] RE: SVN and bringing the total end-to-end OOo project under Configuration Management
Rob Weir wrote: On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 8:15 PM, Andy Browna...@the-martin-byrd.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: Much clipped to save space. Look at http://www.oooforum.org They get tons of traffic though they are independent of the OOo and get no advantage from the URL or any official relationship to the project. If you look on the support page at OOo you will find the oooforum listed as The (unofficial) OpenOffice forum. The Official forum is not listed. If I go to the support page [1] I see a link that says: The OpenOffice.org Community Forum -- The premier forum for OpenOffice.org users; immensely useful and recommended I only see the unofficial forum down at the bottom, under Other Free Support But even that is fine. We can link to other sources of information from the project's websites. We ought to. The universe does not begin and end with Apache OpenOffice. But for that part of the universe which is in Apache OpenOffice, the word Apache means something. [1] http://user.services.openoffice.org/ Andy I think you intended [i]. The page you reference is to the official forum's introduction. But I agree that I missed the official forum listing in the support page. [i] http://support.openoffice.org/ Andy
Re: [code] builds, runs, but doesn't fly yet
Eike Rathke wrote: Hi, On Tuesday, 2011-08-30 01:24:28 +0200, Eike Rathke wrote: The current tree builds using unxlngx6.pro with gcc 4.6.1 amd64 Applications run, smoketest is good. Same for --enable-dbgutil unxlngx6 One thing that caught my eye because I usually set macro security to very high: the dialog under Tools - Options - OpenOffice.org - Security - Macro Security doesn't open, just nothing happens. And that. I hoped for some OSL_ENSURE message but there's none. I think we should ignore that for now and turn attention to more important things. Eike Eike, Do we have a wiki page that shows a non-programmer to build AOOo? Also a list of needed programs would be really helpful, Windows7 and Ubuntu 11.04 here. I would like to help and think this is something I can do. Andy
Re: Building Guide
Eike Rathke wrote: Hi Andy, On Monday, 2011-08-29 18:08:01 -0700, Andy Brown wrote: Do we have a wiki page that shows a non-programmer to build AOOo? Also a list of needed programs would be really helpful, Windows7 and Ubuntu 11.04 here. I would like to help and think this is something I can do. There's the fine Building Guide http://ooo-wiki.apache.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide Eike Thanks. Andy
Re: [migration] Decision making
Donald Whytock wrote: On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: But again, objections must be from committers, backed with technical arguments and the willingness to implement alternatives. The Apache voting policy page you linked agrees that binding votes are from committers, and that all others are either discouraged from voting (to keep the noise down) or else have their votes considered of an indicative or advisory nature only. But some things may require noise. I for one am essentially lurking here as a user, watching the progress of the product on its way to becoming once again current and viable. I'm technical, but have never touched the guts of OOo. So if you bring up a change, presented as a lazy-concensus proposal, and I think it would adversely affect my experience as a user, I'd very much like to be able to object, even if my objection is non-binding. I can't stop you, but on the other hand I'd rather you not stop me. Don Hi Don, I will speak only for myself but as a PPMC member I know that I would want to see reasonable, though out, objections from the users. That said, it would have to be more than I object to such and such. Details is what is needed. Andy
Re: [Introduction] Getting involved with Apache OOo
Matt Richards wrote: Greetings, I have been using OOo for quite some time (its been my fall back if I'm not able to use Microsoft's suite [mostly on Linux and Mac]) and am very pleased seeing it become an Apache project. While, I've not really been part of the OOo community until I heard it has been accepted into the incubator (I been lurking on the general list, [stuck around after another project I've been following got accepted into the incubator]), I'm quite interested in helping this project in anyway shape or form that my skill set is able to do so (time is also key factor). I do not have much in the way of development skill set, my primary background is in customer service, with a little bit of qa testing and a bit of linux server administration. Anyhow, I mostly wanted to introduce myself and welcome the project [Yea, I know it a bit on the late side.. I'm more of a lurker]. I've been reading a few of the discussion threads so far, very pleased with the way things are heading at this time. Thanks for reading, please let me know if I can help in shape or form at this stage. Hi Matt, If you have seen some of the threads you should know that we do what we can. Pick an item that needs doing and do it. The idea is to lead by doing. You know your skill set better than anyone here ever would. Welcome to the group. Andy
Re: OOo Bugzilla data import available for review
Thanks for doing this for us. Mark Thomas wrote: 3. All usernames and passwords remain unchanged with one exception: users with system administration rights have been removed from the admin group. Access to this group will be limited to members of the ASF infrastructure team (new volunteers always welcome). I can not get it to recognize user name or email address. Any suggestions? Andy
Re: OOo Bugzilla data import available for review
TJ Frazier wrote: On 8/25/2011 19:24, Andy Brown wrote: Thanks for doing this for us. Mark Thomas wrote: 3. All usernames and passwords remain unchanged with one exception: users with system administration rights have been removed from the admin group. Access to this group will be limited to members of the ASF infrastructure team (new volunteers always welcome). I can not get it to recognize user name or email address. Any suggestions? Andy It recognizes my user name @oo.o, but not the password. It has sent me a reset message, but I haven't received it (yet). Retried, same results. Also did a quick test to make sure the forwarding was still working, it is. Andy
Re: u...@openoffice.org on mail_list.html
Dave Fisher wrote: Hi Marcus, Starting a new thread so that there is no confusion. You removed all links to an existing us...@openoffice.org from the mail_list.html. (I like the ooo-dev part of what you did.) Please return these links to the page until the time we create ooo-users@i.a.o. BTW - last thread on users is [users] Any Consensus re OO vs LO? Regards, Dave Hi Dave, I send out a couple of messages asking for input from the subscribers to both the users@ and discuss@ mailing list. We can see what they have to say. Andy
Re: [Repo][Proposal]After the code is checked in to SVN
Stephan Bergmann wrote: On Aug 21, 2011, at 6:48 PM, Rob Weir wrote: 1) Initially, only changes are made to make SVN to more perfectly match the Hg tip. We know there are 10 or so files that need to be checked in, with attention to EOL style. And there was a suggestion to update the memo of the initial checkin. Let's get that work done, and then tag that revision with a memorable label, before we make any other changes. (Should also give a tag to the current Hg tip) 2) Registration of any cryptographic code in OOo (required for US Export regulations, not sure if this was previously required when OOo was hosted in Germany). 3) Then do what is necessary to enable anyone who wishes to build to do so. So confirm we can build, add files, etc., if they are missing. Get instructions onto the website, or links to instructions. Everything we do after this is easier if we first enable more people to work with the code. Obviously a newbie is not going to be productive on their first day, but the sooner we get them working with the code, the sooner they will be productive. I think we should try to enable that now, than wait 6 months. 4) As part of verifying the build we should be able to confirm what additional files, if any we need to request that Oracle add to their SGA. 5) Identification and removal of any code that does not have a compatible license 6) Then I think we can open it up to integrating CWS's, fixing bugs, etc. Two more steps that we might want to phase in somewhere are: (a) Replace the Oracle/LGPLv3 license headers in all the relevant files with Apache/AL2 ones. Is this maybe legally important to do as early as possible, or can it wait until end-of-incubation? Probably makes no sense to do before phase 5, anyway. Required to graduate from incubator, the sooner the better. IP clean up is discussed quite often in the general@i.a.o list. (b) Optionally, do some automated cleanup. For example, LibreOffice recently did some automated whitespace and tab cleanup when merging their spread git repos into a single big one. Such cleanup is probably a good idea (if only to follow LOs example and not let the two code bases diverge more than necessary), but generally it of course complicates merging of existing changesets, so a time of starting fresh can be a good time for such a change (which implies that it would probably best be done after integrating the changesets from existing CWS in phase 6). -Stephan
Re: us...@openoffice.org [Was: Re: [Discussion] d...@openoffice.org]
Rob Weir wrote: On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: snip At the end it seems the best solution is still to go 2 ways: ML and forum. Best in what way? If half of us want pizza for dinner, and the other half want sushi, is the best solution to have sushi pizza? I think doing support via two venues is suboptimal, both for the user seeking support and for the person providing support. Would we consider splitting ooo-dev into a list and a forum? I don't think so. phpBB is open source, right? I wonder if there is any way would could make it more mail-enabled? Right now it allows users to subscribe to a forum or a thread and have new messages go to their email. But it doesn't allow responding via email. But I see things like M2F that claim to enable phpBB for mail in databases: http://mail2forum.com/ In other words, we should be really clear whether we merely want *multiple interfaces* to support (ML, forum, nntp, etc) or whether we really want *multiple repositories* of support discussions. The former is good to have. The latter, however, if bad, IMHO. I say that we have to support our users, be it by ML, or forum. I prefer mailing list but also realize that others prefer forums. I do use both since I want to help users. This road is getting old. We have already discussed this, back in June. I saw the same old discussion on the LibO list last year. Lets see if any of the users on the mailing list have anything to say. I have post a message in both the users@ and discuss@ list letting them know about this discussion and since it is they that will be effected I think they should have some input. Andy
Can someone verify this?
http://studio-no.net/openoffice.php seems to be selling OOo, not illegal I know. Is this something like PortableApps? Andy
Re: Can someone verify this?
Marcus (OOo) wrote: Let me try: - I've downloaded the file without that someone wanted to have money or a registration from me. - The mirror http://mirrors.fe.up.pt/; where the download comes from is an officoal mirror of the (old) OOo project. - The MD5 sum is exactly the same as if you would download the file from here: http://download.services.openoffice.org/files/localized/nb/3.3.0/OOo_3.3.0_Win_x86_install-wJRE_nb.exe - The text says: Lisens: Freeware OK, it's not the correct license but you can get indeed the software for free. At the moment I don't see a problem. Marcus Thanks, Marcus. A user posted the link in the discuss@ list, since I do not understand the language used I just though I would ask. The users says that the installer ask for 40 kr to download the install. The file downloaded is 665kb in size. I will forward your post to the user. Andy
Re: us...@openoffice.org [Was: Re: [Discussion] d...@openoffice.org]
Jean Weber wrote: Idle curiosity: I wonder how many people who offer support do it in both places: mailing list and forum, or more or exclusively in one or the other. Personal observation (not intended as a generalization): my preferences vary with whether I'm a consumer or a provider of support services. As a consumer, I generally prefer a forum, but as a provider I prefer an email list. Perhaps I'm just weird, or set in my ways... :-) --Jean Jean, When I can I work on both to provide help. I prefer email and mailing list. Andy
Re: Can someone verify this?
Marcus (OOo) wrote: Thanks for watching out. Is what I do. :) Maybe there is a dependency from where, how, etc. you try to download. However, it doesn't seen to be a general thing. I did not think of that. I downloaded the file from their link and looks like the right size for the Windows install, though an older version. I do not have a Windows machine handy right now to see if it will do an install. Please let the users know: The only official download location is: http://download.openoffice.org Always try to. Andy
Re: us...@openoffice.org [Was: Re: [Discussion] d...@openoffice.org]
Gavin McDonald wrote: From: Marcus (OOo) [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de] Maybe, but they are still not subscribed. So the moderator has to let the posts through; again and again until the user is subscribed. ew,, no that does not have to happen at all. the moderator can do a reply-all , choose the -accept and the -allow addresses then hit send. (of the moderation email). From then on, no more moderation of that user using that email address. No need to repeatedly let the same user in. Gav... The OOo user and discuss list use to have the Delivered-to contain moderator and it was easy to see when a message was from a person that was not subscribed to the list, the way that Apache does it. When the mail system changed that was removed so the person trying to reply did not know if the OP was subscribed or not. I prefer having the ability to know so that I can CC; the OP. It makes it easier for those trying to help. Andy
Re: users-jnqqrfibojom4zkihc2...@public.gmane.org [Was: Re: [Discussion] dev-jnqqrfibojom4zkihc2...@public.gmane.org]
Larry Gusaas wrote: On 2011-08-23 7:28 PM Andy Brown wrote: The OOo user and discuss list use to have the Delivered-to contain moderator and it was easy to see when a message was from a person that was not subscribed to the list, the way that Apache does it. When the mail system changed that was removed so the person trying to reply did not know if the OP was subscribed or not. I prefer having the ability to know so that I can CC; the OP. It makes it easier for those trying to help. Messages from unsubscribed posters to the OOo user and discuss list have the header X-Sympa-To: us...@openoffice.org This information has been posted to the lists by myself and others more than once. Thanks, Larry. I do not know how I missed it. Andy
Re: ooo-wiki going offline
Terry Ellison wrote: I've now finished the upgrade to add the Apache Traffic Server front end to the community MediaWiki service at http://ooo-wiki.apache.org/ and the service is back online. We need to do some further tuning of the system cache optimisation, but even with the first-cut settings that I prepared on my own test-bed VM, the system already looks as if it it is hitting the performance targets needed to sustain a full production transaction rate. It certainly feels extremely snappy compared to the existing OOo community wiki or the Apache cwiki, and the Google pagespeed benchmarks are significantly better than both of these systems. So: * We are good to go for production migration of the community wiki. * We are the first Apache project adopter of another Apache project, Apache Traffic Server (ATS) * We have laid the foundation for an ATS template for MediaWiki hosting that can be used to promote the use of ATS for the wider MediaWiki systems community. It's been a hard few days work, and still some finishing to do, but my thanks to the Infrstructure and ATS guys that have supported me in making this happen. Regards Terry A great big thanks to you and them. Good job. :) Andy
Re: id@openoffice.org
Mathias Bauer wrote: On 21.08.2011 19:32, Andy Brown wrote: Watching the discussions here I have a question. How hard would it be to find out which forwarding addresses are in active use, last six months, last year? Seems to me if an address is active' then it should be maintained for that user as that is where some contacts expect to find that person. I have one of those addresses and in the last year I may have received two or three messages, all spam, so I do not need the address or really want it. As has been indicated it was given when I initially registered OO.o. I think I have received two or three actual messages with that address and that was over two years ago when I signed up for the Marketing Project. I see no need to maintain address forwarding for addresses that are not used but do feel that those that use them should have them maintained for the benefit of the community. It seems that most of us agree that no new address should be assigned. The id@ooo addresses most probably are useful only in one case: getting mail notifications about changes in the bug tracking system. If we want to continue working with the existing bug database (and why shouldn't we?) we might want to be able to reach anybody who has either added something to an issue or has registered himself as an observer for this issue. In both cases the ooo userid and so the mailing address use...@openoffice.org has been used to establish the contact. Throwing away these mailing addresses would mean that we could no longer reach the people that contributed to the issues or registered themselves to it. Regards, Mathias OK. Then it would, I guess, make sense. I was not aware that it was used that way. Andy
Re: id@openoffice.org
TJ Frazier wrote: +1 I volunteer to help with the long-range problems (karma and fu assumed). --/tj/ I am willing to help as well. The only question is how do we get access to the OOo bugzilla to clean it up before moving it to the ASF? Andy
Re: id@openoffice.org
TJ Frazier wrote: On 8/22/2011 15:31, Andy Brown wrote: TJ Frazier wrote: +1 I volunteer to help with the long-range problems (karma and fu assumed). --/tj/ I am willing to help as well. The only question is how do we get access to the OOo bugzilla to clean it up before moving it to the ASF? Andy Strongly suggest we just move it as-is. We *know* how to get access here. That is an option and seems like the best one. Andy
Re: [Discussion] d...@openoffice.org
Marcus (OOo) wrote: @all: If there is somewhere else a place that should be updated (and I've write access) please let me know. Marcus If you have access, maybe on the mailing list page on the OOo site [1] or [2]. If not then post a message to the list that your on. [1] http://support.openoffice.org/ [2] http://www.openoffice.org/mail_list.html Andy
Re: [Discussion] d...@openoffice.org
Dave Fisher wrote: On Aug 22, 2011, at 3:38 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 08/22/2011 11:45 PM, schrieb Andy Brown: Marcus (OOo) wrote: @all: If there is somewhere else a place that should be updated (and I've write access) please let me know. Marcus If you have access, maybe on the mailing list page on the OOo site [1] or [2]. If not then post a message to the list that your on. [1] http://support.openoffice.org/ Sorry, for the support area I haven't write access. However, it would be sufficient to delete the Users Mail List row and to keep the General OOo Mail Lists row as it points already to the modified webpage. We are acting a little quickly. Shouldn't we have an ooo-us...@incubator.apache.org before we delete the Users Mail List on the OOo site? Yes. Marcus was referring to the row that contains the link to the Users List, not the list itself. The Users and other list are linked in on the General OOo Mailing list page that he referred to so it would not hurt to remove just that row. [2] http://www.openoffice.org/mail_list.html Is there something else that needs to be changed? Normally it should be fine already. ;-) The old version is carefully hidden here [3] [3] http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/www/mail_list.html Until we move the users@ooo list I think that needs to be added back to [2] and then [2] checked into to [3]. BTW - Creating the support area is one of the next items in the podling site. [4] [4] http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/support/ I and Marcus are referring to pages on the old OOo site not on the new AOO site. Having information on AOO is nice but till it is live and linked to with OOo domains the old site needs to point people to the main AOO web page(s). Andy
Re: us...@openoffice.org [Was: Re: [Discussion] d...@openoffice.org]
Dave Fisher wrote: The changes are good at showing where we are as developers. The unfortunate point is that us...@openoffice.org is still a functional list with several posts in a day and the change is hiding that list. Until there is ooo-users@i.a.o we shouldn't hide users@ooo. Does anyone think we should wait to create ooo-users? Regards, Dave I think the sooner the better, myself. An I would also like to see something along the lines of the Discuss@oo.o list, it still receives messages from time to time, and it a place that users discuss OOo but not a general help list like Users@. Andy
Re: [Discussion] dev-jnqqrfibojom4zkihc2...@public.gmane.org
Larry Gusaas wrote: On 2011-08-22 5:09 PM Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 08/23/2011 12:50 AM, schrieb Dave Fisher: On Aug 22, 2011, at 3:38 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 08/22/2011 11:45 PM, schrieb Andy Brown: Marcus (OOo) wrote: @all: If there is somewhere else a place that should be updated (and I've write access) please let me know. Marcus If you have access, maybe on the mailing list page on the OOo site [1] or [2]. If not then post a message to the list that your on. [1] http://support.openoffice.org/ Sorry, for the support area I haven't write access. However, it would be sufficient to delete the Users Mail List row and to keep the General OOo Mail Lists row as it points already to the modified webpage. We are acting a little quickly. Really? ;-) The ooo-dev@ mailing list is present since months. For the same long time the old MLs have lost a lot of users/posts. Shouldn't we have an ooo-us...@incubator.apache.org before we delete the Users Mail List on the OOo site? The data is still there. It's just the collected link list that is no longer present/visible. The us...@openoffice.org list is still active. There were 55 posts in the last week. Many current OOo users go to it for support. There is no link to it anymore on the OOo support or mailing list pages. How are current users of OOo supposed to find support if the support lists are no longer listed. Certainly not by posting to this list! Removing the links is very premature. _ Larry I. Gusaas Larry, the link is still on the support page, http://support.openoffice.org/ . The mailing list page has been changed to point people here. The users and discuss list should have been left in place to we have a replacement here. Andy
Re: [What?] Why and How did this reach my inbox?
Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: And why should we accept newsgroup posts the same as posts from subscribers to this list? This list is not a newsgroup, but the gmane newsgroup creates the effect of subscribers without they're being subscribed here. Why should we be interested in that? Especially with those mangled subject lines. - Dennis Dennis, Lets not add more blocks to people that what to help here. Gmane is another way for people to connect to the mailing list. Mailing list, Gmane and forums are way that people help and work together without forcing people into something they do not want or need. OOo and LibO both have used the Gmane gateway for mailing list, I am sure there are others. It would seem that the ASF already uses the gateway so why not take advantage of it? Andy
id@openoffice.org
Watching the discussions here I have a question. How hard would it be to find out which forwarding addresses are in active use, last six months, last year? Seems to me if an address is active' then it should be maintained for that user as that is where some contacts expect to find that person. I have one of those addresses and in the last year I may have received two or three messages, all spam, so I do not need the address or really want it. As has been indicated it was given when I initially registered OO.o. I think I have received two or three actual messages with that address and that was over two years ago when I signed up for the Marketing Project. I see no need to maintain address forwarding for addresses that are not used but do feel that those that use them should have them maintained for the benefit of the community. It seems that most of us agree that no new address should be assigned. My 2cents. Andy
Re: [Discussion] d...@openoffice.org
Marcus (OOo) wrote: I've updated the text on http://www.openoffice.org/mail_list.html; (with borrowed text from Mathias). Marcus I like it. :) Andy
Re: [Discussion] d...@openoffice.org
Rob Weir wrote: As my preceding forwards indicate, we're getting some interesting posts to d...@openoffice.org, including offers of help, but they are not getting adequate responses. We're missing opportunities here to grow the project. Is there anything we can do to improve this? 1) Continue as now, and I'll forward interesting posts to ooo-dev? 2) Send a note to d...@openoffice.org telling them that we've moved over to ooo-dev and inviting them to join? 3) Auto-responder for d...@openoffice.org telling them that we've moved over to ooo-dev? 4) Shut down d...@openoffice.org to new posts? I liked the one reply that was sent to someone offering to help: I think your best bet to help participate in Open Office is now at the Apache Development. Apache should be the new owner of the Open Office Source code and is now working very hard at porting it into their system. The source in now in their incubator. This is usually a temporary 6 month stay until officially accepted. Every thing you should need to know about helping to participate with the project is located at: http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html; If no one objects I will monitor the list and reply with something like the above and point people to the AOOo with page. Andy
Re: [Discussion] d...@openoffice.org
Eike Rathke wrote: Hi Andy, On Friday, 2011-08-19 06:37:49 -0700, Andy Brown wrote: I liked the one reply that was sent to someone offering to help: [...] If no one objects I will monitor the list and reply with something like the above and point people to the AOOo with page. That's probably the best. Bear in mind however that the OOo and AOOo mailing lists are similar setup (to my opinion similar broken) in that the Reply-To header points to the mailing list address, so even if one does a Group-reply the answer is only sent to the list, but not to the poster. One has to manually add the poster to the Cc field, that is important if s/he is not subscribed and the post was moderated through, which happens often with people new to the project. On OOo lists in such a case the X-Validation-By header is set, which may help in detecting and let the mailer do an ask-cc or some such. Eike Hi Eike, The list on OOo that I subscribe to reply-all works as expected. Just tried here though and only the list as addressed, strange. I have been working two of the extension to get the word out about the move and the response has been good. Andy Andy
Re: openoffice.org domains transferred to ASF
Dave Fisher wrote: Some have no dns or the DNS is non-functional openoffice2009.com openoffice-gratuit.com openoffice-pt.com openoffice-pl.com openoffice-nl.com openoffice-fr.com openoffice09fr.com Have these Authoritative servers. NS63.1AND1.ES NS64.1AND1.ES openoffice2009.com expires tomorrow, others of the above are soon. At least two of these where done to prevent fraud with the OOo brand. I know that the 2009 site was reported several times for misrepresenting as an official OOo site. I believe that the 09fr site was as well. My understanding is the it was easier to buy the domain from the owners than take it to court or ICAN to resolve. If I am wrong someone in the know please correct me. Andy
Re: [Repo][Proposal] OOO340 SVN Dump file import
Pedro Giffuni wrote: On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 22:27:29 +0200, Ingrid von der Mehden ingrid...@gmx-topmail.de wrote: Am 15.08.2011 21:13, schrieb Pedro F. Giffuni: --- On Mon, 8/15/11, Rob Weirapa...@robweir.com wrote: [..] ooo/trunk/core --- all the OOO340 stuff ooo/trunk/l10n -- all the language stuff Please do the directory rearrangement in SVN. I have no objection to moving stuff but if it's possible to match the old history later on, having these changes out of SVN won't help. On 'old' OOo there are currently already two separate hg repositories. No directory move within either of them was proposed. Only a target directory for each repository needs to be selected. I don't see how this should affect any history mapping later. Ah .. It's OK then. (sorry as I'm mostly new to the codebase) Is there some development plan after the intial repo is done or can committers start making massive changes (merging branches, adding ports, etc ..) right away? Cheers, Pedro. The first thing that has to be done is to see if we do a build to make sure that we received all the files. The next step then is to see what can be changed to AL2 license and which files will have to be replaced with AL2 licensed files. In the second step builds will have to be done to make sure that nothing is broken in the process. At least that is my understanding. Andy (non-coder)
Re: [www] Ext / Temp repository stability ( was Extensions and templates site down )
Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 1:06 PM, drewd...@baseanswers.com wrote: [from out of left field] Would members consider transferring ownership of the current repository hosted on the OSUOSL server to a third party, perhaps created specifically to take this over, and then working with them to create the indirect reference site under the AOO project, filtering out un-acceptably licensed items as a way to achieving option #2. This would move the entire repository without needing to locate individual authors. I don't see how we can claim ownership of the content on the OSUOSL server. It was not part of the Oracle SGA, as far as I know. So it is not ours to give to a 3rd party. Considering the fact that the URLs are part of service.openoffice.org and AOOo will be getting the domains as part of the SGA, then it would seem that we own them, at least the name. So the domain could be hosted any where that the PPMC see fit, even at OSUOSL. My 2cents. Andy
Re: [www] Ext / Temp repository stability ( was Extensions and templates site down )
Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Andy Browna...@the-martin-byrd.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 1:06 PM, drewd...@baseanswers.comwrote: [from out of left field] Would members consider transferring ownership of the current repository hosted on the OSUOSL server to a third party, perhaps created specifically to take this over, and then working with them to create the indirect reference site under the AOO project, filtering out un-acceptably licensed items as a way to achieving option #2. This would move the entire repository without needing to locate individual authors. I don't see how we can claim ownership of the content on the OSUOSL server. It was not part of the Oracle SGA, as far as I know. So it is not ours to give to a 3rd party. Considering the fact that the URLs are part of service.openoffice.org and AOOo will be getting the domains as part of the SGA, then it would seem that we own them, at least the name. So the domain could be hosted any where that the PPMC see fit, even at OSUOSL. That logic doesn't follow. Hypothetically there could be legacy OpenOffice.org URL's that contain Lady Gaga rips. That doesn't mean we have ownership of the music. We own the URL. We control what the URL points to. But that doesn't mean we own what the URL points to. Please read all that I wrote, at least the name. So the domain could be hosted any where that the PPMC see fit. I agree that we may not own the content but if a 3rd party wished to host them the PPMC could give its consent to do so and have the URLs point to that IP address. Andy
Re: [www] Ext / Temp repository stability ( was Extensions and templates site down )
Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Andy Browna...@the-martin-byrd.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Andy Browna...@the-martin-byrd.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 1:06 PM, drewd...@baseanswers.com wrote: [from out of left field] Would members consider transferring ownership of the current repository hosted on the OSUOSL server to a third party, perhaps created specifically to take this over, and then working with them to create the indirect reference site under the AOO project, filtering out un-acceptably licensed items as a way to achieving option #2. This would move the entire repository without needing to locate individual authors. I don't see how we can claim ownership of the content on the OSUOSL server. It was not part of the Oracle SGA, as far as I know. So it is not ours to give to a 3rd party. Considering the fact that the URLs are part of service.openoffice.org and AOOo will be getting the domains as part of the SGA, then it would seem that we own them, at least the name. So the domain could be hosted any where that the PPMC see fit, even at OSUOSL. That logic doesn't follow. Hypothetically there could be legacy OpenOffice.org URL's that contain Lady Gaga rips. That doesn't mean we have ownership of the music. We own the URL. We control what the URL points to. But that doesn't mean we own what the URL points to. Please read all that I wrote, at least the name. So the domain could be hosted any where that the PPMC see fit. I agree that we may not own the content but if a 3rd party wished to host them the PPMC could give its consent to do so and have the URLs point to that IP address. OK. Sorry. It sounds like we have a similar understanding then. Our consent is not needed for them to host the extensions, but only for us to point (or redirect) our URL to their site. Correct. Andy
Re: Fundraising
Simon Phipps wrote: I don't follow that reasoning. If (hypothetically) I want to pay for you to go to Bermuda for a vacation, it's between you and me and no business of the Bermuda Tourist Commission. So while I can see the hardware donations will have to end, why is it anything to do with this project if (also hypothetically) Team OOo wants to pay for you to go to ApacheCon in Vancouver where you've got a paper on AOOo accepted, or wants to pay a student to work on AOOo code for the summer? S. Well, it not the first time, but it seems I have misread/misunderstood what was being discussed. It would seem as long as funds are not sent through ASF and does not use 'trademarked' items they can do as they wish. Apologizes to all for confusing the matter. Andy
Re: registration
genevieve Berthault wrote: Hello! I would like to subscribe to this mailing list please. All the best, Genny You will have to subscribe yourself. Go to http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/mailing-lists.html and click the link. Just so that your aware this list is very active and you will be getting a large number of message per day. Thanks for your interest in Apache OpenOffice.org and look forward to your input. Andy ps. Please reply only to the list.
Re: [www] OOo Website Conversion
Thanks for the work, Dave.
Dave Fisher wrote:
Hi -
Progress.
On Aug 8, 2011, at 8:38 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
On 08/08/2011 08:29 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
Hi Kay,
I was able to get HTML wrapped using the Apache CMS last night. I'm not ready
to commit anything yet. I'll summarize where I am and possible next steps.
In order to make progress the key was investigating the source for the {% %}
template tagging. This is found here:
cms/build/lib/Dotiac/DTL/Tag
I changed view.pm to include an html_page procedure
In path.pm I added a pattern for html wrapping.
our @patterns = (
[qr!\.mdtext$!, single_narrative = { template =
single_narrative.html }],
[qr!\.html$!, html_page = { template = html_page.html }],
) ;
ah! good! So this can be parsed on a page by page basis? If so, super!
The template html_page.html looks a lot like single_narrative.html but adds an
override to the content block.
{% extends skeleton.html %}
{% block content %}{% autoescape off %}{{ content }}{% endautoescape %}{%
endblock %}
Now is this:
{% extends skeleton.html %}
{% block content %}{% autoescape off %}{{ content }}{% endautoescape %}{%
endblock %}
{$ endextends $}
We keep a single skeleton which is good.
This is great news! Thanks for your wonderful insights and work!
You are welcome. With a few tweaks things are committed and the process works!
Next steps are
- blocks for javascript and css insertion.
For testing purposes I split the www/index.html into an index.style and
shortened index.html.
I'm not sure if this is best or if the split needs to be done while processing
the view. This is a subject for tomorrow.
Also, this page needs a lot of work on styles to make it look like before. Kenai stores
content in places we may not have access to via the svn repos like branding
- controlling sidenav. The current html_page.html is not very good for the
pages that Carl modified in the download directory.
For all html wrapped content I now turn off the sidenav. For mdtext the sidenav
remains.
- header and footer framework
For tomorrow.
- online cms editing of html
Confirmed the editing of html. There is syntax coloring in the CMS WebGUI.
- scripting of Kenai html into CMS compatible - stripping of headers and
extraction of javascript and css.
To be discussed. It depends on how many sets of special page styles are really
needed. Here is how it currently works:
Here is the script for wrapping the html:
sub html_page {
my %args = @_;
my %styleargs = @_;
my $file = content$args{path};
my $template = $args{template};
$args{breadcrumbs} = breadcrumbs($args{path});
read_text_file $file, \%args;
my $page_path = $file;
$page_path =~ s/\.[^.]+$/.page/;
if (-d $page_path) {
for my $f (grep -f, glob $page_path/*.mdtext) {
$f =~ m!/([^/]+)\.mdtext$! or die Bad filename: $f\n;
$args{$1} = {};
read_text_file $f, $args{$1};
}
}
my $style_path = $file;
$style_path =~ s/\.[^.]+$/.style/;
if (-f $style_path) {
read_text_file $style_path, \%styleargs;
$args{scriptstyle} = $styleargs{content};
}
return Template($template)-render(\%args), html = \%args;
}
Which interacts with templates/skeleton.html
title{% block title %}{{ headers.title }}{% endblock %}/title
{% autoescape off %}{% if scriptstyle %}{{ scriptstyle }}{% else %}{% include
scriptstyle.html%}{% endif %}{% endautoescape %}
So you see there is a default location for css and javascript.
The question is if there should be a set of selectable javascript/css
templates, or if we want to have these files be next to the file they apply to.
If we go to a specific set of templates method then we would change to:
{% autoescape off %}{% if scriptstyle %}{% include scriptstyle %}{% else %}{% include
scriptstyle.html%}{% endif %}{% endautoescape %}
Regards,
Dave
Regards,
Dave
On Aug 7, 2011, at 8:35 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
On 08/06/2011 09:03 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
On Aug 4, 2011, at 12:16 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
I just wanted to report that this script worked just fine as near
as I can tell.
Great. When I did the work for the www and download project I used a
different script which is still a stub as there was a hand editing
step to correct inconsistent line endings.
The post about the script has shown up in several places, but
placing it as its own subject seemed appropriate.
yes...it got buried! :)
Now back to investigating headers/footers.
I added a page to the wiki with some of my thoughts today about
headers and footers for the websites including the MediaWiki and User
Forums.
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Website+Template
good! this needs regular updating as we iron out issues...I'll take a look
I am going to try a new template/skeleton.html tomorrow.
Regards, Dave
OK, I'm going to try to start
Re: An example of what's wrong up with the wiki
Joe Schaefer wrote: All: stop talking on this thread. This juvenile conversation needs to end, and we need to get back to making progress on both the service migration and the source code repository. Re service migration: the people who currently admin the existing wiki would be welcome to continue in that role at the ASF. Anyone who has enough common sense to remove stupid crap on the wiki would be welcome to help admin one at the ASF. No it's not fun being called out for taking obviously justified action, and that situation won't change at the ASF other than the fact that your peers in infra will likely support you. Re source code repository: apparently noone on the face of the Earth has the requisite skillset to migrate the history back to svn. Fortunately that's not a fatal situation as you can simply migrate the tip to svn now and migrate everything back to git in a year or so once it's made available to incubating projects (or graduate and it'll probably be available by that time). Let's end this thread and move on to the issues I've mentioned. Rational discussions about the ICLA policy and its impact on releasable artifacts can be handled separately. - Original Message - From: Rob Weirapa...@robweir.com To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Cc: Sent: Sunday, August 7, 2011 6:04 PM Subject: Re: An example of what's wrong up with the wiki On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Larry Gusaaslarry.gus...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011/08/07 11:16 AM Rob Weir wrote: I think we need to do far better than what was just done, when a non-project member, one who just recently announced that they were leaving the project, deleted a contribution from a committer, and then banned the committer from the wiki. That shows multiple levels of problems, security and procedural. The wiki is not part of this project. Apache has no control over that wiki yet. It is still under Oracle. If you've been following the list discussions, in another thread, you should know that the wiki is already up, in a VM, on Apache hardware. Switching over to that as the live version will not be long. It certainly is not too early to discuss how we want it to work at Apache. This should be done with eyes wide open, recognizing what workdc well with the current wiki, but also acknowledging what didn't work so well Your being a committer has nothing to do with the current wiki. You are just being ingenious to reinforce your anti user community wiki bias. Like most things, this is a question of balance more than of absolutes. The balance for a community-led open source project under a permissive license that allows downstream consumers to customize and release their own commercial derivative applications will likely be different than the ideal balance for a corporate-led open source project under a copyleft license designed to discourage commercial derivatives.It is important to acknowledge this difference, and then appreciate the what these differences mean for the project.. A key part of being friendly for commercial consumers is that we treat the license questions far more rigorously than the lax approach taken previously. If this is seen as anti-community then we need to do a better job explaining the reasons for this. Larry -- +1
Re: The VM for the Wiki is online
Raphael Bircher wrote: Hi at all Gav, the Admin from the ASF has setup the VM for the MediaWiki. It's a Ubuntu 10.4.3 LTS VM. At the Moment Gav and I has admin access to this machine. First we have to install all the needed software, Then we will make a test migration with a older Dump, then we can make testings and finaly the final migration. Greetings Raphael Great news. Andy
Re: How to handle the downloads?
Marcus (OOo) wrote: I've created a little diagram how I think the download has to work: http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/docs/download_process.png As it seems we cannot go on like we did with OOo the JS magic has to change a bit, how to recognize the language, OS and country to assemble the nearest mirror server + file name to get the download URL. Marcus Marcus, One thing I would like to ask. That the user _not_ be offered a file that does not exist. We both saw that with the OOo system to many times. From non-existent with JRE plus language to versions for Blackberry. Andy
Re: How to handle the downloads?
Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 08/03/2011 04:54 PM, schrieb Andy Brown: Marcus (OOo) wrote: I've created a little diagram how I think the download has to work: http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/docs/download_process.png As it seems we cannot go on like we did with OOo the JS magic has to change a bit, how to recognize the language, OS and country to assemble the nearest mirror server + file name to get the download URL. Marcus Marcus, One thing I would like to ask. That the user _not_ be offered a file that does not exist. We both saw that with the OOo system to many times. From non-existent with JRE plus language to versions for Blackberry. Andy For the case of an unavailable mirror I've added the File exists on mirror? box. Here the non-exisiting URL should be catched and exchanged with a working one. But for the special things like OOo on Blackberry we need to catch such kind of impossibilities earlier. Maybe right after the user agent was read and it's clear if it's for Windows, Linux, Mac, Solaris or indeed something different. Thanks for the hint. Marcus Just trying to prevent known problems from happening again. Andy
Re: Refactoring the brand: Apache ooo + OpenOffice.org? (was re:OpenOffice.org branding)
Dennis, We are working on some ideas only. There are questions on how to deal with the current OOo wiki and move it to Apache servers. The concern is that there will be a lose of active users if there is a big change in the way edits are made, i.e. requiring an iCLA. At this point we do not have any hard numbers on way maybe lost and trying to see if we can get those users involved to see what path we need to take. HTH Andy Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: Let's slow down here. I don't recognize any alignment on what it is we think we are asking for (or attempting to do). This is going way over the edge past JFDI and/or lazy consensus. -Original Message- From: Andy Brown [mailto:a...@the-martin-byrd.net] Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 09:00 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Refactoring the brand: Apache ooo + OpenOffice.org? (was re:OpenOffice.org branding) Terry, Where would be the best place on the wiki to place a notice directing users to connect here or at least see if they would be willing/able to send in an iCLA? Andy
Re: Refactoring the brand: Apache ooo + OpenOffice.org? (was re:OpenOffice.org branding)
Rob Weir wrote: On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Andy Browna...@the-martin-byrd.net wrote: If you talking the wiki, instead of requiring an ICLA as a person has to create an account, why not make it part of that process that All submitted contributions are under AL2 license. Would that not be sufficient? The IPMC guidance, via the Podling Guide that they have published [1] is: Podlings may use a wiki to create documentation (including the website) providing that follow the guidelines. In particular, care must be taken to ensure that access to the wiki used to create documentation is restricted to only those with filed CLAs. The PPMC MUST review all changes and ensure that trust is not abused. I personally like your idea of having a click-through-license grant on the wiki itself, either as part of account creation or on the edit page itself. But if we did that, I'd suggest some related issues to address: 1) We shouldn't just ignore IPMC guidance. There may be some allowance for variation in procedures, but that should not be assumed. If we want to do something differently, then we need to write up that proposal, get consensus here among PPMC members, and then take it to the IPMC and probably Apache Legal Affairs (to review whatever language we use). I'd gladly support that. I work on this and see what I can come up with. I am no expert on this so it will be a very rough draft, but something that I fell we will need to do. We are much different that the normal Apache project so hopefully be granted some working room. I will start a new thread as this one is getting to deep to manage. 2) We need a credible security mechanism for the wiki. Today, for example, it is not required for a user to give their real name (the field is optional). And the password can be as little as 1 character. (Yup, I just created an account with password=x). With 15,000 zombie accounts, lack of real names and the ability for users to create trivially crackable accounts, it would be hard to really identify a change to a particular person. I do not believe I have seen anyone state that there were not problems with the current setup and improvements could not be made. This is one area that we really need to look at and fix. [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/sites.html 2) How do we ensure that the documentation is under PPMC oversight and remains high quality? I received a daily report of all changes to the wiki, there is also the option for as done report. It would only take a few minutes to do a quick review of those changes, an revert them if needed. OK. Maybe that report could be directed to the ooo-commits list as well? I am sure that is a possibility but if all that use the committers that use the wiki get the reports then we should have that covered without adding to the ooo-commit list. I'm open to discussions of various technical and procedural means to achieve these goals. But I am adamant in achieving them one way or another. Would the above listed work? I think that takes us in the right direction. Thanks. I am only trying to help all of us to keep a great product where it belongs. Andy
Re: Refactoring the brand: Apache ooo + OpenOffice.org? (was re:OpenOffice.org branding)
Rob Weir wrote: I poked around and found this page: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Special:Statistics Good find. This lists some additional roles (with counts) Administrators (26) Bureaucrats (4) Editors (20) Reviewers (5) Those are in addition to 35,020 User accounts. Curiously, it reports only 5 of the 35,020 users as having been active in the past 7 days. Personally I am surprised there have been any edits since the announcement of transferring to Apache, let a lone in the last week. Shows that someone is still interested. I would like to find out what as edited. How we authorize people for these roles and what qualifications are required for these roles is an important question. There are a similar set of questions we should ask about the support forums, what the roles are and how PPMC oversight maps to them. I would think that the PPMC and Committers would be the logical choice. The administration is still our responsibility. Currently we have members that are listed in admin roles for the wiki and for the forums. Andy
Re: OOo Trademark
Danese Cooper wrote: Well, after a policy is decided on, I'd suggest we publish it along with a request for permission link that goes to a special list in this PPMC of people willing to moderate the OOo trademark policy. That's how OSI, Mozilla, Wikimedia and a few other projects I can think about do it. One nice to have is pre-canned logo usage for the most common and simplest cases (like...I want to print a tee-shirt for my conference, or I want to reference your project in my story (from journalists)) I would be willing to serve on that list. D As will I. Andy
Re: OOo Trademark
Shane Curcuru wrote: Thanks for the info. Note that it would be helpful if people interested in working with trademarks read the Apache policies, as well as our growing list of FAQs: http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/ http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/ Part of my strategy is to attempt to cover as many of the basic kinds of uses with generic documentation, and to try to limit the number of explicit agreements or specific grants that we give to third parties. I.e. if we can clearly state in a policy that using our marks in manner X is generally permissible, without having to fillin a webform or email for written permission, it makes our life much, much simpler. There are plenty of uses of trademarks that don't require any permissions and are not infringing - otherwise, how could I order a Coke (or a Pepsi) to drink? For things like journalists writing an article about Apache products, or individuals with personal blogs who just want to link to the download page for a product - I'd like to be able to point to a policy or FAQ that notes if they do it appropriately, no explicit permission is required. Obviously with the userbase and reach of OpenOffice.org, we need to consider how to manage the kinds of requests and the load of requests going forward, now that we're becoming Apache OpenOffice. - Shane When I first got started with the Distribution project at OOo this is the way it worked. It was only a few months ago that Oracle changed the policy. I would prefer the above as well. Andy
Re: Before Symphony contribution
imacat wrote: Dear all, I welcome the contribution from the Symphony team. But before the Symphony contribution, shouldn't it be the first task to move the source onto Apache SVN or something, instead of the current mercurial hg? Not only IBM would like to contribute back to OpenOffice.org, but many of us here would like to do so, too. Having a new public SVN enables everyone here to be able to participate. And this should not be IBM OpenOffice.org, but Apache OpenOffice.org. (I already heard people talking so.) Sorry to be blunt. ^^; I happen to agree. Andy
Re: A first try to remove some copyleft components from the build
David McKay wrote: On 18/07/11 20:50, Andy Brown wrote: Mathias Bauer wrote: On 18.07.2011 20:21, Mathias Bauer wrote: 1) xpdf (GPL'd) is a run dependency, this is linux/unix specific. PDFBox may be a replacement. This component is used for the pdf import extension, not for OOo itself. The pdf import extension is not built by default, there is a configure switch to enable it in the build. In that case xpdf would be required. I think that this already fulfils the legal requirements that building lgpl code must be opt-in. So as far as I can see, this is not a to do. Giving it one more thought: it would be still a to do if we wanted to have a pdf import extension released by Apache. So perhaps a to do with minor priority. Regards, Mathias If we do include the pdf import extension I would like to see it rewritten to do a better job of importing. I have seen to many post in the forums about the way that it works. My suggestion would be to drop it completely. Andy A lot of the issues I see on the forum regarding the PDF extension are to do with expectation. People seem to think this extension is going to give them a full-blown PDF editor with the capabilities of the Adobe tools. When they discover it is for tiny corrections and typo fixes they feel let down. That's not to say there aren't any bugs in it, there may well be. But I don;t think the PDF extension was positioned or described sufficiently to provide users with the correct expectations. Dave. I agree with you that it is the expectations that cause the real problem. For me it is a waste as it does not do as most people expect. An OCR import would be a better option, if we can find one. Andy
Re: OCR (was Re: A first try to remove some copyleft components from the build)
Pedro F. Giffuni wrote: FWIW; --- On Mon, 7/18/11, Andy Brown wrote: ... I agree with you that it is the expectations that cause the real problem. For me it is a waste as it does not do as most people expect. An OCR import would be a better option, if we can find one. I haven't looked at this in a while, but ... http://code.google.com/p/tesseract-ocr/ cheers, Pedro. Thanks. It does look interesting from a quick glance. Bookmarked for reference. Andy
Re: A first try to remove some copyleft components from the build
Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 07/18/2011 10:04 PM, schrieb David McKay: On 18/07/11 20:50, Andy Brown wrote: Mathias Bauer wrote: On 18.07.2011 20:21, Mathias Bauer wrote: 1) xpdf (GPL'd) is a run dependency, this is linux/unix specific. PDFBox may be a replacement. This component is used for the pdf import extension, not for OOo itself. The pdf import extension is not built by default, there is a configure switch to enable it in the build. In that case xpdf would be required. I think that this already fulfils the legal requirements that building lgpl code must be opt-in. So as far as I can see, this is not a to do. Giving it one more thought: it would be still a to do if we wanted to have a pdf import extension released by Apache. So perhaps a to do with minor priority. Regards, Mathias If we do include the pdf import extension I would like to see it rewritten to do a better job of importing. I have seen to many post in the forums about the way that it works. My suggestion would be to drop it completely. Andy A lot of the issues I see on the forum regarding the PDF extension are to do with expectation. People seem to think this extension is going to give them a full-blown PDF editor with the capabilities of the Adobe tools. When they discover it is for tiny corrections and typo fixes they feel let down. That's not to say there aren't any bugs in it, there may well be. But I don;t think the PDF extension was positioned or described sufficiently to provide users with the correct expectations. The intension was to show what is possible. On the extension website is a note that the Beta status was left due to the positive notes we got about the extension. But this is no promiss that its quality is like the import filter for the documents formats for MS Word Co. The solution is not to remove the extension but to improve it's work. Marcus If it can be improved then it maybe worth the effort. I still think an OCR engine would do the work. Andy
Re: 2011-07-15 PPMC Status: Bringing Initial Committers On-Board
Wolf Halton wrote: What do I have to do to get in the PPMC? -Wolf Halton Your listed as one but not joined the mailing list yet. See http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html . Your name and id are there. You should have received an email with the link to join the ooo-private list. Link will follow. Andy
Re: Commiters list
eric b wrote: I meant, when we compare : http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html (1) with http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenOfficeProposal (2) We retrieve people in (1) who did not sign the ICLA as stated in (1). But maybe the list on the wiki is not up to date ... If you will compare http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html with http://people.apache.org/committer-index.html you will find that all the committers on the first list are listed on the second list. All have submitted ICLAs and had an Apache ID and password issued by root@. You should read the ICLA carefully before you decide that you can't or don't want to sign it. I did. But I thought we could contribute with patches without sign it. Anyone can submit patches but only committers can apply those patches. Simply put, it's not about copyright, just about IP clearance and licensing. Both are important aspects of every software project. It's understandable that the ASF does not accept contributions where it is unclear if the contributor has the necessary rights for the contributed code. Yes, sure. IWe got students who would like to directly contribute to OpenOffice.org, and I'll forward the info. To directly contribute a person has to be a committer, which at this point means indirect submissions. Once they prove themselves they can be invited to be a full committer but then they have to have the ICLA on file. HTH Andy
Re: Commiters list and the students
Dave Fisher wrote: Sorry, but this is a better thread: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/%3CBANLkTi=gBok7Q0bCfVzwxh+FZTw-o=a...@mail.gmail.com%3E I agree Dave. It was interesting watching this unfold and see how things work. I stayed connected to the incubator-general list and glad I did. Andy
Re: Extensions and templates site down
Pedro Giffuni wrote: On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 22:43:10 +0100, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote: ... As it happens I'd already started exploring this one with the Document Is the intent to host all of the extensions currently at the OOo site? Or a subset? Or a different set? They host only extensions that have open source licenses, so the ones at the OOo site that have proprietary licenses are not hosted. While this is understandable, it is not good enough. We will have to find an alternative repository and link to it from Apache's website. This is something that can wait though. Pedro This is being worked on at this time. Andy
Re: OpenOffice.org (was Re: Ooo blog)
Kay Schenk wrote: On 07/11/2011 04:06 AM, Graham Lauder wrote: On Sat, 2011-07-09 at 11:12 +0100, David McKay wrote: snip On 09/07/11 07:58, eric b wrote: The .org is and was always essential to the community. Why? Out of the folk on the OOo forum who expressed an opinion to me, no one liked it. It was a perpetual reminder that the product couldn't be called what they really wanted it to be called: OpenOffice. I greatly prefer Apache OpenOffice to Apache OpenOffice.org. Dave. As Peter Junge has stated, this discussion has a repetitive deja vu feel about it. There are number of most excellent things about the name openoffice.org, none of which relate to people who are involved in the community and this includes the people at OOoForum, they don't need to. It does however have beneficial effects for the New User or New Client which of course the Marketing project thinks of constantly. It tells this New Client, who may not be at all familiar with, or even heard the name, a number of things. It tells them that it is open, and so it starts to introduce the concept of open source or reinforces the idea for someone who is looking for Open Source Solutions. It tells them that it is an office type application and it tells them that it is a web based project with the .org on the end and at the same time gives them the web address. For the web savvy user, the .org tells them that there is a noncommercial organisation in place, a community in other words. It is a webaddress, which is important in a product whose entire distribution of product and collateral is webbased. Not openoffice.com, not open-office.com, which people would more likely put into an address bar, but OpenOffice.org, clear, precise, no confusion, put OpenOffice.org in your address bar or google and the new user will get to where they need to go. The name is not about what the community feels comfortable with. It is however about branding Branding needs continuity Branding is client focussed. YES! The name Open Office or OpenOffice is not, in fact, branded in the same way that OpenOffice.org is. I really feel is it critical at this time to let the brand/product stand a OpenOffice.org so as to maintain our current history and recognition worldwide. Graham, you area absolutely dead on! +1 The brand is 14 characters strung together in a very recognisable format, Upper case Os in OpenOffice with dot and lower case o on org. OpenOffice.org. In text on a page of typeface it is recognisable without bugs like the gulls. The diminutive in the format OOo is as recognisable. Google it sometime. The OOo community has always been well known for the strength of it's marketing. Diluting the brand by dropping the .org or tacking Apache (which has even lower brand recognition in our target market) on the end is, from a marketing POV, close to suicidal. Where marketing requires brand development with zero budget, it makes the marketers job very difficult because changing the name throws away 10 years of marketing collateral. It needs to be left as is. If the Apache rules say that Apache has to be appended, then the rule needs changing. I'd be happy to dump the gulls and add the feather as a bug. I'd be happy to add by apache as a tagline. But OpenOffice.org is the name of the software, the website and the community, it should remain unsullied and unaltered. Unless of course someone can come up with several hundred thousand for a marketing budget to launch a new global brand. Cheers GL
Re: Blog Created
Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: Dang! Well, I just jumped right in. So, we want the blog to be the official voice of the project in some way? Is that a requirement? Is that what we want? I thought that is what web sites are for. Blogs have a different kind of voice in my experience. I have lots of outlets for blogging, and I could always create an Apache-oriented RSS feed for aggregation, although probably not, since it doesn't seem like that much fun. Ah well, - Dennis I would not say official but at least semi-official in that it would show, in a faster way, what we are doing and how things are going with the project. I think what you did was a good indication of the way it should go. That is my personal opinion and I my be off base here. Andy
Re: ooo blog (was: RE: ooo-dev list subscriber stats?)
Gavin McDonald wrote: -Original Message- From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org] Sent: Saturday, 9 July 2011 6:06 AM To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: RE: ooo-dev list subscriber stats? +1: - introduce an AOOo blog so that the Community can follow our progress. Ok, so nobody has approached Infra yet, I'll be proactive and create it, then we need a list of people who will be admins and those that will be publishers. Let's start with the name of blog, unlike other things, the blog name should be permanent and reflect the name that the project will have upon graduation to a TLP. (Migrating/renaming blogs is a royal pita so we don't do it.) Apache openoffice.org should be the name of the Blog ? Gav... +1, sounds more than reasonable to me. Andy
Re: ooo blog
Dave Fisher wrote: Yes. When I volunteer to admin, but not publish, I am saying that I am not going to be a blogger (if I can avoid it.) I would only correct obvious errors and omissions. There should be at least one other admin as well. I will offer to assist Dave with the admin part. I am not a blogger as well, if that makes any difference. Andy
Re: OOO and LibreOffice.
Simon Phipps wrote: It's certainly worth asking, although I believe their current LGPLv3+MPL policy is more a suggestion than a requirement so it would ultimately be up to each contributor. Perhaps you could ask on the steering-discuss list[1]? S. [1] http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ As each developer retains ownership of their code it maybe better to ask on the developers list [1]. The SC has no control over the devs. [1] libreoff...@lists.freedesktop.org Andy
Re: How do I get an Apache ID for OOo?
Ted Rolle, Jr. wrote: I'd like to participate in the OOo project. I'm a programmer and documentation editor. Ted A person does not request an id. Anyone can contribute to OOo by sending patches to code or the web sites to this list. When the committers see the patches they include them in the proper location. After review of the contributions the PPMC/Committers have the option to invite the person to be a committer. If the person accepts the invitation they are then allowed to select the user id and then make direct commits to the code/web site. The exception to the id requirement is on the ooousers wiki page where anyone can sign up and make additions or changes. HTH Andy
Re: Is the OOo Source on the Apache SVN Now?
imacat wrote: Dear all, I'm wondering, is the OOo source on the Apache svn now? If not, will it be moved onto the Apache svn? I would like to check some of the old issues reported from our local community. I guess working on the hg source is not a good idea. The actual source code is not available yet, there is still work being done to bring it in. You can see when it is in by keeping an eye on the source tree at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/ooo/ . I am sure that there will be an announcement here when it is ready to work with. It might not be a bad idea to pull the hg source for reference. Andy
Re: Some more strange files in the OOo code
Greg Stein wrote: On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 14:27, Pedro F. Giffuni giffu...@tutopia.com wrote: ... I think the first Apache release it will be a good opportunity to do all the big API/ABI changes, including this. I think we should also use lucene 3.2, etc.. For my own education... what API we talking about here? Does OOo have some kind of published API for third parties to build on top of OOo? Or we we talking about subcomponents of OOo (like ODF handling) that third parties might use in their tools? Personally, I do agree that this is a great opportunity to make the necessary (and wanted) changes. Cheers, -g Sure does, http://api.openoffice.org/ . That is what allows all those extensions to work. Andy
Re: Scope of Apache license: what needs to be covered?
Rob Weir wrote: On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Alexandro Colorado j...@openoffice.org wrote: Sorry for jumping in but it seems there is an missunderstading between Rob and the ODFAuthor project. I think the ODFAuthor was in the position of many quasi-independent groups like the OOo NGOs and others. It is possible that I an confused, but I think I am mainly concerned about fragmenting the project into many quasi-independent groups. I'm not absolutist in this, but I can see clear risks. Let me give you an extreme example. Suppose we decided to stop writing word processor text alignment code, Instead we relied on group A, which owned and developed left alignment code, group B which did all the center alignment work and group C did the right alignment code. (OK, the example is ridiculous technically, but bear with me please) Because, in this fanciful example, the Apache project had other groups own essential portions of the project, this means that anyone who tries to put together an actual product based on Apache OOo would need to access the three alignment libraries produced by groups A, B and C. This is true whether one was making an open source release, or a proprietary release. Whoever tries to release a version of OOo binaries, if they wished to have a viable product (from a user perspective) would need to negotiate with groups A, B and C, in terms of functionality, schedule, support, localization support, etc., as well as license. Compare that to a situation where the core alignment code is all in the Apache OpenOffice project, under the Apache 2.0 license. That gives downstream users of our releases, open source and commercial, the maximum flexibility to repackage the release. They can add code, subtract code, do whatever they want. But we don't send them to track down dozens of 3rd party dependencies owned by other organizations. Another example, with translations. Suppose the translation files for OOo were owned by a bunch of different groups and were not part of the Apache project, under the Apache license. Then, if someone wanted to take the AOOo sources and make a special version, say a Portable Apps version, or a special educational version, or whatever, then they would need to negotiate access with external groups for their translation files. I think we need to be careful about this kind of fragmentation since they prevent downstream consumers of our releases from making effective use of our releases. It hurts the downstream ecosystem. I think we should have a clear idea of what the essential, core OpenOffice product is, and ensure that those parts of it are developed in the AOOo project, under the Apache 2.0 license, and under PMC oversight. Of course, there may be parts that are not essential, core release components, and those could be done anywhere. In fact, we should encourage extensions, additional documentation, plugins, etc., as part of the overall eco system. That is a good thing. But we need to have a clear idea of what the core is as well, and ensure that the core is developed in one place. So we start up a subproject to deal with user documentation and start from scratch. Trying to build up a group of people that have no interest in learning a new, less efficient, process. Or have infra build a system that works for the contributors. Andy
Re: Scope of Apache license: what needs to be covered?
Jean Hollis Weber wrote: On Tue, 2011-06-28 at 19:22 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: It might help to be explicit about what you want to do with the user guides. Are you: 1) Looking to have a link from the Apache OOo web site to the user guides? 2) Having the publication form of the user guides hosted by the Apache OOo website? 3) Periodically contributing the user guides to Apache OOo for inclusion in a release? 1) and/or 2) Yes, if AOOo in interested in either of those options. Or hosted (as ODT/PDF) on the wiki, with links to the wiki from the website. We would be happy with any of those arrangements. 3) No. I do not envision user guides being included in a release. They never have been, and I think it would be impractical because they are never completed in time for inclusion in a release. And repeating from another note from me, just to keep the info together: We would welcome participation by any and all members of AOOo, and oversight and approval by the AOOo (P)PMC at any stage, as long as we don't have to use SVN or other unfamiliar tools during the document production process. We just want to continue using our own website and production methods. --Jean Agreed. Andy
Re: Scope of Apache license: what needs to be covered?
Rob Weir wrote: On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Jean Hollis Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, 2011-06-28 at 20:44 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 8:28 PM, Jean Hollis Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, 2011-06-28 at 19:22 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: It might help to be explicit about what you want to do with the user guides. Are you: 1) Looking to have a link from the Apache OOo web site to the user guides? 2) Having the publication form of the user guides hosted by the Apache OOo website? 3) Periodically contributing the user guides to Apache OOo for inclusion in a release? 1) and/or 2) Yes, if AOOo in interested in either of those options. Or hosted (as ODT/PDF) on the wiki, with links to the wiki from the website. We would be happy with any of those arrangements. Did you see how Apache Subversion was handling its user guide? http://subversion.apache.org/ (see in the side panel on left) That might be a good model for how an external user guide project can relate to an Apache project. This looks more like option #1 above. I think that is a good approach and I like it. If you take that approach then I don't think there is any decision that we need to take now, at least not in the Apache project. But when we have an end-user facing web portal hosted by Apache (the future home of http://www.openoffice.org) then we'll want to have a discussion on how we link to your user guide. One other thing. I think the Apache trademark policy is also relevant here: http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/ You probably will want to review that and see if you would need any approvals from Apache for the trademarks and/or logos that you use in the user guide. Speaking of approvals, the OOo logo on the web pages. I though that we were in the process of receiving the trademarks from Oracle. Is this still the case? If so did they grant us use of the trademark? Andy
Re: Source format for user guides
Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 9:17 PM, Andy Brown a...@the-martin-byrd.net wrote: Rob Weir wrote: I like the idea of using ODF, for the reasons you state. I assuming this implies ODF files in the SVN repository. If so, we're going to have three pain points: 1) Since ODF is not a text format, diff's are not possible with the default SVN tools. Yes, we can do change tracking inside of the document, but it is harder to monitor changes to an ODF document in the repository by looking at commit messages. 2) How do non-committer contributors submit user guide patches and how are they reviewed and applied? 3) Similar to #2, how do we merge changes if multiple committers modify the same file? None of these are killers. We could reduce the the impact of #3 if we used fine-grained ODF documents. So instead of 100 page documents, have ten ten-page documents that could be merged for publication. That way we get fewer conflicts. There are things we could do about #1. SVN allows an external diff program. We could write one, perhaps using the ODF Toolkit, that extracts text and diffs it. Similarly, we could write an ODF patch utility. Yes, this is extra work, but it is useful and would benefit more than just OOo. -Rob Hi Rob, I agree with Jean. The manuals can be uploaded or linked to the wiki page. There is no need to reinvent a system that works as well as the ODFAuthors does. Forcing people to lean a new system that they have no interest in will only drive contributors away. Andy Can you clarify, please? Is the intent to make ODFAuthors be part of the Apache OpenOffice project, e.g. run on Apache servers with PMC-elected committers having write access, other contributing authors submitting patches before being eventually voted in as committers, all working in the Apache project lists, transparently, with all work under the Apache license, with the PMC setting overall direction and approving releases? Is that the idea? If so, this would be great. -Rob That is not the suggestion at all. Leave what works alone. A simple link on the ooouser wiki to the ODFAuthors site would be all that is needed. If a change in license is required to upload the manuals to the wiki then, Jean will have to say how easy or hard the license will be to change to AL2. If it is moved to ASF servers then we will lose some of those that are hard a work on the manuals by adding a new layer to work through. I am having a hard time figuring out svn and I have a personal reason to learn. Do not add that layer to what ODFAuthors already do. Their process is simple: 1: The author uploads a draft the document. 2: Author places note in the mailing list. 3: One of the copy editors downloads and notes in the list. 4: Copy editor makes corrections and or additions as needed. If questions arise then a question is placed back on the list. 5: Once done the editing is done a new copy is loaded to the site. 6: The author is pinged in the mailing list. 7: steps two to six are repeated to the manual is ready for publishing. If this is moved to svn then there is a lot more to learn and work for the copy editors. It is not needed nor wanted. Andy
Re: migration stuff, wiki page
Raphael Bircher wrote: Hi at all For preparation of the big migration we plane to make same thing similar as http://kenai.com/projects/ooo-migration/pages/Home unfortunaly we have three space for it atm. We should reduce them to one. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Infrastructure I think, the developer wiki is not the ideal place for it. OOODEV request a singed ICLA. But at the migration we have to collaborate with people who don't have a singed ICLA e.g. like Kenai Admins from Oracle. So IMHO it's better to use the USER wiki for it. At the User Wiki we have two top sits: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Site-PPMC-Plan and https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Transition+Planning Speaking for myself, this seem to be the logical location. Can sameone explain the difference between the two site. For my point of view we should concentrate the efforts to one top page and his subpages. What do you think about. Greetings Raphael Andy
Re: Files for wiki/web links
Wolf Halton wrote: Why not have it be an actual wiki page with option to download pdf? I hate odds when I am reading sites from the droid. :-) I am willing to give it a try if someone can point me to instructions on what to do. Excuse my lack of knowledge, but what is odds? Andy
Re: Files for wiki/web links
Dave Fisher wrote: On Jun 24, 2011, at 6:48 AM, Andy Brown wrote: Wolf Halton wrote: Why not have it be an actual wiki page with option to download pdf? I hate odds when I am reading sites from the droid. :-) I am willing to give it a try if someone can point me to instructions on what to do. It is possible to do a PDF export of some or all of the Wiki Space. In the Browse menu choose Advanced. On the Advanced page there is a PDF Export action, click that and select which pages you want from the space. I just did a quick setup on the PDF Layout. This is an Admin function and is restricted to only a couple of us. If someone wants to volunteer to help admin the Wikis I am happy. Let me know. Some relevant docs are: http://confluence.atlassian.com/display/CONF34/Advanced+PDF+Stylesheet+Customisations http://confluence.atlassian.com/display/CONF34/Editing+the+PDF+Stylesheet Regards, Dave Thanks for the links. Andy
Re: Contributors versus Committers versus PMC members - AND USERS
Rob Weir wrote: Does anyone see a difference other than the obvious difference of technology, between the OOo user list and the forums? Are they being used for different kinds of things? Or are they just different ways of doing the same things? -Rob There is a big difference from the users stand point. If you want to see how hot this topic can get go to [1] and search for forum . As an individual I prefer mailing list but I understand why some prefer forums. For those that do not have high speed connections forums are a bandwidth hog. The disadvantage to a mailing list is most of the time you have to be subscribed or you may miss replies to your question and makes it hard to follow up as needed. [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@documentfoundation.org/ For my part we need and can support both. Andy
Re: Contributors versus Committers versus PMC members - AND USERS
Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Andy Brown a...@the-martin-byrd.net wrote: There is a big difference from the users stand point. If you want to see how hot this topic can get go to [1] and search for forum . As an individual I prefer mailing list but I understand why some prefer forums. For those that do not have high speed connections forums are a bandwidth hog. The disadvantage to a mailing list is most of the time you have to be subscribed or you may miss replies to your question and makes it hard to follow up as needed. [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@documentfoundation.org/ For my part we need and can support both. But do we need a separate thing for both of them? Or would a single 'place' that supported both forms of access be better? For example, a forum that allowed mail subscription globally, or per thread? Or a mailing list with an RSS feed? There are advantages to having a singe store of information. I agree that having a single point to store questions and answers would be ideal. I do not know enough about the technology to use or suggest RSS or how they could be combined. From my point of view the technology used is to different. So are they just used for the same things, but accessed differently? Or have they diverged to separate, perhaps partially overlapping but still sufficiently distinct different user communities who have different styles, different tones, different focuses, etc.? Being on both the mailing list and forum, you see some of the same questions and cross references one to the other. The do serve the same purpose but accessed differently. But it is that access that is important to the end user. Andy
Re: SGA and a grant
Kazunari Hirano wrote: Hi all, I am translating http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenOfficeProposal into Japanese. :) I have just come up to Initial Source. -- Initial Source The initial source will consist of a collection of OpenOffice.org files as specified in Oracle's submitted SGA. During incubation, we will seek a grant to the following additional items: MySQL Connector module default images ChildWorkSpaces (CWS) -- I have some questions. 1. What is SGA? Is it System Global Area? 2. Can we see SGA? 3. Does the statement above mean that MySQL Connector module, default images and CWSes are not specified in the SGA? It would seem from the proposal and the discussions before the approval that this is correct. A request is being worked on for these and other files that were not in the original grant. Andy
Re: Sending Wiki Notifications to Mailing Lists
Dave Fisher wrote: In light of this conversation I am changing the proposal to this: For both the Community Forum (OOOUSER) and the Developer Forum (OOODEV) I now propose sending an email with a daily digest to ooo-commits@incubator.a.o. This way those who want to oversee changes can do so, and in the same place where svn change emails go. (FYI -a website change sends three emails to that list.) For those who want to see recent changes in confluence, this is possible. Here is how: (1) Go to the Dashboard. (2) On the left find Spaces: and click on the Team tab. (3) On the View Spaces for Team pop-up menu select ooo Recent changes for both Wikis appear on the right - a few, not 100. For those who want to get their own notifications - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/users/viewmyemailsettings.action Since the proposal has changed I will wait an additional 36 hours (for a total of 72) to see if Consensus is achieved. Regards, Dave I feel that this is the best idea. It will keep from flooding this list with information that not all are interested in. Andy
Files for wiki/web links
Hi All, I am working on a how to be put on the User wiki site and have a question on the license wording, how much is required? Would This document is released under AL2 license. be proper? Or do I need to copy the entire license? TIA Andy
Re: Files for wiki/web links
Shane, Thanks for the reply. I do not think I made myself clear. The document I am working on is not part of a program source file. It is to be a how-to document that would be upload so that it can be read on the wiki. The file will be in PDF format and readable online or download for local reference. It is all one file, so do I need to include the copyright notice? Thanks again. Andy Shane Curcuru wrote: We've got a FAQ for that! http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html Note that this page is the official policy for Apache software products, and is required in the future before Apache OpenOffice can graduate from the Incubator. See also the What scripts are available to update existing source headers? FAQ on that page; there are some scripts to automate checking license headers that might be useful. Note that other organizations or individuals may use the Apache license as well, and may apply it in their own way(s), so you may have seen other styles of NOTICES and the like elsewhere. Separately, there is an Apache RAT (Release Audit Tool) podling: http://incubator.apache.org/rat/ - Shane On 6/23/2011 8:09 PM, Andy Brown wrote: Hi All, I am working on a how to be put on the User wiki site and have a question on the license wording, how much is required? Would This document is released under AL2 license. be proper? Or do I need to copy the entire license? TIA Andy
Re: Files for wiki/web links
Hi again, Shane. I think I see now. Any thing shown on a web page or not part of the program does not need the license or copyright notice. If it is included with the software then it is required. Andy Shane Curcuru wrote: We've got a FAQ for that! http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html Note that this page is the official policy for Apache software products, and is required in the future before Apache OpenOffice can graduate from the Incubator. See also the What scripts are available to update existing source headers? FAQ on that page; there are some scripts to automate checking license headers that might be useful. Note that other organizations or individuals may use the Apache license as well, and may apply it in their own way(s), so you may have seen other styles of NOTICES and the like elsewhere. Separately, there is an Apache RAT (Release Audit Tool) podling: http://incubator.apache.org/rat/ - Shane On 6/23/2011 8:09 PM, Andy Brown wrote: Hi All, I am working on a how to be put on the User wiki site and have a question on the license wording, how much is required? Would This document is released under AL2 license. be proper? Or do I need to copy the entire license? TIA Andy
Re: Sending Wiki Notifications to Mailing Lists
Pedro F. Giffuni wrote: I personally would prefer not to receive them. Please make sure they are easy to filter: some header like [Wiki digest] ..., at least. cheers, Pedro. Agreed. Andy
Re: Some more strange files in the OOo code
Pedro F. Giffuni wrote: --- On Tue, 6/21/11, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote: From: Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com ... On 21 Jun 2011, at 15:13, Mathias Bauer wrote: ... I opt for dropping OS/2 support completely. I agree, but it would still be better to get that code under AL first just in case there's someone downstream who wants to use it. +1 to just dropping it. I hate to say this since I was an OS/2 fan but it's really not worth it. There are binary releases somewhere plus it's still available under LGPL so the LO guys can take it. Pedro. I agree with Simon, that it maybe needed so get it under Al. Andy
Re: Oh, let's not forget @openoffice.org too
Alexandro Colorado wrote: On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Rob Weir apa...@robweir.com wrote: I'm having difficulty reconciling the openoffice.org email forwarding service with how Apache projects work. Having such an address appears to suggest that the person is representing the project,or at the very least is a member of the project. But we speak as individuals, both in the project and externally. If we're suggesting that we represent the project, then that is incorrect. There are exceptions, as outlined in the multiple hats description [1] , where a PMC Chair or other Apache officers might need to speak authoritatively on policy matters. But that is not the typical case. And remember, committers are given email forwards via an a.o email address. So there is no functional requirement that I can see for an OOo address, other than the conventional postmaster and admin addresses. So I'd favor ending the OOo email forwarding. The alternative would be to continue this service, but that begs the question of who is permitted such an address, what such an address means, who decides and what criteria are used to decide who gets such an address? That seems to duplicate the kinds of questions we already deal with when we look at those individuals whose contributions to the project merit being voted in as Committers, and getting an a.o email address. -Rob [1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#hats On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: I am not certain this is identified as something to deal with. Along with the openoffice.org domain and whatever happens with that, there is also the openoffice.org affinity e-mail forwarding operation. Is there anything in place to sustain that? Might it be interrupted or even retired at some point? (Not proposing, just want to ensure that someone has their eye on this.) - Dennis The email is open to anyone signed in the OOo domain in collabnet. I will support the idea to keep it that way. There is no distinction on what level of commitment you have to the project. In practice, not many people use the OOo domain. I did and even as an active user, very few times I have been inquired on how to use it by fellow project members. So my idea Rob is, lets keep it like this without giving it too much overthought of abuse or anything. If there was ill intend it would have been spoted through the 10 years of OOo history. BTW the ES project actually use several @openoffice.org accounts for different initiatives through it. It has never really been an issue. I can see keeping what is there but it should be locked so no new address are allowed. Over time then it could be removed. My 2 cents. Andy
Re: OOo User Registrations and Improvement Program
Dave Fisher wrote: Hi All, I was curious about both the OpenOffice.org User Registration and the Oracle Improvement Program. Is this something that Oracle is willing to share? If only snapshots. (1) At some point we'll need to ask Oracle to redirect registrations. (2) Is there any interest in seeing if Oracle would provide some type of anonymized snapshot of the registration database? After all that is probably the best way to measure the community. (3) Snapshots of the Oracle Improvement Data could be helpful. Is there an opinion? Regards, Dave I agree that this would be very helpful to us. Andy
Re: User facing web items
Hi Ross, Ross Gardler wrote: On 17 June 2011 00:00, Andy Browna...@the-martin-byrd.net wrote: I have seen references to user facing web items, web pages, wiki and mailing list. What will happen to the forum at http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/ ? It is an very useful user facing asset that I would hate to see lost. If it is transfered what will be require from those that provide assistance there? Will the moderators be required to committers? Thus requiring an iCLA? There are many other things to consider in this question: - will infra@ be willing to host an instance of the software - can we migrate the content? - is it under a suitable licence to allow migration - is the forum approach the right solution today - and many more issues Ross I know from conversations that the forum is hosted on Oracle servers, in Germany, if I am not mistaken. The Admin is an employee of Oracle. The moderators are from all over and volunteers for the most part. If it can not hosted on Apache servers then I am afraid that it will be lost and all the help that it has for users. Is a forum the right solution today, good question but I have seen flame wars break out over that very topic in some mailing list. I prefer mailing list but understand why end users prefer a forum so I would support us keeping it. Andy
Re: User facing web items
Dave Fisher wrote: On Jun 17, 2011, at 2:59 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: On 17 June 2011 00:00, Andy Browna...@the-martin-byrd.net wrote: I have seen references to user facing web items, web pages, wiki and mailing list. What will happen to the forum at http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/ ? It is an very useful user facing asset that I would hate to see lost. If it is transfered what will be require from those that provide assistance there? Will the moderators be required to committers? Thus requiring an iCLA? There are many other things to consider in this question: - will infra@ be willing to host an instance of the software - can we migrate the content? - is it under a suitable licence to allow migration - is the forum approach the right solution today - and many more issues Gavin McDonald on infrastructure was asking about this. He said it would fall to him. Someone who know will have to give him details. I know that Japan is currently dependent on an openoffice.org hosted forum(s?). Regards, Dave This forum is on Oracle servers. The forum runs on phpBB. I will ask some questions and see what I can find out or see if the admin can help out here. Andy
User facing web items
I have seen references to user facing web items, web pages, wiki and mailing list. What will happen to the forum at http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/ ? It is an very useful user facing asset that I would hate to see lost. If it is transfered what will be require from those that provide assistance there? Will the moderators be required to committers? Thus requiring an iCLA? There were at least two moderators from the forum listed in the Initial Committers list but I have not seen any post or questions related to this and I would like to be able to pass on if they need to add themselves to this list. Andy
Re: Bootstrapping a build
Pedro Giffuni wrote: On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 18:17:30 +0200, Martin Hollmichel martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com wrote: On 06/15/2011 05:00 PM, Mathias Bauer wrote: [...] As far as I'm concerned that would be fine for dmake. I never liked to have it in the OOo code base and I know that others would welcome to have it separated too. As there are no runtime dependencies to any OOo code I'd prefer to have dmake elsewhere (SF, github, etc) to make clear that dmake can be used by any other project, re-license the OOo specific and Oracle copyrighted dmake (*.mk, etc) files to AL2.0 within the OOo-tree (solenv), Martin I think the Apache - Google code site seems appropriate. Also, preserving the history from the repository would be good. FWIW, Debian carries something called dmake-4.12, no idea if it's related or not. Pedro. From the Description of dmake 1:4.12-2 make utility used to build OpenOffice.org in Ubuntu's Package Manager. It would seem that is all that it is used for. Andy
Re: Introducing myself
Jean Hollis Weber wrote: I've been away for the past 2 weeks, so I've missed all the happenings. I'm now catching up on the list archives and hope to be confirmed soon as a committer. Meanwhile, I thought I would introduce myself, because I've seen several topics where I think I can contribute information and ideas. I am Jean Hollis Weber, currently Co-Lead of OpenOffice.org Documentation. My background is 30 years of technical writing, editing and publishing, mostly on computer software related projects. My area of expertise is user-oriented information, including user guides, how-tos, and online help. (I have written an award-winning book titled Is the Help Helpful? as well as other books under my own name and quite a lot of the material in the official OOo user guides.) I also have some project management (documentation team leadership) experience related to coordinating the production of multi-authored documents such as user guides. Although there may be no formal team leads here, I think it's often useful for people to take on a leadership or coordinating role once work items have been defined. I've found that many publishing projects stall without someone in that role. I don't actually want to spend a lot of time leading (I'd prefer to be writing new material), so please don't read that as me looking to take charge of documentation! --Jean Hi Jean, Glad you made it. :) Andy
Re: Opinions (was: Subversion - Seeding incubator/openofficeorg/ please)
Greg Stein wrote: I wanted to raise this query to the surface for input: the name in the repository. This is easily changed, so it's really just about ongoing perception. * I used ooo to match the mailing list names and to keep URLs short * Christian used openofficeorg to match some podling references +1 for ooo Andy
