Re: leftover debug?
Please delete it.
Thank you
Damjan
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 2:33 AM Don Lewis wrote:
> It looks like there is some leftover debug code in trunk commit
> 5168e59c15cb9af435bdca9b78b99d1abe16c58e.
>
> main/scripting/source/protocolhandler/scripthandler.cxx:
> cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 147) void SAL_CALL
> ScriptProtocolHandler::dispatchWithNotification(
> cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 148) const URL&
> aURL, const Sequence < PropertyValue >& lArgs,
> cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 149) const
> Reference< XDispatchResultListener >& xListener )
> cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 150) throw (
> RuntimeException )
> cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 151) {
> cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 152)
> cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 153) sal_Bool
> bSuccess = sal_False;
> cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 154) Any
> invokeResult;
> cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 155) bool
> bCaughtException = sal_False;
> cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 156) Any
> aException;
> cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 157)
> cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 158) if (
> m_bInitialised )
> cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 159) {
> cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 160) try
> cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 161) {
> 5168e59c (mseidel2019-08-19 18:28:35 +0200 162)
> printf("ScriptProtocolHandler::dispatchWithNotification()\n");
> 5168e59c (mseidel2019-08-19 18:28:35 +0200 163)
> ::rtl::OUString xStringUri = ::rtl::Uri::decode( aURL.Complete,
> 5168e59c (mseidel2019-08-19 18:28:35 +0200 164)
> rtl_UriDecodeWithCharset, RTL_TEXTENCODING_UTF8 );
> 5168e59c (mseidel2019-08-19 18:28:35 +0200 165) bool
> bIsDocumentScript = ( xStringUri.indexOfAsciiL( RTL_CONSTASCII_STRINGPARAM(
> "document" ) ) !=-1 );
> 5168e59c (mseidel2019-08-19 18:28:35 +0200 166) printf("URI is
> %s\n", ::rtl::OUStringToOString (xStringUri,
> RTL_TEXTENCODING_UTF8).pData->buffer);
> cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 167)
>
> I found it because printf was not declared when attempting to build on
> CentOS 6.
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
leftover debug?
It looks like there is some leftover debug code in trunk commit
5168e59c15cb9af435bdca9b78b99d1abe16c58e.
main/scripting/source/protocolhandler/scripthandler.cxx:
cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 147) void SAL_CALL
ScriptProtocolHandler::dispatchWithNotification(
cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 148) const URL& aURL,
const Sequence < PropertyValue >& lArgs,
cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 149) const Reference<
XDispatchResultListener >& xListener )
cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 150) throw (
RuntimeException )
cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 151) {
cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 152)
cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 153) sal_Bool bSuccess =
sal_False;
cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 154) Any invokeResult;
cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 155) bool
bCaughtException = sal_False;
cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 156) Any aException;
cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 157)
cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 158) if ( m_bInitialised
)
cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 159) {
cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 160) try
cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 161) {
5168e59c (mseidel2019-08-19 18:28:35 +0200 162)
printf("ScriptProtocolHandler::dispatchWithNotification()\n");
5168e59c (mseidel2019-08-19 18:28:35 +0200 163)
::rtl::OUString xStringUri = ::rtl::Uri::decode( aURL.Complete,
5168e59c (mseidel2019-08-19 18:28:35 +0200 164)
rtl_UriDecodeWithCharset, RTL_TEXTENCODING_UTF8 );
5168e59c (mseidel2019-08-19 18:28:35 +0200 165) bool
bIsDocumentScript = ( xStringUri.indexOfAsciiL( RTL_CONSTASCII_STRINGPARAM(
"document" ) ) !=-1 );
5168e59c (mseidel2019-08-19 18:28:35 +0200 166) printf("URI is %s\n",
::rtl::OUStringToOString (xStringUri, RTL_TEXTENCODING_UTF8).pData->buffer);
cdf0e10c (rcweir 2011-08-16 17:05:51 + 167)
I found it because printf was not declared when attempting to build on
CentOS 6.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [status] Static webside migration
Am 01.10.19 um 22:33 schrieb Peter Kovacs: On 01.10.19 22:24, Dave Fisher wrote: On Oct 1, 2019, at 1:16 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: On 01.10.19 20:18, Marcus wrote: Am 01.10.19 um 19:31 schrieb Dave Fisher: Heads up that I’m starting to do the migration, Repos name must start with OpenOffice. thanks a lot for starting this beast of migration. I propose these: OpenOffice-DevWebsite OpenOffice-OrgWebsite May I ask you to use shorter names and all in lower case: ooo-dev-site ooo-org-site I prefer this as it looks easier to remember and to use. I prefer descriptiveness over shortness. we are not able to shorten openoffice. How about: openoffice-org-www (I am fine with -website or -web-site, but -site is missing something for me. openoffice-org is very descriptive yea agreed. +1 openoffice-dev-doc (Maybe the repo works without web interpretation too) openoffice-dev is descriptive Not for me. Dev is heavyliy overloded shortcut, for me. We use it for all contexts. I prefer openoffice-doc over openoffice-dev. Even openoffice-pgm-doc I like more. sorry, I don't know what you mean with dev oder doc or pgm. Please let us use what we know already. Marcus we would deliver a read me anyhow. Also I would like to be addressable to Github for low feedback loop or can anyone think any reason why we want to switch this off? Switch off what? Using Github for changes is a feature. We can switch off the propagation to the feature Github. I am just asking. I like the feature it offers. Regards, Dave Thanks Marcus I’ll be tackling the project site first. I plan to make use of https://S.apache.org/asfyaml so that we will have staging and production. I may use the Apache CMS scripts for page generation. Infra-VP does not have trouble with those being on a Jenkins or Buildbot node. I may use jBake which I’ve used with the Incubator site. It may use both. Changes will be done in GIT and the CMS WebGUI will not be used. Committers will be able to change the git repos. There will be instructions on the local build as well. I’m starting with the local build. This will take sometime. If someone wants to redesign our Websites Look & Feel then proposals welcome. I may play with it myself... Regards, Dave I have one more question. Jörg has mentioned that a lot of outside links point to the current web pages. What do we do with this? Do we make an announcement that this will happen and maybe give people some sort of hint to update their link lists? If we track what we change then we can create https redirection rules. cool. I like this. Best Regards, Dave All the Best Peter On 24.09.19 22:54, Dave Fisher wrote: Hi Kay, I promised to look into this migration after Apachecon. I’ve been thinking through a plan the last few days. See inline. Sent from my iPhone On Sep 24, 2019, at 1:38 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: Hi -- The last item I saw on this topic was this one concerning the new CMS https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/msg36504.html and I recall you mentioning at one point that it was desirable to do some housecleaning on the www.openoffice.org web site due to size and no longer pertinent information. Some questions at this point -- * was a new "CMS" chosen? If so what is it and where can we find additional information? Not exactly. Here is the plan. (1) Copy OpenOffice.apache.org svn to a new git repository. (2) Learn to use the new infra supported yaml tags to try a few different build techniques. I am familiar with JBake from the incubator build but Pelican is possible. (3) Finish the project site. (4) Rinse and repeat with the OpenOffice.org site The current site, as Dave pointed out earlier, uses a lot of the current CMS capabilities in terms of page rendering, dealing with the many languages of the site etc. to render the static content. We’ll figure that out. If someone wants to redesign the site we can work through it in parallel. * How long will svn continue to function for both www.openoffice.org and openoffice.apache.org? The CMS is fragile and if it falls down it could become a blocking issue. Infra will warm is if things are immanent. I did discuss our migration briefly with an infra person at ACNA19. * It seems it would be advantageous to do a LOT of housecleaning on www.openoffice.org before migration I don't have ANY ideas about archiving www.openoffice.org. It is quite large. I could certainly help in about a month with the "housecleaning" aspect of both sites assuming they remain svn accessible for a while. But I'm assuming we might want archives of both even before that. Yes? Tag the SVN repository before starting its cleanup. Feel free to keep a local copy. I recommend doing cleanup on a local copy and checking in the results. So, three parallel threads. (1) Cleanup (2) Redesign if needed. (3) Move to git and away from CMS Regards, Dave -- MzK On 9/19/19 10:01 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: Hello all, Can everyone
Re: [status] Static webside migration
Am 01.10.19 um 22:24 schrieb Dave Fisher: On Oct 1, 2019, at 1:16 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: On 01.10.19 20:18, Marcus wrote: Am 01.10.19 um 19:31 schrieb Dave Fisher: Heads up that I’m starting to do the migration, Repos name must start with OpenOffice. thanks a lot for starting this beast of migration. I propose these: OpenOffice-DevWebsite OpenOffice-OrgWebsite May I ask you to use shorter names and all in lower case: ooo-dev-site ooo-org-site I prefer this as it looks easier to remember and to use. I prefer descriptiveness over shortness. we are not able to shorten openoffice. How about: openoffice-org-www (I am fine with -website or -web-site, but -site is missing something for me. openoffice-org is very descriptive openoffice-dev-doc (Maybe the repo works without web interpretation too) openoffice-dev is descriptive OK, when we have to use "openoffice" in the name then your both suggestions are good. Please use them. Thanks Marcus I’ll be tackling the project site first. I plan to make use of https://S.apache.org/asfyaml so that we will have staging and production. I may use the Apache CMS scripts for page generation. Infra-VP does not have trouble with those being on a Jenkins or Buildbot node. I may use jBake which I’ve used with the Incubator site. It may use both. Changes will be done in GIT and the CMS WebGUI will not be used. Committers will be able to change the git repos. There will be instructions on the local build as well. I’m starting with the local build. This will take sometime. If someone wants to redesign our Websites Look & Feel then proposals welcome. I may play with it myself... Regards, Dave I have one more question. Jörg has mentioned that a lot of outside links point to the current web pages. What do we do with this? Do we make an announcement that this will happen and maybe give people some sort of hint to update their link lists? If we track what we change then we can create https redirection rules. cool. I like this. Best Regards, Dave All the Best Peter On 24.09.19 22:54, Dave Fisher wrote: Hi Kay, I promised to look into this migration after Apachecon. I’ve been thinking through a plan the last few days. See inline. Sent from my iPhone On Sep 24, 2019, at 1:38 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: Hi -- The last item I saw on this topic was this one concerning the new CMS https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/msg36504.html and I recall you mentioning at one point that it was desirable to do some housecleaning on the www.openoffice.org web site due to size and no longer pertinent information. Some questions at this point -- * was a new "CMS" chosen? If so what is it and where can we find additional information? Not exactly. Here is the plan. (1) Copy OpenOffice.apache.org svn to a new git repository. (2) Learn to use the new infra supported yaml tags to try a few different build techniques. I am familiar with JBake from the incubator build but Pelican is possible. (3) Finish the project site. (4) Rinse and repeat with the OpenOffice.org site The current site, as Dave pointed out earlier, uses a lot of the current CMS capabilities in terms of page rendering, dealing with the many languages of the site etc. to render the static content. We’ll figure that out. If someone wants to redesign the site we can work through it in parallel. * How long will svn continue to function for both www.openoffice.org and openoffice.apache.org? The CMS is fragile and if it falls down it could become a blocking issue. Infra will warm is if things are immanent. I did discuss our migration briefly with an infra person at ACNA19. * It seems it would be advantageous to do a LOT of housecleaning on www.openoffice.org before migration I don't have ANY ideas about archiving www.openoffice.org. It is quite large. I could certainly help in about a month with the "housecleaning" aspect of both sites assuming they remain svn accessible for a while. But I'm assuming we might want archives of both even before that. Yes? Tag the SVN repository before starting its cleanup. Feel free to keep a local copy. I recommend doing cleanup on a local copy and checking in the results. So, three parallel threads. (1) Cleanup (2) Redesign if needed. (3) Move to git and away from CMS Regards, Dave -- MzK On 9/19/19 10:01 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: Hello all, Can everyone interested in this topic give a short status? Short ping on the current availability. And list any impediments or difficulties that he currently sees where others can help with. I would very much like to see this take some drive. And I would love to see George delivering something, so we can review committer status in the near future. (As I do with any other volunteer knocking on our door.) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:
Re: FOSDEM Dev room
Hi Andrea, "Open Document Editors" Developer room is accepted: https://fosdem.org/2020/news/2019-10-01-accepted-developer-rooms/ Beware, it is not in alphabetical order but between "G" and "H" Regards, Matthias Am 20.09.19 um 09:28 schrieb Andrea Pescetti: > Peter Kovacs wrote: >> Deadline is today. I am sorry I failed to come up with a proper >> application fo this event. Maybe Andrea, can you enter one on the short >> notice? > > This was under control and I've already taken care of this (sorry for > not notifying the list), but still thanks a lot for double-checking. > > I think that indeed we should always, semi-automatically, submit > requests for what we can realistically provide people for (so, both > the devroom and the booth) and then arrange according to what we get. > We'll know about the devroom at the end of September. > > Regards, > Andrea. > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [status] Static webside migration
No problem. Let’s go with the following. openoffice-project for the project site - openoffice.apache.org openoffice-org for the user site - www.openoffice.org Regards, Dave > On Oct 1, 2019, at 2:38 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: > > I am confused. I thought the developer site is something like dev doku I > found somewhere in the svn. > > The developer side is not about development. It is about the project. > > On 01.10.19 23:12, Matthias Seidel wrote: >> Hi Peter, >> >> Am 01.10.19 um 22:33 schrieb Peter Kovacs: >>> On 01.10.19 22:24, Dave Fisher wrote: > On Oct 1, 2019, at 1:16 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: > > On 01.10.19 20:18, Marcus wrote: >> Am 01.10.19 um 19:31 schrieb Dave Fisher: >>> Heads up that I’m starting to do the migration, >>> Repos name must start with OpenOffice. >> thanks a lot for starting this beast of migration. >> I propose these: OpenOffice-DevWebsite OpenOffice-OrgWebsite >> May I ask you to use shorter names and all in lower case: >> >> ooo-dev-site >> ooo-org-site >> >> I prefer this as it looks easier to remember and to use. > I prefer descriptiveness over shortness. we are not able to shorten > openoffice. > > How about: > > openoffice-org-www (I am fine with -website or -web-site, but -site is > missing something for me. openoffice-org is very descriptive >>> yea agreed. +1 > openoffice-dev-doc (Maybe the repo works without web interpretation too) openoffice-dev is descriptive >>> Not for me. Dev is heavyliy overloded shortcut, for me. We use it for >>> all contexts. >>> >>> I prefer openoffice-doc over openoffice-dev. Even openoffice-pgm-doc I >>> like more. >> Which website would that be?! >> >> We are talking about migration of >> >> https://www.openoffice.org (OpenOffice.org website for user) >> >> and >> >> https://openoffice.apache.org (Project website for developer) >> >> Regards, >> >>Matthias >> > we would deliver a read me anyhow. Also I would like to be addressable > to Github for low feedback loop or can anyone think any reason why we > want to switch this off? Switch off what? Using Github for changes is a feature. >>> We can switch off the propagation to the feature Github. I am just >>> asking. I like the feature it offers. Regards, Dave >> Thanks >> >> Marcus >> >> >> >>> I’ll be tackling the project site first. >>> >>> I plan to make use of https://S.apache.org/asfyaml so that we will >>> have staging and production. >>> >>> I may use the Apache CMS scripts for page generation. Infra-VP does >>> not have trouble with those being on a Jenkins or Buildbot node. I >>> may use jBake which I’ve used with the Incubator site. It may use both. >>> >>> Changes will be done in GIT and the CMS WebGUI will not be used. >>> Committers will be able to change the git repos. There will be >>> instructions on the local build as well. I’m starting with the local >>> build. >>> >>> This will take sometime. >>> >>> If someone wants to redesign our Websites Look & Feel then proposals >>> welcome. I may play with it myself... >>> >>> Regards, >>> Dave >>> > I have one more question. Jörg has mentioned that a lot of outside > links point to the current web pages. What do we do with this? Do we > make an announcement that this will happen and maybe give people some > sort of hint to update their link lists? If we track what we change then we can create https redirection rules. > cool. I like this. Best Regards, Dave > All the Best > > Peter > >> On 24.09.19 22:54, Dave Fisher wrote: >> Hi Kay, >> >> I promised to look into this migration after Apachecon. >> >> I’ve been thinking through a plan the last few days. >> >> See inline. >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On Sep 24, 2019, at 1:38 PM, Kay Schenk >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi -- >>> >>> The last item I saw on this topic was this one concerning the new >>> CMS >>> >>> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/msg36504.html >>> >>> and I recall you mentioning at one point that it was desirable to >>> do some housecleaning on the www.openoffice.org web site due to >>> size and no longer pertinent information. >>> >>> Some questions at this point -- >>> >>> * was a new "CMS" chosen? If so what is it and where can we find >>> additional information? >> Not exactly. Here is the plan. >> >> (1) Copy OpenOffice.apache.org svn to a new git
Re: [status] Static webside migration
I am confused. I thought the developer site is something like dev doku I found somewhere in the svn. The developer side is not about development. It is about the project. On 01.10.19 23:12, Matthias Seidel wrote: > Hi Peter, > > Am 01.10.19 um 22:33 schrieb Peter Kovacs: >> On 01.10.19 22:24, Dave Fisher wrote: On Oct 1, 2019, at 1:16 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: On 01.10.19 20:18, Marcus wrote: > Am 01.10.19 um 19:31 schrieb Dave Fisher: >> Heads up that I’m starting to do the migration, >> >>> Repos name must start with OpenOffice. > thanks a lot for starting this beast of migration. > >>> I propose these: >>> >>> OpenOffice-DevWebsite >>> OpenOffice-OrgWebsite > May I ask you to use shorter names and all in lower case: > > ooo-dev-site > ooo-org-site > > I prefer this as it looks easier to remember and to use. I prefer descriptiveness over shortness. we are not able to shorten openoffice. How about: openoffice-org-www (I am fine with -website or -web-site, but -site is missing something for me. >>> openoffice-org is very descriptive >> yea agreed. +1 openoffice-dev-doc (Maybe the repo works without web interpretation too) >>> openoffice-dev is descriptive >> Not for me. Dev is heavyliy overloded shortcut, for me. We use it for >> all contexts. >> >> I prefer openoffice-doc over openoffice-dev. Even openoffice-pgm-doc I >> like more. > Which website would that be?! > > We are talking about migration of > > https://www.openoffice.org (OpenOffice.org website for user) > > and > > https://openoffice.apache.org (Project website for developer) > > Regards, > > Matthias > we would deliver a read me anyhow. Also I would like to be addressable to Github for low feedback loop or can anyone think any reason why we want to switch this off? >>> Switch off what? Using Github for changes is a feature. >> We can switch off the propagation to the feature Github. I am just >> asking. I like the feature it offers. >>> Regards, >>> Dave >>> > Thanks > > Marcus > > > >> I’ll be tackling the project site first. >> >> I plan to make use of https://S.apache.org/asfyaml so that we will >> have staging and production. >> >> I may use the Apache CMS scripts for page generation. Infra-VP does >> not have trouble with those being on a Jenkins or Buildbot node. I >> may use jBake which I’ve used with the Incubator site. It may use both. >> >> Changes will be done in GIT and the CMS WebGUI will not be used. >> Committers will be able to change the git repos. There will be >> instructions on the local build as well. I’m starting with the local >> build. >> >> This will take sometime. >> >> If someone wants to redesign our Websites Look & Feel then proposals >> welcome. I may play with it myself... >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> I have one more question. Jörg has mentioned that a lot of outside links point to the current web pages. What do we do with this? Do we make an announcement that this will happen and maybe give people some sort of hint to update their link lists? >>> If we track what we change then we can create https redirection rules. cool. I like this. >>> Best Regards, >>> Dave >>> All the Best Peter > On 24.09.19 22:54, Dave Fisher wrote: > Hi Kay, > > I promised to look into this migration after Apachecon. > > I’ve been thinking through a plan the last few days. > > See inline. > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Sep 24, 2019, at 1:38 PM, Kay Schenk >> wrote: >> >> Hi -- >> >> The last item I saw on this topic was this one concerning the new >> CMS >> >> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/msg36504.html >> >> and I recall you mentioning at one point that it was desirable to >> do some housecleaning on the www.openoffice.org web site due to >> size and no longer pertinent information. >> >> Some questions at this point -- >> >> * was a new "CMS" chosen? If so what is it and where can we find >> additional information? > Not exactly. Here is the plan. > > (1) Copy OpenOffice.apache.org svn to a new git repository. > > (2) Learn to use the new infra supported yaml tags to try a few > different build techniques. I am familiar with JBake from the > incubator build but Pelican is possible. > > (3) Finish the project site. > > (4) Rinse and repeat with the OpenOffice.org site > >> The current site, as Dave pointed out earlier, uses a lot of the
Re: [status] Static webside migration
Hi Peter, Am 01.10.19 um 22:33 schrieb Peter Kovacs: > On 01.10.19 22:24, Dave Fisher wrote: >>> On Oct 1, 2019, at 1:16 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: >>> >>> On 01.10.19 20:18, Marcus wrote: Am 01.10.19 um 19:31 schrieb Dave Fisher: > Heads up that I’m starting to do the migration, > >> Repos name must start with OpenOffice. thanks a lot for starting this beast of migration. >> I propose these: >> >> OpenOffice-DevWebsite >> OpenOffice-OrgWebsite May I ask you to use shorter names and all in lower case: ooo-dev-site ooo-org-site I prefer this as it looks easier to remember and to use. >>> I prefer descriptiveness over shortness. we are not able to shorten >>> openoffice. >>> >>> How about: >>> >>> openoffice-org-www (I am fine with -website or -web-site, but -site is >>> missing something for me. >> openoffice-org is very descriptive > yea agreed. +1 >>> openoffice-dev-doc (Maybe the repo works without web interpretation too) >> openoffice-dev is descriptive > Not for me. Dev is heavyliy overloded shortcut, for me. We use it for > all contexts. > > I prefer openoffice-doc over openoffice-dev. Even openoffice-pgm-doc I > like more. Which website would that be?! We are talking about migration of https://www.openoffice.org (OpenOffice.org website for user) and https://openoffice.apache.org (Project website for developer) Regards, Matthias > >>> we would deliver a read me anyhow. Also I would like to be addressable >>> to Github for low feedback loop or can anyone think any reason why we >>> want to switch this off? >> Switch off what? Using Github for changes is a feature. > We can switch off the propagation to the feature Github. I am just > asking. I like the feature it offers. >> Regards, >> Dave >> Thanks Marcus > I’ll be tackling the project site first. > > I plan to make use of https://S.apache.org/asfyaml so that we will > have staging and production. > > I may use the Apache CMS scripts for page generation. Infra-VP does > not have trouble with those being on a Jenkins or Buildbot node. I > may use jBake which I’ve used with the Incubator site. It may use both. > > Changes will be done in GIT and the CMS WebGUI will not be used. > Committers will be able to change the git repos. There will be > instructions on the local build as well. I’m starting with the local > build. > > This will take sometime. > > If someone wants to redesign our Websites Look & Feel then proposals > welcome. I may play with it myself... > > Regards, > Dave > >>> I have one more question. Jörg has mentioned that a lot of outside >>> links point to the current web pages. What do we do with this? Do we >>> make an announcement that this will happen and maybe give people some >>> sort of hint to update their link lists? >> If we track what we change then we can create https redirection rules. >>> cool. I like this. >> Best Regards, >> Dave >> >>> All the Best >>> >>> Peter >>> On 24.09.19 22:54, Dave Fisher wrote: Hi Kay, I promised to look into this migration after Apachecon. I’ve been thinking through a plan the last few days. See inline. Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 24, 2019, at 1:38 PM, Kay Schenk > wrote: > > Hi -- > > The last item I saw on this topic was this one concerning the new > CMS > > https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/msg36504.html > > and I recall you mentioning at one point that it was desirable to > do some housecleaning on the www.openoffice.org web site due to > size and no longer pertinent information. > > Some questions at this point -- > > * was a new "CMS" chosen? If so what is it and where can we find > additional information? Not exactly. Here is the plan. (1) Copy OpenOffice.apache.org svn to a new git repository. (2) Learn to use the new infra supported yaml tags to try a few different build techniques. I am familiar with JBake from the incubator build but Pelican is possible. (3) Finish the project site. (4) Rinse and repeat with the OpenOffice.org site > The current site, as Dave pointed out earlier, uses a lot of the > current CMS capabilities in terms of page rendering, dealing with > the many languages of the site etc. to render the static content. We’ll figure that out. If someone wants to redesign the site we can work through it in parallel. > * How long will svn continue to function for both > www.openoffice.org
Re: A openoffice 'dependency' map
Since I found out for uploading something in Cwiki the page needs additional rights, I decided to go for MWiki. I have updated https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Architecture you can also do some sort of versioning there, which is nice. I hope you are not too disappointed from the document. On 01.10.19 18:42, Kay Schenk wrote: > Mwiki does have "versioning" of a sort. You can look at previous > versions of pages and do rollbacks. > > I'm looking at the following -- > > https://wiki.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Architecture=245544=245542 > > > in which you can see how revisions are managed. > > Good that you are trying to deal with this in any way though. > > "And in the end, only kindness matters." > -- Jewel, "Hands" > __ > MzK > > > On 9/30/19 11:13 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: >> Sadly a picture as such is currently of no use. The picture has 1200 >> objects. Most of them pointers from one Modul to another. And there >> are still errors or modules are duplicated. Draw has some flaws for >> this use case. But I already learned what we need to improve in Draw. >> The map is still work in progress. But I would like to share it in >> this early stage. >> >> Confluence has the advantage that it versions the document. That >> would make it easier to maintain. Does mwiki also version the code? >> >> Hmm maybe we could move the contents of other picture already on >> Confluence in this document so you would obtain a document that >> contains all pictures. From the good ones we can the create pictures >> as links. >> >> >> Am 1. Oktober 2019 01:19:03 MESZ schrieb Marcus : >>> Am 30.09.19 um 21:51 schrieb Peter Kovacs: I have made it to my first milestone in creating documentation. I >>> have created a draw document that shows all modules. Pointers point >>> towards providers and dependencies, from the configuration standpoint >>> of the build system. It is not really accurate, but it gives an idea on the topic. Where do you think is the right home for this document? It is maybe >>> to thing that will prevail since the manual effort of maintenance is >>> quite high. >>> >>> I would say, make a JPG or PNG of it, put it in Confluence with some >>> text and attach the original Draw doc to that page. Maybe here [1]? >>> >>> [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/UML-Diagramme >>> >>> Marcus >>> >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [status] Static webside migration
On 01.10.19 22:24, Dave Fisher wrote: > >> On Oct 1, 2019, at 1:16 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: >> >> On 01.10.19 20:18, Marcus wrote: >>> Am 01.10.19 um 19:31 schrieb Dave Fisher: Heads up that I’m starting to do the migration, > Repos name must start with OpenOffice. >>> thanks a lot for starting this beast of migration. >>> > I propose these: > > OpenOffice-DevWebsite > OpenOffice-OrgWebsite >>> May I ask you to use shorter names and all in lower case: >>> >>> ooo-dev-site >>> ooo-org-site >>> >>> I prefer this as it looks easier to remember and to use. >> I prefer descriptiveness over shortness. we are not able to shorten >> openoffice. >> >> How about: >> >> openoffice-org-www (I am fine with -website or -web-site, but -site is >> missing something for me. > openoffice-org is very descriptive yea agreed. +1 > >> openoffice-dev-doc (Maybe the repo works without web interpretation too) > openoffice-dev is descriptive Not for me. Dev is heavyliy overloded shortcut, for me. We use it for all contexts. I prefer openoffice-doc over openoffice-dev. Even openoffice-pgm-doc I like more. > >> we would deliver a read me anyhow. Also I would like to be addressable >> to Github for low feedback loop or can anyone think any reason why we >> want to switch this off? > Switch off what? Using Github for changes is a feature. We can switch off the propagation to the feature Github. I am just asking. I like the feature it offers. > > Regards, > Dave > >>> Thanks >>> >>> Marcus >>> >>> >>> I’ll be tackling the project site first. I plan to make use of https://S.apache.org/asfyaml so that we will have staging and production. I may use the Apache CMS scripts for page generation. Infra-VP does not have trouble with those being on a Jenkins or Buildbot node. I may use jBake which I’ve used with the Incubator site. It may use both. Changes will be done in GIT and the CMS WebGUI will not be used. Committers will be able to change the git repos. There will be instructions on the local build as well. I’m starting with the local build. This will take sometime. If someone wants to redesign our Websites Look & Feel then proposals welcome. I may play with it myself... Regards, Dave >> I have one more question. Jörg has mentioned that a lot of outside >> links point to the current web pages. What do we do with this? Do we >> make an announcement that this will happen and maybe give people some >> sort of hint to update their link lists? > If we track what we change then we can create https redirection rules. >> cool. I like this. > Best Regards, > Dave > >> >> All the Best >> >> Peter >> >>> On 24.09.19 22:54, Dave Fisher wrote: >>> Hi Kay, >>> >>> I promised to look into this migration after Apachecon. >>> >>> I’ve been thinking through a plan the last few days. >>> >>> See inline. >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> On Sep 24, 2019, at 1:38 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: Hi -- The last item I saw on this topic was this one concerning the new CMS https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/msg36504.html and I recall you mentioning at one point that it was desirable to do some housecleaning on the www.openoffice.org web site due to size and no longer pertinent information. Some questions at this point -- * was a new "CMS" chosen? If so what is it and where can we find additional information? >>> Not exactly. Here is the plan. >>> >>> (1) Copy OpenOffice.apache.org svn to a new git repository. >>> >>> (2) Learn to use the new infra supported yaml tags to try a few >>> different build techniques. I am familiar with JBake from the >>> incubator build but Pelican is possible. >>> >>> (3) Finish the project site. >>> >>> (4) Rinse and repeat with the OpenOffice.org site >>> The current site, as Dave pointed out earlier, uses a lot of the current CMS capabilities in terms of page rendering, dealing with the many languages of the site etc. to render the static content. >>> We’ll figure that out. >>> >>> If someone wants to redesign the site we can work through it in >>> parallel. * How long will svn continue to function for both www.openoffice.org and openoffice.apache.org? >>> The CMS is fragile and if it falls down it could become a blocking >>> issue. Infra will warm is if things are immanent. I did discuss >>> our migration briefly with an infra person at ACNA19. >>> * It seems it would be advantageous to do a LOT of housecleaning on www.openoffice.org before migration I don't have ANY
Re: [status] Static webside migration
> On Oct 1, 2019, at 1:16 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: > > On 01.10.19 20:18, Marcus wrote: >> Am 01.10.19 um 19:31 schrieb Dave Fisher: >>> Heads up that I’m starting to do the migration, >>> Repos name must start with OpenOffice. >> >> thanks a lot for starting this beast of migration. >> I propose these: OpenOffice-DevWebsite OpenOffice-OrgWebsite >> >> May I ask you to use shorter names and all in lower case: >> >> ooo-dev-site >> ooo-org-site >> >> I prefer this as it looks easier to remember and to use. > I prefer descriptiveness over shortness. we are not able to shorten > openoffice. > > How about: > > openoffice-org-www (I am fine with -website or -web-site, but -site is > missing something for me. openoffice-org is very descriptive > > openoffice-dev-doc (Maybe the repo works without web interpretation too) openoffice-dev is descriptive > > we would deliver a read me anyhow. Also I would like to be addressable > to Github for low feedback loop or can anyone think any reason why we > want to switch this off? Switch off what? Using Github for changes is a feature. Regards, Dave > >> >> Thanks >> >> Marcus >> >> >> >>> I’ll be tackling the project site first. >>> >>> I plan to make use of https://S.apache.org/asfyaml so that we will >>> have staging and production. >>> >>> I may use the Apache CMS scripts for page generation. Infra-VP does >>> not have trouble with those being on a Jenkins or Buildbot node. I >>> may use jBake which I’ve used with the Incubator site. It may use both. >>> >>> Changes will be done in GIT and the CMS WebGUI will not be used. >>> Committers will be able to change the git repos. There will be >>> instructions on the local build as well. I’m starting with the local >>> build. >>> >>> This will take sometime. >>> >>> If someone wants to redesign our Websites Look & Feel then proposals >>> welcome. I may play with it myself... >>> >>> Regards, >>> Dave >>> > > I have one more question. Jörg has mentioned that a lot of outside > links point to the current web pages. What do we do with this? Do we > make an announcement that this will happen and maybe give people some > sort of hint to update their link lists? If we track what we change then we can create https redirection rules. > cool. I like this. Best Regards, Dave > > > All the Best > > Peter > >> On 24.09.19 22:54, Dave Fisher wrote: >> Hi Kay, >> >> I promised to look into this migration after Apachecon. >> >> I’ve been thinking through a plan the last few days. >> >> See inline. >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On Sep 24, 2019, at 1:38 PM, Kay Schenk >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi -- >>> >>> The last item I saw on this topic was this one concerning the new >>> CMS >>> >>> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/msg36504.html >>> >>> and I recall you mentioning at one point that it was desirable to >>> do some housecleaning on the www.openoffice.org web site due to >>> size and no longer pertinent information. >>> >>> Some questions at this point -- >>> >>> * was a new "CMS" chosen? If so what is it and where can we find >>> additional information? >> Not exactly. Here is the plan. >> >> (1) Copy OpenOffice.apache.org svn to a new git repository. >> >> (2) Learn to use the new infra supported yaml tags to try a few >> different build techniques. I am familiar with JBake from the >> incubator build but Pelican is possible. >> >> (3) Finish the project site. >> >> (4) Rinse and repeat with the OpenOffice.org site >> >>> The current site, as Dave pointed out earlier, uses a lot of the >>> current CMS capabilities in terms of page rendering, dealing with >>> the many languages of the site etc. to render the static content. >> We’ll figure that out. >> >> If someone wants to redesign the site we can work through it in >> parallel. >>> * How long will svn continue to function for both >>> www.openoffice.org and openoffice.apache.org? >> The CMS is fragile and if it falls down it could become a blocking >> issue. Infra will warm is if things are immanent. I did discuss >> our migration briefly with an infra person at ACNA19. >> >>> * It seems it would be advantageous to do a LOT of housecleaning >>> on www.openoffice.org before migration >>> >>> I don't have ANY ideas about archiving www.openoffice.org. It is >>> quite large. I could certainly help in about a month with the >>> "housecleaning" aspect of both sites assuming they remain svn >>> accessible for a while. But I'm assuming we might want archives >>> of both even before that. Yes? >> Tag the SVN repository before starting its cleanup. Feel free to
Re: [status] Static webside migration
On 01.10.19 20:18, Marcus wrote: > Am 01.10.19 um 19:31 schrieb Dave Fisher: >> Heads up that I’m starting to do the migration, >> >>> Repos name must start with OpenOffice. > > thanks a lot for starting this beast of migration. > >>> I propose these: >>> >>> OpenOffice-DevWebsite >>> OpenOffice-OrgWebsite > > May I ask you to use shorter names and all in lower case: > > ooo-dev-site > ooo-org-site > > I prefer this as it looks easier to remember and to use. I prefer descriptiveness over shortness. we are not able to shorten openoffice. How about: openoffice-org-www (I am fine with -website or -web-site, but -site is missing something for me. openoffice-dev-doc (Maybe the repo works without web interpretation too) we would deliver a read me anyhow. Also I would like to be addressable to Github for low feedback loop or can anyone think any reason why we want to switch this off? > > Thanks > > Marcus > > > >> I’ll be tackling the project site first. >> >> I plan to make use of https://S.apache.org/asfyaml so that we will >> have staging and production. >> >> I may use the Apache CMS scripts for page generation. Infra-VP does >> not have trouble with those being on a Jenkins or Buildbot node. I >> may use jBake which I’ve used with the Incubator site. It may use both. >> >> Changes will be done in GIT and the CMS WebGUI will not be used. >> Committers will be able to change the git repos. There will be >> instructions on the local build as well. I’m starting with the local >> build. >> >> This will take sometime. >> >> If someone wants to redesign our Websites Look & Feel then proposals >> welcome. I may play with it myself... >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> >>> I have one more question. Jörg has mentioned that a lot of outside links point to the current web pages. What do we do with this? Do we make an announcement that this will happen and maybe give people some sort of hint to update their link lists? >>> >>> If we track what we change then we can create https redirection rules. cool. I like this. >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Dave >>> All the Best Peter > On 24.09.19 22:54, Dave Fisher wrote: > Hi Kay, > > I promised to look into this migration after Apachecon. > > I’ve been thinking through a plan the last few days. > > See inline. > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Sep 24, 2019, at 1:38 PM, Kay Schenk >> wrote: >> >> Hi -- >> >> The last item I saw on this topic was this one concerning the new >> CMS >> >> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/msg36504.html >> >> and I recall you mentioning at one point that it was desirable to >> do some housecleaning on the www.openoffice.org web site due to >> size and no longer pertinent information. >> >> Some questions at this point -- >> >> * was a new "CMS" chosen? If so what is it and where can we find >> additional information? > Not exactly. Here is the plan. > > (1) Copy OpenOffice.apache.org svn to a new git repository. > > (2) Learn to use the new infra supported yaml tags to try a few > different build techniques. I am familiar with JBake from the > incubator build but Pelican is possible. > > (3) Finish the project site. > > (4) Rinse and repeat with the OpenOffice.org site > >> The current site, as Dave pointed out earlier, uses a lot of the >> current CMS capabilities in terms of page rendering, dealing with >> the many languages of the site etc. to render the static content. > We’ll figure that out. > > If someone wants to redesign the site we can work through it in > parallel. >> * How long will svn continue to function for both >> www.openoffice.org and openoffice.apache.org? > The CMS is fragile and if it falls down it could become a blocking > issue. Infra will warm is if things are immanent. I did discuss > our migration briefly with an infra person at ACNA19. > >> * It seems it would be advantageous to do a LOT of housecleaning >> on www.openoffice.org before migration >> >> I don't have ANY ideas about archiving www.openoffice.org. It is >> quite large. I could certainly help in about a month with the >> "housecleaning" aspect of both sites assuming they remain svn >> accessible for a while. But I'm assuming we might want archives >> of both even before that. Yes? > Tag the SVN repository before starting its cleanup. Feel free to > keep a local copy. > > I recommend doing cleanup on a local copy and checking in the > results. > > So, three parallel threads. > > (1) Cleanup > (2) Redesign if needed. > (3) Move to git and away from CMS > > Regards, > Dave > >> -- MzK >> >> >> >>> On 9/19/19 10:01 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: >>> Hello all, >>> >>>
Re: [status] Static webside migration
Am 01.10.19 um 21:43 schrieb Matthias Seidel: > Am 01.10.19 um 20:18 schrieb Marcus: >> Am 01.10.19 um 19:31 schrieb Dave Fisher: >>> Heads up that I’m starting to do the migration, >>> Repos name must start with OpenOffice. >> thanks a lot for starting this beast of migration. >> I propose these: OpenOffice-DevWebsite OpenOffice-OrgWebsite >> May I ask you to use shorter names and all in lower case: >> >> ooo-dev-site >> ooo-org-site >> >> I prefer this as it looks easier to remember and to use. > +1 > > Matthias Thinking about it, we may have to use "openoffice" because of the GitHub space, so openoffice-dev-site openoffice-org-site would be my favorites. Matthias > >> Thanks >> >> Marcus >> >> >> >>> I’ll be tackling the project site first. >>> >>> I plan to make use of https://S.apache.org/asfyaml so that we will >>> have staging and production. >>> >>> I may use the Apache CMS scripts for page generation. Infra-VP does >>> not have trouble with those being on a Jenkins or Buildbot node. I >>> may use jBake which I’ve used with the Incubator site. It may use both. >>> >>> Changes will be done in GIT and the CMS WebGUI will not be used. >>> Committers will be able to change the git repos. There will be >>> instructions on the local build as well. I’m starting with the local >>> build. >>> >>> This will take sometime. >>> >>> If someone wants to redesign our Websites Look & Feel then proposals >>> welcome. I may play with it myself... >>> >>> Regards, >>> Dave >>> > I have one more question. Jörg has mentioned that a lot of outside > links point to the current web pages. What do we do with this? Do we > make an announcement that this will happen and maybe give people some > sort of hint to update their link lists? If we track what we change then we can create https redirection rules. Best Regards, Dave > > All the Best > > Peter > >> On 24.09.19 22:54, Dave Fisher wrote: >> Hi Kay, >> >> I promised to look into this migration after Apachecon. >> >> I’ve been thinking through a plan the last few days. >> >> See inline. >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On Sep 24, 2019, at 1:38 PM, Kay Schenk >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi -- >>> >>> The last item I saw on this topic was this one concerning the new >>> CMS >>> >>> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/msg36504.html >>> >>> and I recall you mentioning at one point that it was desirable to >>> do some housecleaning on the www.openoffice.org web site due to >>> size and no longer pertinent information. >>> >>> Some questions at this point -- >>> >>> * was a new "CMS" chosen? If so what is it and where can we find >>> additional information? >> Not exactly. Here is the plan. >> >> (1) Copy OpenOffice.apache.org svn to a new git repository. >> >> (2) Learn to use the new infra supported yaml tags to try a few >> different build techniques. I am familiar with JBake from the >> incubator build but Pelican is possible. >> >> (3) Finish the project site. >> >> (4) Rinse and repeat with the OpenOffice.org site >> >>> The current site, as Dave pointed out earlier, uses a lot of the >>> current CMS capabilities in terms of page rendering, dealing with >>> the many languages of the site etc. to render the static content. >> We’ll figure that out. >> >> If someone wants to redesign the site we can work through it in >> parallel. >>> * How long will svn continue to function for both >>> www.openoffice.org and openoffice.apache.org? >> The CMS is fragile and if it falls down it could become a blocking >> issue. Infra will warm is if things are immanent. I did discuss >> our migration briefly with an infra person at ACNA19. >> >>> * It seems it would be advantageous to do a LOT of housecleaning >>> on www.openoffice.org before migration >>> >>> I don't have ANY ideas about archiving www.openoffice.org. It is >>> quite large. I could certainly help in about a month with the >>> "housecleaning" aspect of both sites assuming they remain svn >>> accessible for a while. But I'm assuming we might want archives >>> of both even before that. Yes? >> Tag the SVN repository before starting its cleanup. Feel free to >> keep a local copy. >> >> I recommend doing cleanup on a local copy and checking in the >> results. >> >> So, three parallel threads. >> >> (1) Cleanup >> (2) Redesign if needed. >> (3) Move to git and away from CMS >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> >>> -- MzK >>> >>> >>> On 9/19/19 10:01 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: Hello all, Can everyone interested in this topic give a short status? Short ping on the
Re: [status] Static webside migration
> On Oct 1, 2019, at 11:18 AM, Marcus wrote: > > Am 01.10.19 um 19:31 schrieb Dave Fisher: >> Heads up that I’m starting to do the migration, >>> Repos name must start with OpenOffice. > > thanks a lot for starting this beast of migration. > >>> I propose these: >>> >>> OpenOffice-DevWebsite >>> OpenOffice-OrgWebsite > > May I ask you to use shorter names and all in lower case: > > ooo-dev-site > ooo-org-site The reason to use openoffice- is due to ease in finding the repositories on GitHub and seeing that they belong to us (both Apache and the OpenOffice project). It is not a big deal in SVN, but I think git differs due to a lot of the automation that connects gitbox and GitHub. Try this search: https://github.com/apache?utf8=✓=openoffice== Or this page: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf And then search on the page for “openoffice” To use “ooo” will require Infra to make an exception in their whole logic including matching of Apache LDAP roles to Github authorization groups. I can ask, but I don’t think we need to be that special. I rather take their time on supporting whatever we need in builedbot/jenkins. Regards, Dave > > I prefer this as it looks easier to remember and to use. > > Thanks > > Marcus > > > >> I’ll be tackling the project site first. >> I plan to make use of https://S.apache.org/asfyaml so that we will have >> staging and production. >> I may use the Apache CMS scripts for page generation. Infra-VP does not have >> trouble with those being on a Jenkins or Buildbot node. I may use jBake >> which I’ve used with the Incubator site. It may use both. >> Changes will be done in GIT and the CMS WebGUI will not be used. Committers >> will be able to change the git repos. There will be instructions on the >> local build as well. I’m starting with the local build. >> This will take sometime. >> If someone wants to redesign our Websites Look & Feel then proposals >> welcome. I may play with it myself... >> Regards, >> Dave >>> I have one more question. Jörg has mentioned that a lot of outside links point to the current web pages. What do we do with this? Do we make an announcement that this will happen and maybe give people some sort of hint to update their link lists? >>> >>> If we track what we change then we can create https redirection rules. >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Dave >>> All the Best Peter > On 24.09.19 22:54, Dave Fisher wrote: > Hi Kay, > > I promised to look into this migration after Apachecon. > > I’ve been thinking through a plan the last few days. > > See inline. > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Sep 24, 2019, at 1:38 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: >> >> Hi -- >> >> The last item I saw on this topic was this one concerning the new CMS >> >> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/msg36504.html >> >> and I recall you mentioning at one point that it was desirable to do >> some housecleaning on the www.openoffice.org web site due to size and no >> longer pertinent information. >> >> Some questions at this point -- >> >> * was a new "CMS" chosen? If so what is it and where can we find >> additional information? > Not exactly. Here is the plan. > > (1) Copy OpenOffice.apache.org svn to a new git repository. > > (2) Learn to use the new infra supported yaml tags to try a few different > build techniques. I am familiar with JBake from the incubator build but > Pelican is possible. > > (3) Finish the project site. > > (4) Rinse and repeat with the OpenOffice.org site > >> The current site, as Dave pointed out earlier, uses a lot of the current >> CMS capabilities in terms of page rendering, dealing with the many >> languages of the site etc. to render the static content. > We’ll figure that out. > > If someone wants to redesign the site we can work through it in parallel. >> * How long will svn continue to function for both www.openoffice.org and >> openoffice.apache.org? > The CMS is fragile and if it falls down it could become a blocking issue. > Infra will warm is if things are immanent. I did discuss our migration > briefly with an infra person at ACNA19. > >> * It seems it would be advantageous to do a LOT of housecleaning on >> www.openoffice.org before migration >> >> I don't have ANY ideas about archiving www.openoffice.org. It is quite >> large. I could certainly help in about a month with the "housecleaning" >> aspect of both sites assuming they remain svn accessible for a while. >> But I'm assuming we might want archives of both even before that. Yes? > Tag the SVN repository before starting its cleanup. Feel free to keep a > local copy. > > I recommend doing cleanup on a local copy and checking in
Re: [status] Static webside migration
Am 01.10.19 um 20:18 schrieb Marcus: > Am 01.10.19 um 19:31 schrieb Dave Fisher: >> Heads up that I’m starting to do the migration, >> >>> Repos name must start with OpenOffice. > > thanks a lot for starting this beast of migration. > >>> I propose these: >>> >>> OpenOffice-DevWebsite >>> OpenOffice-OrgWebsite > > May I ask you to use shorter names and all in lower case: > > ooo-dev-site > ooo-org-site > > I prefer this as it looks easier to remember and to use. +1 Matthias > > Thanks > > Marcus > > > >> I’ll be tackling the project site first. >> >> I plan to make use of https://S.apache.org/asfyaml so that we will >> have staging and production. >> >> I may use the Apache CMS scripts for page generation. Infra-VP does >> not have trouble with those being on a Jenkins or Buildbot node. I >> may use jBake which I’ve used with the Incubator site. It may use both. >> >> Changes will be done in GIT and the CMS WebGUI will not be used. >> Committers will be able to change the git repos. There will be >> instructions on the local build as well. I’m starting with the local >> build. >> >> This will take sometime. >> >> If someone wants to redesign our Websites Look & Feel then proposals >> welcome. I may play with it myself... >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> >>> I have one more question. Jörg has mentioned that a lot of outside links point to the current web pages. What do we do with this? Do we make an announcement that this will happen and maybe give people some sort of hint to update their link lists? >>> >>> If we track what we change then we can create https redirection rules. >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Dave >>> All the Best Peter > On 24.09.19 22:54, Dave Fisher wrote: > Hi Kay, > > I promised to look into this migration after Apachecon. > > I’ve been thinking through a plan the last few days. > > See inline. > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Sep 24, 2019, at 1:38 PM, Kay Schenk >> wrote: >> >> Hi -- >> >> The last item I saw on this topic was this one concerning the new >> CMS >> >> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/msg36504.html >> >> and I recall you mentioning at one point that it was desirable to >> do some housecleaning on the www.openoffice.org web site due to >> size and no longer pertinent information. >> >> Some questions at this point -- >> >> * was a new "CMS" chosen? If so what is it and where can we find >> additional information? > Not exactly. Here is the plan. > > (1) Copy OpenOffice.apache.org svn to a new git repository. > > (2) Learn to use the new infra supported yaml tags to try a few > different build techniques. I am familiar with JBake from the > incubator build but Pelican is possible. > > (3) Finish the project site. > > (4) Rinse and repeat with the OpenOffice.org site > >> The current site, as Dave pointed out earlier, uses a lot of the >> current CMS capabilities in terms of page rendering, dealing with >> the many languages of the site etc. to render the static content. > We’ll figure that out. > > If someone wants to redesign the site we can work through it in > parallel. >> * How long will svn continue to function for both >> www.openoffice.org and openoffice.apache.org? > The CMS is fragile and if it falls down it could become a blocking > issue. Infra will warm is if things are immanent. I did discuss > our migration briefly with an infra person at ACNA19. > >> * It seems it would be advantageous to do a LOT of housecleaning >> on www.openoffice.org before migration >> >> I don't have ANY ideas about archiving www.openoffice.org. It is >> quite large. I could certainly help in about a month with the >> "housecleaning" aspect of both sites assuming they remain svn >> accessible for a while. But I'm assuming we might want archives >> of both even before that. Yes? > Tag the SVN repository before starting its cleanup. Feel free to > keep a local copy. > > I recommend doing cleanup on a local copy and checking in the > results. > > So, three parallel threads. > > (1) Cleanup > (2) Redesign if needed. > (3) Move to git and away from CMS > > Regards, > Dave > >> -- MzK >> >> >> >>> On 9/19/19 10:01 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: >>> Hello all, >>> >>> >>> Can everyone interested in this topic give a short status? >>> >>> Short ping on the current availability. And list any impediments or >>> difficulties that he currently sees where others can help with. >>> >>> I would very much like to see this take some drive. And I would >>> love to >>> see George delivering something, so we can review committer >>> status in >>> the near future. (As I
Re: Building AOO 4.2.0 for Windows with AdoptOpenJDK
Hi Marcus, Am 01.10.19 um 20:20 schrieb Marcus: > Am 01.10.19 um 10:33 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >> Am 01.10.19 um 01:23 schrieb Marcus: >>> Am 30.09.19 um 22:59 schrieb Matthias Seidel: Am 30.09.19 um 22:35 schrieb Peter Kovacs: > We had constant 7 votes on 4.1.7 and 4.1.6 release. However only 3 > volunteers voted in both releases. > These numbers are low in general. Maybe we need to organize test > phases in order to raize the numbers. This will still not raise test > attendance for a single feature. > > How about we schedule a test release every quarter? These releases > do not necessary lead to a release and are announced as unstable. > But it would give people a better time frame to plan and we can > advertise for tester. I build new versions about every second week. For sure, people are downloading these builds and use them on a daily base. Still no feedback! The problem isn't about the builds... >>> >>> to make it a bit more comfortable for you: What about to build only >>> when it is worth it (e.g., after some commits or bigger/important >>> commits and not with a fixed time schedule? >> >> I am not uncomfortable with building AOO. In fact I build even more >> often to test my changes before I commit. >> I only upload once a week or two. ;-) >> >> And don't forget that we have no working buildbots anymore! > > sure, I just want to show you a way to reduce your builds. Especially > when the commit rate is very low at the moment. I do only build (for my personal use) when I did a commit. This way I can monitor if something is broken. Constant QA is something missing from this project for way too long... Matthias > > Marcus > > > > Am 30. September 2019 21:13:52 MESZ schrieb Matthias Seidel > : >> Hi Dave, >> >> Am 30.09.19 um 18:53 schrieb Dave Fisher: >>> Hi Matthias, >>> >>> I think that it is likely people were focused on 4.1.7 testing. >> Where have all these people been when we voted for release? ;-) >> >>> My personal opinion is that if switching does not require users to >> switch and they can use the Oracle JRE if that is what they have >> then >> the change make sense. >> >> The user is still free to choose whatever JRE he/she wants (and is >> detected by AOO). >> >> I build with AdoptOpenJDK for some weeks now [1] and have found no >> problems. But that *really* needs more testing... >> >> Regards, >> >> Matthias >> >> [1] https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Test/ >> >>> Regards, >>> Dave >>> On Sep 30, 2019, at 8:31 AM, Matthias Seidel >> wrote: No feedback=No interest? Maybe I should stop providing test builds. That would save me a lot of my spare time... Regards, Matthias Am 05.09.19 um 12:58 schrieb Matthias Seidel: > Hi Keith, all, > > Did you have time to test? > > Feedback is always welcome... ;-) > > Regards, > > Matthias > > Am 01.09.19 um 18:23 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >> Hi all, >> >> Am 31.08.19 um 18:45 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >>> Hi Keith, >>> >>> Am 31.08.19 um 15:37 schrieb Keith N. McKenna: On 8/31/2019 4:23 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote: > Hi all, > > At the moment I am doing my test builds (trunk and 42X) for >> Windows with > the latest Oracle JDK (8u221). > I am still able to download, but Oracle changed its > licensing. >> I am not > a lawyer and would prefer to move away from it. > > Damjan recently introduced some patches, so AOO can now work >> with > AdoptOpenJDK. > It is available in 32 bit, which is still needed for Windows >> [1]. > I am just doing a build for AOO 4.2.0 with AdaptOpenJDK > (8u222) >> and it > looks good so far... > > What do you think? > > Regards, > > Matthias > > [1] > >> https://adoptopenjdk.net/releases.html?variant=openjdk8=hotspot#x32_win >> >> > Mathias; This sounds like it has great potential as it appears to gives >> us a potential path beyond version 8 as a cursory reading of the >> AdoptOpenJDK web site shows that it supports version 11 and 12 for both both >> Windows 32 and 64 bit systems. I look forward to testing your new version 4.2.0 build with the AdoptOpenJDK. >>> You
Re: Building AOO 4.2.0 for Windows with AdoptOpenJDK
Am 01.10.19 um 10:33 schrieb Matthias Seidel: Am 01.10.19 um 01:23 schrieb Marcus: Am 30.09.19 um 22:59 schrieb Matthias Seidel: Am 30.09.19 um 22:35 schrieb Peter Kovacs: We had constant 7 votes on 4.1.7 and 4.1.6 release. However only 3 volunteers voted in both releases. These numbers are low in general. Maybe we need to organize test phases in order to raize the numbers. This will still not raise test attendance for a single feature. How about we schedule a test release every quarter? These releases do not necessary lead to a release and are announced as unstable. But it would give people a better time frame to plan and we can advertise for tester. I build new versions about every second week. For sure, people are downloading these builds and use them on a daily base. Still no feedback! The problem isn't about the builds... to make it a bit more comfortable for you: What about to build only when it is worth it (e.g., after some commits or bigger/important commits and not with a fixed time schedule? I am not uncomfortable with building AOO. In fact I build even more often to test my changes before I commit. I only upload once a week or two. ;-) And don't forget that we have no working buildbots anymore! sure, I just want to show you a way to reduce your builds. Especially when the commit rate is very low at the moment. Marcus Am 30. September 2019 21:13:52 MESZ schrieb Matthias Seidel : Hi Dave, Am 30.09.19 um 18:53 schrieb Dave Fisher: Hi Matthias, I think that it is likely people were focused on 4.1.7 testing. Where have all these people been when we voted for release? ;-) My personal opinion is that if switching does not require users to switch and they can use the Oracle JRE if that is what they have then the change make sense. The user is still free to choose whatever JRE he/she wants (and is detected by AOO). I build with AdoptOpenJDK for some weeks now [1] and have found no problems. But that *really* needs more testing... Regards, Matthias [1] https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Test/ Regards, Dave On Sep 30, 2019, at 8:31 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote: No feedback=No interest? Maybe I should stop providing test builds. That would save me a lot of my spare time... Regards, Matthias Am 05.09.19 um 12:58 schrieb Matthias Seidel: Hi Keith, all, Did you have time to test? Feedback is always welcome... ;-) Regards, Matthias Am 01.09.19 um 18:23 schrieb Matthias Seidel: Hi all, Am 31.08.19 um 18:45 schrieb Matthias Seidel: Hi Keith, Am 31.08.19 um 15:37 schrieb Keith N. McKenna: On 8/31/2019 4:23 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote: Hi all, At the moment I am doing my test builds (trunk and 42X) for Windows with the latest Oracle JDK (8u221). I am still able to download, but Oracle changed its licensing. I am not a lawyer and would prefer to move away from it. Damjan recently introduced some patches, so AOO can now work with AdoptOpenJDK. It is available in 32 bit, which is still needed for Windows [1]. I am just doing a build for AOO 4.2.0 with AdaptOpenJDK (8u222) and it looks good so far... What do you think? Regards, Matthias [1] https://adoptopenjdk.net/releases.html?variant=openjdk8=hotspot#x32_win Mathias; This sounds like it has great potential as it appears to gives us a potential path beyond version 8 as a cursory reading of the AdoptOpenJDK web site shows that it supports version 11 and 12 for both both Windows 32 and 64 bit systems. I look forward to testing your new version 4.2.0 build with the AdoptOpenJDK. You will find them at the usual place: https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Test/ They should be up tomorrow. Builds are online! Please test, especially everything related to Java. ;-) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [status] Static webside migration
Am 01.10.19 um 19:31 schrieb Dave Fisher: Heads up that I’m starting to do the migration, Repos name must start with OpenOffice. thanks a lot for starting this beast of migration. I propose these: OpenOffice-DevWebsite OpenOffice-OrgWebsite May I ask you to use shorter names and all in lower case: ooo-dev-site ooo-org-site I prefer this as it looks easier to remember and to use. Thanks Marcus I’ll be tackling the project site first. I plan to make use of https://S.apache.org/asfyaml so that we will have staging and production. I may use the Apache CMS scripts for page generation. Infra-VP does not have trouble with those being on a Jenkins or Buildbot node. I may use jBake which I’ve used with the Incubator site. It may use both. Changes will be done in GIT and the CMS WebGUI will not be used. Committers will be able to change the git repos. There will be instructions on the local build as well. I’m starting with the local build. This will take sometime. If someone wants to redesign our Websites Look & Feel then proposals welcome. I may play with it myself... Regards, Dave I have one more question. Jörg has mentioned that a lot of outside links point to the current web pages. What do we do with this? Do we make an announcement that this will happen and maybe give people some sort of hint to update their link lists? If we track what we change then we can create https redirection rules. Best Regards, Dave All the Best Peter On 24.09.19 22:54, Dave Fisher wrote: Hi Kay, I promised to look into this migration after Apachecon. I’ve been thinking through a plan the last few days. See inline. Sent from my iPhone On Sep 24, 2019, at 1:38 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: Hi -- The last item I saw on this topic was this one concerning the new CMS https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/msg36504.html and I recall you mentioning at one point that it was desirable to do some housecleaning on the www.openoffice.org web site due to size and no longer pertinent information. Some questions at this point -- * was a new "CMS" chosen? If so what is it and where can we find additional information? Not exactly. Here is the plan. (1) Copy OpenOffice.apache.org svn to a new git repository. (2) Learn to use the new infra supported yaml tags to try a few different build techniques. I am familiar with JBake from the incubator build but Pelican is possible. (3) Finish the project site. (4) Rinse and repeat with the OpenOffice.org site The current site, as Dave pointed out earlier, uses a lot of the current CMS capabilities in terms of page rendering, dealing with the many languages of the site etc. to render the static content. We’ll figure that out. If someone wants to redesign the site we can work through it in parallel. * How long will svn continue to function for both www.openoffice.org and openoffice.apache.org? The CMS is fragile and if it falls down it could become a blocking issue. Infra will warm is if things are immanent. I did discuss our migration briefly with an infra person at ACNA19. * It seems it would be advantageous to do a LOT of housecleaning on www.openoffice.org before migration I don't have ANY ideas about archiving www.openoffice.org. It is quite large. I could certainly help in about a month with the "housecleaning" aspect of both sites assuming they remain svn accessible for a while. But I'm assuming we might want archives of both even before that. Yes? Tag the SVN repository before starting its cleanup. Feel free to keep a local copy. I recommend doing cleanup on a local copy and checking in the results. So, three parallel threads. (1) Cleanup (2) Redesign if needed. (3) Move to git and away from CMS Regards, Dave -- MzK On 9/19/19 10:01 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: Hello all, Can everyone interested in this topic give a short status? Short ping on the current availability. And list any impediments or difficulties that he currently sees where others can help with. I would very much like to see this take some drive. And I would love to see George delivering something, so we can review committer status in the near future. (As I do with any other volunteer knocking on our door.) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [status] Static webside migration
Hi - Heads up that I’m starting to do the migration, > Repos name must start with OpenOffice. > > I propose these: > > OpenOffice-DevWebsite > OpenOffice-OrgWebsite I’ll be tackling the project site first. I plan to make use of https://S.apache.org/asfyaml so that we will have staging and production. I may use the Apache CMS scripts for page generation. Infra-VP does not have trouble with those being on a Jenkins or Buildbot node. I may use jBake which I’ve used with the Incubator site. It may use both. Changes will be done in GIT and the CMS WebGUI will not be used. Committers will be able to change the git repos. There will be instructions on the local build as well. I’m starting with the local build. This will take sometime. If someone wants to redesign our Websites Look & Feel then proposals welcome. I may play with it myself... Regards, Dave > >> >> I have one more question. Jörg has mentioned that a lot of outside >> links point to the current web pages. What do we do with this? Do we >> make an announcement that this will happen and maybe give people some >> sort of hint to update their link lists? > > If we track what we change then we can create https redirection rules. > > Best Regards, > Dave > >> >> >> All the Best >> >> Peter >> >>> On 24.09.19 22:54, Dave Fisher wrote: >>> Hi Kay, >>> >>> I promised to look into this migration after Apachecon. >>> >>> I’ve been thinking through a plan the last few days. >>> >>> See inline. >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> On Sep 24, 2019, at 1:38 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: Hi -- The last item I saw on this topic was this one concerning the new CMS https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/msg36504.html and I recall you mentioning at one point that it was desirable to do some housecleaning on the www.openoffice.org web site due to size and no longer pertinent information. Some questions at this point -- * was a new "CMS" chosen? If so what is it and where can we find additional information? >>> Not exactly. Here is the plan. >>> >>> (1) Copy OpenOffice.apache.org svn to a new git repository. >>> >>> (2) Learn to use the new infra supported yaml tags to try a few different >>> build techniques. I am familiar with JBake from the incubator build but >>> Pelican is possible. >>> >>> (3) Finish the project site. >>> >>> (4) Rinse and repeat with the OpenOffice.org site >>> The current site, as Dave pointed out earlier, uses a lot of the current CMS capabilities in terms of page rendering, dealing with the many languages of the site etc. to render the static content. >>> We’ll figure that out. >>> >>> If someone wants to redesign the site we can work through it in parallel. * How long will svn continue to function for both www.openoffice.org and openoffice.apache.org? >>> The CMS is fragile and if it falls down it could become a blocking issue. >>> Infra will warm is if things are immanent. I did discuss our migration >>> briefly with an infra person at ACNA19. >>> * It seems it would be advantageous to do a LOT of housecleaning on www.openoffice.org before migration I don't have ANY ideas about archiving www.openoffice.org. It is quite large. I could certainly help in about a month with the "housecleaning" aspect of both sites assuming they remain svn accessible for a while. But I'm assuming we might want archives of both even before that. Yes? >>> Tag the SVN repository before starting its cleanup. Feel free to keep a >>> local copy. >>> >>> I recommend doing cleanup on a local copy and checking in the results. >>> >>> So, three parallel threads. >>> >>> (1) Cleanup >>> (2) Redesign if needed. >>> (3) Move to git and away from CMS >>> >>> Regards, >>> Dave >>> -- MzK > On 9/19/19 10:01 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: > Hello all, > > > Can everyone interested in this topic give a short status? > > Short ping on the current availability. And list any impediments or > difficulties that he currently sees where others can help with. > > I would very much like to see this take some drive. And I would love to > see George delivering something, so we can review committer status in > the near future. (As I do with any other volunteer knocking on our door.) > > > Thanks > > All the Best > > Peter > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> >> >>
Re: A openoffice 'dependency' map
Mwiki does have "versioning" of a sort. You can look at previous versions of pages and do rollbacks. I'm looking at the following -- https://wiki.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Architecture=245544=245542 in which you can see how revisions are managed. Good that you are trying to deal with this in any way though. "And in the end, only kindness matters." -- Jewel, "Hands" __ MzK On 9/30/19 11:13 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote: Sadly a picture as such is currently of no use. The picture has 1200 objects. Most of them pointers from one Modul to another. And there are still errors or modules are duplicated. Draw has some flaws for this use case. But I already learned what we need to improve in Draw. The map is still work in progress. But I would like to share it in this early stage. Confluence has the advantage that it versions the document. That would make it easier to maintain. Does mwiki also version the code? Hmm maybe we could move the contents of other picture already on Confluence in this document so you would obtain a document that contains all pictures. From the good ones we can the create pictures as links. Am 1. Oktober 2019 01:19:03 MESZ schrieb Marcus : Am 30.09.19 um 21:51 schrieb Peter Kovacs: I have made it to my first milestone in creating documentation. I have created a draw document that shows all modules. Pointers point towards providers and dependencies, from the configuration standpoint of the build system. It is not really accurate, but it gives an idea on the topic. Where do you think is the right home for this document? It is maybe to thing that will prevail since the manual effort of maintenance is quite high. I would say, make a JPG or PNG of it, put it in Confluence with some text and attach the original Draw doc to that page. Maybe here [1]? [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/UML-Diagramme Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
ApacheCon North America 2020, project participation
Hi, folks, (Note: You're receiving this email because you're on the dev@ list for one or more Apache Software Foundation projects.) For ApacheCon North America 2019, we asked projects to participate in the creation of project/topic specific tracks. This was very successful, with about 15 projects stepping up to curate the content for their track/summit/event. We need to know if you're going to do the same for 2020. This informs how large a venue we book for the event, how long the event runs, and many other considerations. If you intend to participate again in 2020, we need to hear from you on the plann...@apachecon.com mailing list. This is not a firm commitment, but we need to know if you're, say, 75% confident that you'll be participating. And, no, we do not have any details at all, but assume that it will be in roughly the same calendar space as this year's event, ie, somewhere in the August-October timeframe. Thanks. -- Rich Bowen VP Conferences The Apache Software Foundation @apachecon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-de-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-de-h...@openoffice.apache.org
ApacheCon North America 2020, project participation
Hi, folks, (Note: You're receiving this email because you're on the dev@ list for one or more Apache Software Foundation projects.) For ApacheCon North America 2019, we asked projects to participate in the creation of project/topic specific tracks. This was very successful, with about 15 projects stepping up to curate the content for their track/summit/event. We need to know if you're going to do the same for 2020. This informs how large a venue we book for the event, how long the event runs, and many other considerations. If you intend to participate again in 2020, we need to hear from you on the plann...@apachecon.com mailing list. This is not a firm commitment, but we need to know if you're, say, 75% confident that you'll be participating. And, no, we do not have any details at all, but assume that it will be in roughly the same calendar space as this year's event, ie, somewhere in the August-October timeframe. Thanks. -- Rich Bowen VP Conferences The Apache Software Foundation @apachecon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [vote] AOO417-RC1
+1 > On Sep 30, 2019, at 4:03 PM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Great! > > One additional thought: > > We use $Revision$ in main/solenv/bin/build.pl and a lot of other files. > That doesn't seem to work anymore since we switched from SVN to Git. > > We have AC_REVISION( $Revision$ ) in configure.ac. Maybe we can replace > the logic [1]. > > Regards, > >Matthias > > [1] > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/8215785/how-can-i-use-ac-revision-with-git/8216176 > > > Am 30.09.19 um 19:14 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> I have an idea on how to include the git hash on the source distro... will >> try to work on it this week. >> >>> On Sep 26, 2019, at 7:58 PM, Don Lewis wrote: >>> >>> On 26 Sep, Matthias Seidel wrote: Hi Don, Am 20.09.19 um 06:47 schrieb Don Lewis: > Prioritizing the publication of the source tarball would be helpful. I > can't publish the updated FreeBSD port until that happens, and the > binary packages won't be available until a couple days after that. How was it done in the past? >>> Basically it wasn't done and nobody noticed. Pretty anyone who might >>> notice was building from an svn checkout and not a source tarball. >>> Probably the biggest consumer of the source tarball was the FreeBSD >>> port, which I maintain, and I never notice that the revision info was >>> blank on FreeBSD. I only noticed when the discussion came up where >>> during the cutover to git. >>> As I understand it, the revision was also missing when building from source tarball in earlier versions? >>> Yes. Building from a source tarball is probably something we should >>> test on an ongoing basis. >>> We should implement it in trunk now and backport it to AOO42X and AOO418. >>> Agreed. >>> >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >>> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Building AOO 4.2.0 for Windows with AdoptOpenJDK
Hi Marcus, Am 01.10.19 um 01:20 schrieb Marcus: > Am 30.09.19 um 17:31 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >> No feedback=No interest? >> >> Maybe I should stop providing test builds. >> That would save me a lot of my spare time... > > sorry for being silent for this topic. However, Java is not really my > favorite thing. ;-) Just do normal tests with everything that is related to Java: - Search in online help - (some) wizards - database - ... The only "special" thing to test would be if the SDK is complete regarding JavaDoc. But I doubt that anyone had a look at the SDK in the past years... ;-) Matthias > > Marcus > > > >> Am 05.09.19 um 12:58 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >>> Hi Keith, all, >>> >>> Did you have time to test? >>> >>> Feedback is always welcome... ;-) >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Matthias >>> >>> Am 01.09.19 um 18:23 schrieb Matthias Seidel: Hi all, Am 31.08.19 um 18:45 schrieb Matthias Seidel: > Hi Keith, > > Am 31.08.19 um 15:37 schrieb Keith N. McKenna: >> On 8/31/2019 4:23 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> At the moment I am doing my test builds (trunk and 42X) for >>> Windows with >>> the latest Oracle JDK (8u221). >>> I am still able to download, but Oracle changed its licensing. I >>> am not >>> a lawyer and would prefer to move away from it. >>> >>> Damjan recently introduced some patches, so AOO can now work with >>> AdoptOpenJDK. >>> It is available in 32 bit, which is still needed for Windows [1]. >>> I am just doing a build for AOO 4.2.0 with AdaptOpenJDK (8u222) >>> and it >>> looks good so far... >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Matthias >>> >>> [1] >>> https://adoptopenjdk.net/releases.html?variant=openjdk8=hotspot#x32_win >>> >>> >>> >> Mathias; >> >> This sounds like it has great potential as it appears to gives us a >> potential path beyond version 8 as a cursory reading of the >> AdoptOpenJDK >> web site shows that it supports version 11 and 12 for both both >> Windows >> 32 and 64 bit systems. >> >> I look forward to testing your new version 4.2.0 build with the >> AdoptOpenJDK. > You will find them at the usual place: > https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Test/ > > They should be up tomorrow. Builds are online! Please test, especially everything related to Java. ;-) > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Building AOO 4.2.0 for Windows with AdoptOpenJDK
Hi Marcus, Am 01.10.19 um 01:23 schrieb Marcus: > Am 30.09.19 um 22:59 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >> Am 30.09.19 um 22:35 schrieb Peter Kovacs: >>> We had constant 7 votes on 4.1.7 and 4.1.6 release. However only 3 >>> volunteers voted in both releases. >>> These numbers are low in general. Maybe we need to organize test >>> phases in order to raize the numbers. This will still not raise test >>> attendance for a single feature. >>> >>> How about we schedule a test release every quarter? These releases >>> do not necessary lead to a release and are announced as unstable. >>> But it would give people a better time frame to plan and we can >>> advertise for tester. >> >> I build new versions about every second week. >> For sure, people are downloading these builds and use them on a daily >> base. Still no feedback! >> >> The problem isn't about the builds... > > to make it a bit more comfortable for you: What about to build only > when it is worth it (e.g., after some commits or bigger/important > commits and not with a fixed time schedule? I am not uncomfortable with building AOO. In fact I build even more often to test my changes before I commit. I only upload once a week or two. ;-) And don't forget that we have no working buildbots anymore! Matthias > > Just a thought. > > Marcus > > > >>> Am 30. September 2019 21:13:52 MESZ schrieb Matthias Seidel >>> : Hi Dave, Am 30.09.19 um 18:53 schrieb Dave Fisher: > Hi Matthias, > > I think that it is likely people were focused on 4.1.7 testing. Where have all these people been when we voted for release? ;-) > My personal opinion is that if switching does not require users to switch and they can use the Oracle JRE if that is what they have then the change make sense. The user is still free to choose whatever JRE he/she wants (and is detected by AOO). I build with AdoptOpenJDK for some weeks now [1] and have found no problems. But that *really* needs more testing... Regards, Matthias [1] https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Test/ > Regards, > Dave > >> On Sep 30, 2019, at 8:31 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote: >> No feedback=No interest? >> >> Maybe I should stop providing test builds. >> That would save me a lot of my spare time... >> >> Regards, >> >> Matthias >> >> >> Am 05.09.19 um 12:58 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >>> Hi Keith, all, >>> >>> Did you have time to test? >>> >>> Feedback is always welcome... ;-) >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Matthias >>> >>> Am 01.09.19 um 18:23 schrieb Matthias Seidel: Hi all, Am 31.08.19 um 18:45 schrieb Matthias Seidel: > Hi Keith, > > Am 31.08.19 um 15:37 schrieb Keith N. McKenna: >> On 8/31/2019 4:23 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> At the moment I am doing my test builds (trunk and 42X) for Windows with >>> the latest Oracle JDK (8u221). >>> I am still able to download, but Oracle changed its licensing. I am not >>> a lawyer and would prefer to move away from it. >>> >>> Damjan recently introduced some patches, so AOO can now work with >>> AdoptOpenJDK. >>> It is available in 32 bit, which is still needed for Windows [1]. >>> I am just doing a build for AOO 4.2.0 with AdaptOpenJDK (8u222) and it >>> looks good so far... >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Matthias >>> >>> [1] >>> https://adoptopenjdk.net/releases.html?variant=openjdk8=hotspot#x32_win >>> >> Mathias; >> >> This sounds like it has great potential as it appears to gives us a >> potential path beyond version 8 as a cursory reading of the AdoptOpenJDK >> web site shows that it supports version 11 and 12 for both both Windows >> 32 and 64 bit systems. >> >> I look forward to testing your new version 4.2.0 build with the >> AdoptOpenJDK. > You will find them at the usual place: > https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Test/ > > They should be up tomorrow. Builds are online! Please test, especially everything related to Java. ;-) > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: A openoffice 'dependency' map
Sadly a picture as such is currently of no use. The picture has 1200 objects. Most of them pointers from one Modul to another. And there are still errors or modules are duplicated. Draw has some flaws for this use case. But I already learned what we need to improve in Draw. The map is still work in progress. But I would like to share it in this early stage. Confluence has the advantage that it versions the document. That would make it easier to maintain. Does mwiki also version the code? Hmm maybe we could move the contents of other picture already on Confluence in this document so you would obtain a document that contains all pictures. From the good ones we can the create pictures as links. Am 1. Oktober 2019 01:19:03 MESZ schrieb Marcus : >Am 30.09.19 um 21:51 schrieb Peter Kovacs: >> I have made it to my first milestone in creating documentation. I >have created a draw document that shows all modules. Pointers point >towards providers and dependencies, from the configuration standpoint >of the build system. >> It is not really accurate, but it gives an idea on the topic. >> >> Where do you think is the right home for this document? It is maybe >to thing that will prevail since the manual effort of maintenance is >quite high. > >I would say, make a JPG or PNG of it, put it in Confluence with some >text and attach the original Draw doc to that page. Maybe here [1]? > >[1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/UML-Diagramme > >Marcus > > >- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
