Re: Bug in AOO 3.4.1 on the Fedora 18
On 01/23/2013 03:04 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: I think this is one further reason to eliminate the dump 3 layer directory structure which is totally obsolete and make things only complicate. Currently we have the URE, basis and brand layer which is the result of some cleaver thinking of some product managers to have multiple offices installed on the same machine. Multiple offices that are based on OpenOffice and are only different in the brand layer. I think a scenario which is very seldom and if somebody need it, it should be fine to duplicate the file. Running both on my Fedora box has been a common thing with no problems. Are you proposing removing the ability? -- Andrew Pitonyak My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
Re: [bugzilla] "Product" category clean-up?
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 12:28:44PM -0500, Rob Weir wrote: >> The native-lang "product" has a separate "component" for each locale. >> That was a change from the legacy OOo BZ where each NL project had its >> own top-level "product". I think this is an improvement, since the >> old structure cluttered the root level with more than 100 of products. > > The component br-pt should be pt-BR > Thanks, fixed. -Rob > > Regards > -- > Ariel Constenla-Haile > La Plata, Argentina
Re: [bugzilla] "Product" category clean-up?
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 12:28:44PM -0500, Rob Weir wrote: > The native-lang "product" has a separate "component" for each locale. > That was a change from the legacy OOo BZ where each NL project had its > own top-level "product". I think this is an improvement, since the > old structure cluttered the root level with more than 100 of products. The component br-pt should be pt-BR Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina pgpHe4L5gaKaE.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [RELEASE]: release schedule/preparation and start voting for AOO 3.4.1 repin
Am 01/23/2013 12:40 AM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
On 01/22/2013 01:41 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
Am 01/22/2013 09:06 PM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
our plan was to release AOO 3.4.1 on Jan. 24th. I think I have forgot to
start the necessary vote in time and plan to do this tomorrow now.
hmmm...for some reason, I didn't think we needed a vote on this...oh
well, my mistake obviously
According to this plan think of the following release plan to vote, make
the bits available, prepare announcements, prepare the download page
(update for new languages), ...
1. start vote on Jan 23th and inform infra about the planned release
2. provide the bits after the final vote on Jan. 26th, I will do that
late
on Saturday becasue I am traveling to he US
3. inform infra and SourceForge about the release and wait at least 24
hours for synchronizing the mirrors, I would say until Tuesday
(Tuesday is
always a good day for an announcement)
4. in the meantime prepare an announcement and have it in place for
Tuesday, Jan 29th
Tuesday next week is also good.
I should be able to assist with the website in the evening hours (CET).
5. the same for the adapted download page
@Kay, all:
Any need to test the additions in a test area? I've just changed the 8
new languages in "languages.js" to be available ("n" ---> "y"), added
download links to the "other.html" and also for the checksums webpage.
It might be nice to able to do a "live" test once the packs are at
SourceForge -- I can't tell by this when that might be -- late Sun?
So, I would suggest uploading revisions to /download/test just to make
sure.
OK, I'll make them available in test area as soon as I can see the
packages online - maybe already on Sunday.
Marcus
6. put the changes live and fire up the announcement, share the news via
all channels
7. adapt the update mechansim to support the new languages
... and make sure to exclude "hu" as it's already available.
Marcus
8. start counting the downloads
9. being proud of a further release and thank our translation volunteers
10. continue towards AOO 4.0
11. invite further translation volunteers, QA and developers to join AOO
and make 4.0 a further success and available in more languages
Ok 10. and 11. will have some time and a lot of work is in front of us
but
it will happen ;-)
Sorry that I forgot the vote in time and we have to postpone the release
until next week.
Juergen
Re: OpenOffice Base - Multiplying Columns
Hello Eric, two comments: 1.) In general there is no reason to store calculated values in a databse. 2.) the basic programm doesn't contain informatioens about the data cells which you want to compare or fill. Kind regards Mechtilde Am 23.01.2013 20:29, schrieb Eric Meyer: > I would like to multiply a column based on one of two values, depending > upon whether or not a boolean value is true or false. Specifically, if I > select Used as true, I would like my margin to be multiplied by .35. > Otherwise, if it is false, then I would like my margin to be multiplied by > .3. I would like both of these answers to be entered into my Commission > column. > > I wrote a macro, though it is not entering the data: > > REM * BASIC * > > Sub Main > If Used = False Then Commission = Margin*.35 Else Commission=Margin*.3 > End Sub > > Thoughts/suggestions/guidance? > > signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: OpenOffice thin client edition - why not?
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 8:06 AM, Inge Wallin wrote: > On Friday, January 18, 2013 15:21:01 Ian Lynch wrote: >> On 18 January 2013 13:18, Fernando Cassia wrote: >> > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Ian Lynch wrote: >> >> What we really need is a cloud version of AOO like Google Docs. >> > >> > We don´t *need* ONE thing. That´s the beauty of open source, ´we´ >> > could do *several* things. >> >> Well yes, but it is more efficient to do one thing that covers many >> needs rather than try and do many things with not enough resource. >> >> > I for one don´t ´need´ an AJAX / HTML5 version of AOO... GDocs is fine... >> >> A lot of people would say yes but GDocs is not open source. >> Some people would say MS Office is fine and others would say Koffice. >> Question is whether or not we want a long term sustainable project for >> the community or one that will get more and more marginalised. > > As a side note: While I am happy that KOffice is mentioned now and then on > this list, I think it would be proper to mention the Calligra Suite instead. > KOffice is not being developed any more while Calligra is running full speed > ahead. > Hi Inge, Thanks for the reminder. Getting people to recognize a name change takes time, and repetition. We still see on a daily basis people expressing surprise to learn that OpenOffice is now at Apache. Are you planning to be at the KDE conference in July in Bilbao? It might good to have someone from AOO attend. Aside from the obvious common interest in ODF, it would be interesting to see if there are any other opportunities for collaboration. Regards, -Rob > -Inge > > > >> > I personally think browser based apps are a pig, and doing apps in >> > JScript is insane. I had Chrome open the other day just with GMail and >> > it was using over 150 MB of RAM... >> >> Not really a big problem with modern multi-gig computers (including >> future mobile technologies). Less of a problem than stuff that only >> works on one device or needs a lot of effort to port across >> multi-devices, operating systems etc. To me open standards are worth >> paying a bit of a price for in terms of machine resources since the >> latter continue to grow and get less expensive. >> >> > A thin client virtualized version on the other hand would use the PC´s >> > CPU and horsepower and deliver great speed to even to lowest powered >> > devices. >> >> Assuming you have someone to host it for you. O a global scale that is >> not trivial to do which is probably why Google with all its resources >> does what it does. >> >> > But of course, that´s going in a different direction from the current >> > fad >> >> Swimming against global trends is not a sensible idea when you have >> very limited resources and very little time. >> >> > FC
Re: Possible broken link
Johan Blomberg wrote: When you try to download the swedish dictionary at http://www.openoffice.org/sv/addons/ (Svensk ordlista), you get a "page not found". Thanks, replaced with a link to the dictionary included in Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 in Swedish, currently planned for release next week. Please check if the page is OK now. Also note that we are looking for a volunteer to translate into Swedish the release announcement: the text is at https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=apache_openoffice_now_available_in and, if you have some time to translate it, it would be great if you send the translation by e-mail to l...@openoffice.apache.org Regards, Andrea.
OpenOffice Base - Multiplying Columns
I would like to multiply a column based on one of two values, depending upon whether or not a boolean value is true or false. Specifically, if I select Used as true, I would like my margin to be multiplied by .35. Otherwise, if it is false, then I would like my margin to be multiplied by .3. I would like both of these answers to be entered into my Commission column. I wrote a macro, though it is not entering the data: REM * BASIC * Sub Main If Used = False Then Commission = Margin*.35 Else Commission=Margin*.3 End Sub Thoughts/suggestions/guidance? -- Eric Meyer NW Kansas Ag-Chem Representative LDI 1366 Toulon Avenue Hays, KS 67601 785-735-4355 Fax: 785-301-2421
Re: RAT scans: Re: What rights are given in an SGA
- Messaggio originale - > Da: Dave Fisher ... > > On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:12 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > >> Hello; >> >> >> - Messaggio originale - >>> Da: Jürgen Schmidt >> If we are distributing code there it is our responsibility. I am afraid there are also tarballs that deserve special > consideration. I recall we were carrying a GPL'd slovenian dictionary (not > sure if I >>> finally got rid of it). Some content like the SDK should be verified for > licensing content and updated. >>> >>> what do you mean with SDK? Our OpenOffice SDK is part of the normal >>> source tree and doesn't contain anything critical. >>> >> >> I just looked and it appears we are pointing to the latest source indeed. >> >> I was afraid that there might be pages pointing to older releases >> >> http://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/source/sdk/ >> >> >> I cleaned out older versions of dmake and a GPL'd dictionary that we > were >> carrying but without an audit we have no certainty about what may be left. >> >> And no, I don't have time to hunt for specific cases so that's the > reason why >> I am suggesting a rat scan. There's no hurry though, just something to >> consider for a TODO list. > > I think that rather than a RAT scan, a checkout of the web tree plus > find/greps > would uncover issues. > > Do you have search strings (other than GPL) to suggest? > I would focus around binary files (.zip, tar.*, .jar and oxt.) Pedro. > Regards, > Dave > >> >> Pedro. >
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 respin to support 8 new languages
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:13 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: > Hi all, > > this is a call for vote on releasing a minor respin of Apache OpenOffice > 3.4.1 to support 8 new languages (Danish, Swedish, Norwegian Bokmal, > Polish, Korean, Basque, Asturian, Scottish Gaelic). The Hungarian > version is repackaged and a Hungarian dictionary is now included. > > This release is a minor update to support further languages but no bug > fixes. We decided to keep the effort minimal and updated only the new > languages and no further minor bug fixes. It is the last minor update > including "incubating" in the name and we do that to integrate smoothly > in the naming scheme of the current release and to keep the download > simple. > > The source release for AOO 3.4.1 will be renewed and is based now on > revision 1435053 from branch AOO34. For our broad user base we built and > provide convenience binary packages on the same revision for all new > languages. > > The source release candidate can be found under > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341srcrelease > > The convenience binary full install sets for the new languages can be > found under > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341fullsets > > The convenience binary language packs for the new languages can be found > under > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341languagepacks > > Please vote on releasing this respin package as a complement to our > already released Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). > > The vote starts now and will be open for 72 hours until: > >Saturday, 26 January: 2013-01-26 10:00am UTC+1. > > The vote of PMC members is binding but we invite all people to vote (non > binding) on this RC. We would like to provide a release that is > supported by the majority of our project members. > >[ ] +1 Release this respin package as complement Apache OpenOffice > 3.4.1 (incubating) >[ ] 0 Don't care >[ ] -1 Do not release this package because... > +1 -- MzK "No act of kindness, no matter how small, is ever wasted." -- Aesop
Re: Updates to Bugzilla issues for obsolete assignments
Hi I think that is a brilliant idea. When I looked for mwiki problems I found a number of issues some dating back to 2006, and when I looked for the mail here in dev and in wiki I could not find any references. Would it make sense (and can we identify) these old no longer active accounts as well (in my case it was .de accounts) ? An alternative would be to say bug that have been assigned for e.g. more than a year go back to unassigned. rgds jan I. On 23 January 2013 18:26, Rob Weir wrote: > I've gone through Bugzilla and reset assignments for open defects > (those in unconfirmed, confirmed, accepted and reopened states) where > the assignment field was set to a user with a @sun.com or @oracle.com > email address. That way it will be clearer which issues are actually > unassigned and open for volunteers to grab. > > -Rob >
Fwd: Multiplying Columns in Base
I am having a difficult time accomplishing a simple command. Ideally, I would like to enter a value in the "Margin" column and have it calculate a value in the "Commission" column (where the multiplication factor would be dependent upon whether it was new or used). So, it would be something like, if "new" then take margin *.3 and enter data into commission. If "used" then take margin *.35 and enter data into commission. What is a good resource that I can use or what suggestions do you have? Thanks, -- Eric Meyer NW Kansas Ag-Chem Representative LDI 1366 Toulon Avenue Hays, KS 67601 785-735-4355 Fax: 785-301-2421 -- Eric Meyer NW Kansas Ag-Chem Representative LDI 1366 Toulon Avenue Hays, KS 67601 785-735-4355 Fax: 785-301-2421
Updates to Bugzilla issues for obsolete assignments
I've gone through Bugzilla and reset assignments for open defects (those in unconfirmed, confirmed, accepted and reopened states) where the assignment field was set to a user with a @sun.com or @oracle.com email address. That way it will be clearer which issues are actually unassigned and open for volunteers to grab. -Rob
Re: How to make money with Apache OpenOffice (proposed blog post)
Hi all, if you think it may be of interest, I could talk about the development of tailor-made extensions for customers. I think this may be seen as a kind of the win-win situation which Rob is referring to: taking advantage of the whole community by learning a lot about extension development, creating tailored extensions for customers with so much specific requirements that a consultancy agreement is needed, giving back to the community the new skills learned during the process (the ones not related to the customer's specific needs, or at least making generalizations), thus sharing knowledge, which can lead to new customers' requests and so on. In my case, for example, that's the way I came to talk at FOSDEM (it all started in quite recent times with IBM Lotus Symphony, but the global context is the same; indeed, it could even be a subject of interest, given the merging of Symphony code in AOO 4). I am at your disposal if you think it may fit. Best regards, Fabrizio On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > On 21/01/2013 Rob Weir wrote: > >> If anyone is uncomfortable with this I can do it on my personal blog, >> of course. But it is relevant to the AOO project, so I'd prefer to >> put it here. >> > > I see no reasons to avoid this topic. But the post would actually be more > credible, and enjoyable, if we actually manage to interview a couple of > consultants/companies who are making money (or even a living) out of > OpenOffice. So not only a generic post by project volunteers, but a post > including also a few paragraphs where established consultants provide some > extra information. > > Regards, > Andrea. >
Re: RAT scans: Re: What rights are given in an SGA
On Jan 23, 2013, at 7:12 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > Hello; > > > - Messaggio originale - >> Da: Jürgen Schmidt > >>> >>> If we are distributing code there it is our responsibility. >>> >>> >>> I am afraid there are also tarballs that deserve special consideration. >>> I recall we were carrying a GPL'd slovenian dictionary (not sure if I >> finally >>> got rid of it). Some content like the SDK should be verified for licensing >>> content and updated. >> >> what do you mean with SDK? Our OpenOffice SDK is part of the normal >> source tree and doesn't contain anything critical. >> > > I just looked and it appears we are pointing to the latest source indeed. > > I was afraid that there might be pages pointing to older releases > > http://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/source/sdk/ > > > I cleaned out older versions of dmake and a GPL'd dictionary that we were > carrying but without an audit we have no certainty about what may be left. > > And no, I don't have time to hunt for specific cases so that's the reason why > I am suggesting a rat scan. There's no hurry though, just something to > consider for a TODO list. I think that rather than a RAT scan, a checkout of the web tree plus find/greps would uncover issues. Do you have search strings (other than GPL) to suggest? Regards, Dave > > Pedro.
Re: OpenOffice thin client edition - why not?
On Friday, January 18, 2013 15:21:01 Ian Lynch wrote: > On 18 January 2013 13:18, Fernando Cassia wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Ian Lynch wrote: > >> What we really need is a cloud version of AOO like Google Docs. > > > > We don´t *need* ONE thing. That´s the beauty of open source, ´we´ > > could do *several* things. > > Well yes, but it is more efficient to do one thing that covers many > needs rather than try and do many things with not enough resource. > > > I for one don´t ´need´ an AJAX / HTML5 version of AOO... GDocs is fine... > > A lot of people would say yes but GDocs is not open source. > Some people would say MS Office is fine and others would say Koffice. > Question is whether or not we want a long term sustainable project for > the community or one that will get more and more marginalised. As a side note: While I am happy that KOffice is mentioned now and then on this list, I think it would be proper to mention the Calligra Suite instead. KOffice is not being developed any more while Calligra is running full speed ahead. -Inge > > I personally think browser based apps are a pig, and doing apps in > > JScript is insane. I had Chrome open the other day just with GMail and > > it was using over 150 MB of RAM... > > Not really a big problem with modern multi-gig computers (including > future mobile technologies). Less of a problem than stuff that only > works on one device or needs a lot of effort to port across > multi-devices, operating systems etc. To me open standards are worth > paying a bit of a price for in terms of machine resources since the > latter continue to grow and get less expensive. > > > A thin client virtualized version on the other hand would use the PC´s > > CPU and horsepower and deliver great speed to even to lowest powered > > devices. > > Assuming you have someone to host it for you. O a global scale that is > not trivial to do which is probably why Google with all its resources > does what it does. > > > But of course, that´s going in a different direction from the current > > fad > > Swimming against global trends is not a sensible idea when you have > very limited resources and very little time. > > > FC
Re: [CODE][CLEANUP]: getting rid of the 3 layer office directory structure
- Messaggio originale - > Da: Jürgen Schmidt ... > > On 1/23/13 4:29 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: >> >> >> >> >> - Messaggio originale - >>> Da: Jürgen Schmidt >> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> we currently still have a complex but not necessary 3 layer directory >>> structure in the office that makes many things more complicate and is >>> completely unnecessary. >>> >>> The reason why we have this is historical and not longer relevant and >>> the question is if we want to get rid of this for our next release? >>> >> >> It sounds like a good idea. The one thing I wonder about is if >> it shall cause trouble to the code being merged but you know >> the answer to that better that me. ;). >> ... > > I am talking about an office installation not the svn directory structure. > OK; it is a very invasive change but if we have to do it (for some linux distributions, apparently) I agree that 4.0 is the right place/moment to do it. Pedro.
Re: [CODE][CLEANUP]: getting rid of the 3 layer office directory structure
On 1/23/13 4:29 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > > > > > - Messaggio originale - >> Da: Jürgen Schmidt > >> >> Hi, >> >> we currently still have a complex but not necessary 3 layer directory >> structure in the office that makes many things more complicate and is >> completely unnecessary. >> >> The reason why we have this is historical and not longer relevant and >> the question is if we want to get rid of this for our next release? >> > > It sounds like a good idea. The one thing I wonder about is if > it shall cause trouble to the code being merged but you know > the answer to that better that me. ;). > > While here I noticed we started moving some dependent modules > from main/ to ext_libraries/ but things like boost and stlport were > never moved. Is there some special consideration or adjustment > to be done to the build, or is it just a matter of doing some > "svn move" around the base? I am talking about an office installation not the svn directory structure. Juergen > >> >> Any opinions or volunteers who have interest to help with such a >> project? If we decide to work on it, we have to start immediately to >> have enough time for testing. >> > > Not volunteering sorry, my plate is full. > > > Pedro. >
Re: [CODE][CLEANUP]: getting rid of the 3 layer office directory structure
- Messaggio originale - > Da: Jürgen Schmidt > > Hi, > > we currently still have a complex but not necessary 3 layer directory > structure in the office that makes many things more complicate and is > completely unnecessary. > > The reason why we have this is historical and not longer relevant and > the question is if we want to get rid of this for our next release? > It sounds like a good idea. The one thing I wonder about is if it shall cause trouble to the code being merged but you know the answer to that better that me. ;). While here I noticed we started moving some dependent modules from main/ to ext_libraries/ but things like boost and stlport were never moved. Is there some special consideration or adjustment to be done to the build, or is it just a matter of doing some "svn move" around the base? > > Any opinions or volunteers who have interest to help with such a > project? If we decide to work on it, we have to start immediately to > have enough time for testing. > Not volunteering sorry, my plate is full. Pedro.
Re: RAT scans: Re: What rights are given in an SGA
Hello; - Messaggio originale - > Da: Jürgen Schmidt >> >> If we are distributing code there it is our responsibility. >> >> >> I am afraid there are also tarballs that deserve special consideration. >> I recall we were carrying a GPL'd slovenian dictionary (not sure if I > finally >> got rid of it). Some content like the SDK should be verified for licensing >> content and updated. > > what do you mean with SDK? Our OpenOffice SDK is part of the normal > source tree and doesn't contain anything critical. > I just looked and it appears we are pointing to the latest source indeed. I was afraid that there might be pages pointing to older releases http://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/source/sdk/ I cleaned out older versions of dmake and a GPL'd dictionary that we were carrying but without an audit we have no certainty about what may be left. And no, I don't have time to hunt for specific cases so that's the reason why I am suggesting a rat scan. There's no hurry though, just something to consider for a TODO list. Pedro.
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 respin to support 8 new languages
Jürgen Schmidt wrote: Hi all, this is a call for vote on releasing a minor respin of Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 to support 8 new languages (Danish, Swedish, Norwegian Bokmal, Polish, Korean, Basque, Asturian, Scottish Gaelic). The Hungarian version is repackaged and a Hungarian dictionary is now included. This release is a minor update to support further languages but no bug fixes. We decided to keep the effort minimal and updated only the new languages and no further minor bug fixes. It is the last minor update including "incubating" in the name and we do that to integrate smoothly in the naming scheme of the current release and to keep the download simple. The source release for AOO 3.4.1 will be renewed and is based now on revision 1435053 from branch AOO34. For our broad user base we built and provide convenience binary packages on the same revision for all new languages. The source release candidate can be found under https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341srcrelease The convenience binary full install sets for the new languages can be found under https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341fullsets The convenience binary language packs for the new languages can be found under https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341languagepacks Please vote on releasing this respin package as a complement to our already released Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). The vote starts now and will be open for 72 hours until: Saturday, 26 January: 2013-01-26 10:00am UTC+1. The vote of PMC members is binding but we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project members. [X] +1 Release this respin package as complement Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... Keith
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 respin to support 8 new languages
+1 More language support is a great thing for Apache Open Office On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:55 AM, Albino Biasutti Neto wrote: > Hi > > 2013/1/23 Jürgen Schmidt : > > this is a call for vote on releasing a minor respin of Apache OpenOffice > > 3.4.1 to support 8 new languages (Danish, Swedish, Norwegian Bokmal, > > Polish, Korean, Basque, Asturian, Scottish Gaelic). The Hungarian > > version is repackaged and a Hungarian dictionary is now included. > > Good ! :-) > > >[ ] +1 Release this respin package as complement Apache OpenOffice > > 3.4.1 (incubating) > >[ ] 0 Don't care > >[ ] -1 Do not release this package because... > > +1 > > One however. It could be an update to 3.4.2 (the versions). > > Albino > -- Wolf Halton This Apt Has Super Cow Powers - http://sourcefreedom.com Open-Source Software in Libraries - http://FOSS4Lib.org Advancing Libraries Together - http://LYRASIS.org Apache Open Office Developer wolfhal...@apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 respin to support 8 new languages
Hi 2013/1/23 Jürgen Schmidt : > this is a call for vote on releasing a minor respin of Apache OpenOffice > 3.4.1 to support 8 new languages (Danish, Swedish, Norwegian Bokmal, > Polish, Korean, Basque, Asturian, Scottish Gaelic). The Hungarian > version is repackaged and a Hungarian dictionary is now included. Good ! :-) >[ ] +1 Release this respin package as complement Apache OpenOffice > 3.4.1 (incubating) >[ ] 0 Don't care >[ ] -1 Do not release this package because... +1 One however. It could be an update to 3.4.2 (the versions). Albino
Re: [DISCUSS][[VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 respin to support 8 new languages
Hi, has someone build it on Windows? I set up a new build environment and have not finished yet, so cannot test it myself. Kind regards Regina Jürgen Schmidt schrieb: Hi, I have tested the source release package already and have made a successful build on MacOS. Juergen
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 respin to support 8 new languages
+1 Carl On 01/23/2013 04:13 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: Hi all, this is a call for vote on releasing a minor respin of Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 to support 8 new languages (Danish, Swedish, Norwegian Bokmal, Polish, Korean, Basque, Asturian, Scottish Gaelic). The Hungarian version is repackaged and a Hungarian dictionary is now included. This release is a minor update to support further languages but no bug fixes. We decided to keep the effort minimal and updated only the new languages and no further minor bug fixes. It is the last minor update including "incubating" in the name and we do that to integrate smoothly in the naming scheme of the current release and to keep the download simple. The source release for AOO 3.4.1 will be renewed and is based now on revision 1435053 from branch AOO34. For our broad user base we built and provide convenience binary packages on the same revision for all new languages. The source release candidate can be found under https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341srcrelease The convenience binary full install sets for the new languages can be found under https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341fullsets The convenience binary language packs for the new languages can be found under https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341languagepacks Please vote on releasing this respin package as a complement to our already released Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). The vote starts now and will be open for 72 hours until: Saturday, 26 January: 2013-01-26 10:00am UTC+1. The vote of PMC members is binding but we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project members. [ ] +1 Release this respin package as complement Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 respin to support 8 new languages
[X] +1 Release this respin package as complement Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) Groetjes, Olaf
Re: [DISCUSS][[VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 respin to support 8 new languages
Hi. I compiled the source release on ubuntu 12.04 desktop, and made run-go test of the danish installation. Jan I. On 23 January 2013 10:15, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: > Hi, > > I have tested the source release package already and have made a > successful build on MacOS. > > Juergen > > On 1/23/13 10:13 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > this is a call for vote on releasing a minor respin of Apache OpenOffice > > 3.4.1 to support 8 new languages (Danish, Swedish, Norwegian Bokmal, > > Polish, Korean, Basque, Asturian, Scottish Gaelic). The Hungarian > > version is repackaged and a Hungarian dictionary is now included. > > > > This release is a minor update to support further languages but no bug > > fixes. We decided to keep the effort minimal and updated only the new > > languages and no further minor bug fixes. It is the last minor update > > including "incubating" in the name and we do that to integrate smoothly > > in the naming scheme of the current release and to keep the download > simple. > > > > The source release for AOO 3.4.1 will be renewed and is based now on > > revision 1435053 from branch AOO34. For our broad user base we built and > > provide convenience binary packages on the same revision for all new > > languages. > > > > The source release candidate can be found under > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341srcrelease > > > > The convenience binary full install sets for the new languages can be > > found under > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341fullsets > > > > The convenience binary language packs for the new languages can be found > > under > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341languagepacks > > > > Please vote on releasing this respin package as a complement to our > > already released Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). > > > > The vote starts now and will be open for 72 hours until: > > > >Saturday, 26 January: 2013-01-26 10:00am UTC+1. > > > > The vote of PMC members is binding but we invite all people to vote (non > > binding) on this RC. We would like to provide a release that is > > supported by the majority of our project members. > > > >[ ] +1 Release this respin package as complement Apache OpenOffice > > 3.4.1 (incubating) > >[ ] 0 Don't care > >[ ] -1 Do not release this package because... > > > >
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 respin to support 8 new languages
+1 On 23 January 2013 10:13, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: > Hi all, > > this is a call for vote on releasing a minor respin of Apache OpenOffice > 3.4.1 to support 8 new languages (Danish, Swedish, Norwegian Bokmal, > Polish, Korean, Basque, Asturian, Scottish Gaelic). The Hungarian > version is repackaged and a Hungarian dictionary is now included. > > This release is a minor update to support further languages but no bug > fixes. We decided to keep the effort minimal and updated only the new > languages and no further minor bug fixes. It is the last minor update > including "incubating" in the name and we do that to integrate smoothly > in the naming scheme of the current release and to keep the download > simple. > > The source release for AOO 3.4.1 will be renewed and is based now on > revision 1435053 from branch AOO34. For our broad user base we built and > provide convenience binary packages on the same revision for all new > languages. > > The source release candidate can be found under > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341srcrelease > > The convenience binary full install sets for the new languages can be > found under > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341fullsets > > The convenience binary language packs for the new languages can be found > under > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341languagepacks > > Please vote on releasing this respin package as a complement to our > already released Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). > > The vote starts now and will be open for 72 hours until: > >Saturday, 26 January: 2013-01-26 10:00am UTC+1. > > The vote of PMC members is binding but we invite all people to vote (non > binding) on this RC. We would like to provide a release that is > supported by the majority of our project members. > >[ ] +1 Release this respin package as complement Apache OpenOffice > 3.4.1 (incubating) >[ ] 0 Don't care >[ ] -1 Do not release this package because... >
[DISCUSS][[VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 respin to support 8 new languages
Hi, I have tested the source release package already and have made a successful build on MacOS. Juergen On 1/23/13 10:13 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: > Hi all, > > this is a call for vote on releasing a minor respin of Apache OpenOffice > 3.4.1 to support 8 new languages (Danish, Swedish, Norwegian Bokmal, > Polish, Korean, Basque, Asturian, Scottish Gaelic). The Hungarian > version is repackaged and a Hungarian dictionary is now included. > > This release is a minor update to support further languages but no bug > fixes. We decided to keep the effort minimal and updated only the new > languages and no further minor bug fixes. It is the last minor update > including "incubating" in the name and we do that to integrate smoothly > in the naming scheme of the current release and to keep the download simple. > > The source release for AOO 3.4.1 will be renewed and is based now on > revision 1435053 from branch AOO34. For our broad user base we built and > provide convenience binary packages on the same revision for all new > languages. > > The source release candidate can be found under > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341srcrelease > > The convenience binary full install sets for the new languages can be > found under > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341fullsets > > The convenience binary language packs for the new languages can be found > under > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341languagepacks > > Please vote on releasing this respin package as a complement to our > already released Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). > > The vote starts now and will be open for 72 hours until: > >Saturday, 26 January: 2013-01-26 10:00am UTC+1. > > The vote of PMC members is binding but we invite all people to vote (non > binding) on this RC. We would like to provide a release that is > supported by the majority of our project members. > >[ ] +1 Release this respin package as complement Apache OpenOffice > 3.4.1 (incubating) >[ ] 0 Don't care >[ ] -1 Do not release this package because... >
Re: [CODE][CLEANUP]: getting rid of the 3 layer office directory structure
+1, the idea of making the structure is something I would like to see. Would love to help but I am hung up on translate-vm and a couple of other things. Jan I. On 23 January 2013 09:31, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: > Hi, > > we currently still have a complex but not necessary 3 layer directory > structure in the office that makes many things more complicate and is > completely unnecessary. > > The reason why we have this is historical and not longer relevant and > the question is if we want to get rid of this for our next release? > > Our office installation directory structure becomes cleaner and more > straight forward and we can eliminate some potential conflicts with > another derivative product that still hijacked some of our installation > bits (names). > > This task seems to be easy on the first look but is more complicate and > more work on the second. > > 1. files and directories (URE, base layer) have to be installed in new > places, we haver to think about the structure. > 2. we have to check library link flags which are currently different for > libraries from the different layers. > 3. we have to check and consolidate many configuration files where we > have entries to find the related files/entries in the different layers. > 4. we have to check some bootstrap processes and have to check that they > work correct > 5. we have to do very careful testing, testing, testing ... > 6. ... > > Any opinions or volunteers who have interest to help with such a > project? If we decide to work on it, we have to start immediately to > have enough time for testing. > > Juergen > > >
[VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 respin to support 8 new languages
Hi all, this is a call for vote on releasing a minor respin of Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 to support 8 new languages (Danish, Swedish, Norwegian Bokmal, Polish, Korean, Basque, Asturian, Scottish Gaelic). The Hungarian version is repackaged and a Hungarian dictionary is now included. This release is a minor update to support further languages but no bug fixes. We decided to keep the effort minimal and updated only the new languages and no further minor bug fixes. It is the last minor update including "incubating" in the name and we do that to integrate smoothly in the naming scheme of the current release and to keep the download simple. The source release for AOO 3.4.1 will be renewed and is based now on revision 1435053 from branch AOO34. For our broad user base we built and provide convenience binary packages on the same revision for all new languages. The source release candidate can be found under https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341srcrelease The convenience binary full install sets for the new languages can be found under https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341fullsets The convenience binary language packs for the new languages can be found under https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOO341languagepacks Please vote on releasing this respin package as a complement to our already released Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating). The vote starts now and will be open for 72 hours until: Saturday, 26 January: 2013-01-26 10:00am UTC+1. The vote of PMC members is binding but we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project members. [ ] +1 Release this respin package as complement Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
[CODE][CLEANUP]: getting rid of the 3 layer office directory structure
Hi, we currently still have a complex but not necessary 3 layer directory structure in the office that makes many things more complicate and is completely unnecessary. The reason why we have this is historical and not longer relevant and the question is if we want to get rid of this for our next release? Our office installation directory structure becomes cleaner and more straight forward and we can eliminate some potential conflicts with another derivative product that still hijacked some of our installation bits (names). This task seems to be easy on the first look but is more complicate and more work on the second. 1. files and directories (URE, base layer) have to be installed in new places, we haver to think about the structure. 2. we have to check library link flags which are currently different for libraries from the different layers. 3. we have to check and consolidate many configuration files where we have entries to find the related files/entries in the different layers. 4. we have to check some bootstrap processes and have to check that they work correct 5. we have to do very careful testing, testing, testing ... 6. ... Any opinions or volunteers who have interest to help with such a project? If we decide to work on it, we have to start immediately to have enough time for testing. Juergen
Re: Bug in AOO 3.4.1 on the Fedora 18
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 1/23/13 9:04 AM, Jrgen Schmidt wrote: > On 1/23/13 1:13 AM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 09:38:39PM -0200, Albino Biasutti Neto >> wrote: >>> Hi >>> >>> 2013/1/22 Ariel Constenla-Haile : I don't have a fedora18 to test right now, but installing OpenOffice in fedora requires to blacklist LO. If you didn't so, then it might happen that your installation is broken. >>> >>> The first command in fedora 18 was yum remove libreoffice-* >>> ;-) >>> > >> It's not enough to remove LO, at least in all previous fedora >> versions, you have to blacklist lo in /etc/yum.conf with a line > >> exclude=libreoffice* > >> otherwise, when updating lo's ure will obsolete aoo-ure, and thus >> replace it. > > I think this is one further reason to eliminate the dump 3 layer dump = dumb > directory structure which is totally obsolete and make things only > complicate. > > Currently we have the URE, basis and brand layer which is the > result of some cleaver thinking of some product managers to have > multiple cleaver = clever I need more coffee ;-) > offices installed on the same machine. Multiple offices that are > based on OpenOffice and are only different in the brand layer. I > think a scenario which is very seldom and if somebody need it, it > should be fine to duplicate the file. > > The best time would be now for 4.0 but I see a timing problem. I > will start a new thread where we can start a discussion on this > topic and maybe some interested people want to join such a cleanup > effort. > > New thread is on the way ... please continue in the new thread. > > Juergen > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJQ/5p7AAoJEM/u8xZRtf3oKvIP/R2eWBMbd8O6XO1gzvj3hIhy wpWMLvDy9LT7/ZaPX7Slsy9PeHDNKR8H+N8ooSuyohHE1rSyhLE6VtDJHvOieO18 CS+KIktSB7n2mCM5OPyW0NTC7G5YSAAELaJvEhd6UimTE8vsCaVSArIbT/KvzRkC 3cbqUUlYAZi8GXG8gbPY65s0HlqeZmBM6dwPR8kD/gdXm+RZLZB0AhhIyktUl+TQ keto2TQp5L3JhL46Sj5ezsHXSVN3W4/YWQRgNv6ucvKnIMUe/GWgooT8Khs//RA+ 26vl4Um4AHpm80UmGN50WB6G4yMUw77KguwYgcm7Pp8zI5btxfyNEJEj3/nQdYu8 KLaIeH250EVWNe6scmKn+EHRee6wqvHR61i5l2bQOKXabLcs9OR19wt4ufCXJ33N VigEfzXTYLciHI4dKm1jRwTpx+R16aFn3B6E1lbx0eUHOVFidJxJKEBWchG9NJA/ HM+LbMFHKTiYWUl/njesskISkKZ7Jb8Pg5VKvnkn99OPNQQZJEypVVEgTcDhrt4Q 0aUEHT8xCImiDCIJQoVqZNHfjxQAG5djFLQ9EJ8HmGjlNuL2T9Orwm2dfkUPxbJs gYZUIyjYw0erZ+TSwbsezR+2Jj+v/12nbDMwRkT+18Y5tK1hferS92cbRNbCXR8c p1vGci0i3qi+2/6i/HLY =Pwuy -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: RAT scans: Re: What rights are given in an SGA
On 1/22/13 11:58 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > - Messaggio originale - > >> Da: Andrea Pescetti > >> >> Pedro Giffuni wrote: >>> It would be good to tun a RAT scan over the website. We have not done >>> anything to clean the content licensewise and we probably carry >>> copyleft content, including code, there! >> >> The website contains gigabytes of materials for which we are probably unable >> to >> trace detailed history and licensing, since they come from multiple CVS >> repositories, then lost and migrated to multiple SVN repositories, then lost >> and >> migrated to the current tree. >> >> So a RAT scan wouldn't probably yield anything actionable. >> >> The only thing we know for sure is that all those materials were contributed >> to >> be put on the openoffice.org website and that we are continuing to keep them >> online. Even if there is copyleft content or code I believe it will be fine >> so >> long as we don't put it in a release (and it won't happen that some site >> contents go into a release without a thorough check). >> > > If we are distributing code there it is our responsibility. > > > I am afraid there are also tarballs that deserve special consideration. > I recall we were carrying a GPL'd slovenian dictionary (not sure if I finally > got rid of it). Some content like the SDK should be verified for licensing > content and updated. what do you mean with SDK? Our OpenOffice SDK is part of the normal source tree and doesn't contain anything critical. Juergen > > The fact that information was transfered through CVS and SVN or whatever > is irrelevant we should know what we have and ultimately after any cleanup > SVN will remember what we had in there. > > I understand we are underpowered to fix all that but the biggest problem is > that we don't have any accounting over the content there, so it's a can of > worms waiting to be opened. > > Pedro. >
Re: Bug in AOO 3.4.1 on the Fedora 18
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 1/23/13 1:13 AM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote: > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 09:38:39PM -0200, Albino Biasutti Neto > wrote: >> Hi >> >> 2013/1/22 Ariel Constenla-Haile : >>> I don't have a fedora18 to test right now, but installing >>> OpenOffice in fedora requires to blacklist LO. If you didn't >>> so, then it might happen that your installation is broken. >> >> The first command in fedora 18 was yum remove libreoffice-* ;-) >> > > It's not enough to remove LO, at least in all previous fedora > versions, you have to blacklist lo in /etc/yum.conf with a line > > exclude=libreoffice* > > otherwise, when updating lo's ure will obsolete aoo-ure, and thus > replace it. I think this is one further reason to eliminate the dump 3 layer directory structure which is totally obsolete and make things only complicate. Currently we have the URE, basis and brand layer which is the result of some cleaver thinking of some product managers to have multiple offices installed on the same machine. Multiple offices that are based on OpenOffice and are only different in the brand layer. I think a scenario which is very seldom and if somebody need it, it should be fine to duplicate the file. The best time would be now for 4.0 but I see a timing problem. I will start a new thread where we can start a discussion on this topic and maybe some interested people want to join such a cleanup effort. New thread is on the way ... please continue in the new thread. Juergen -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJQ/5mAAAoJEM/u8xZRtf3oC8YP+gOc4zCaUGzpnssYHpqawl9Z CAWljbLPBauE6JAtkZOaLTYx9hNQc4Tu1ivIouT9GJ+WJ/OXvYJTbmf/sBD+ATPE nAiwvlTPfrgiU0KN+CtFoaPxDuRSfxJbnFx7SOKF23Xin3vLcvlKWcPjqqoWBuEO NpNH/1WqH7QqxnB+XSZACluS6YWm6cHuhWKzOPHbor1zQh7OGSL+avvP9YQ8puHv wTGa5vaigX8MVdV6lUFPQC+DemF2xJEsHgkpa3ZaQ19FFwWbdxKF00XcdBwKmTEz LhgqRMiFIdz0h3kwMv17ZIWuo7+SKC6bxD3jJc5XYTNbree86k24mfKa2r4/WakR cCTHz8GH5RrFGWgtHhCHNHHKBHanMPDNJa1nDHzjQMwp/7r/6zdwmbmgZ8dP2jWD BRxtiNikYfDFQoj3v7M1PVtj0EmeINH6f8IN5lE+CYR9fx6PLIhfTJTJbA6gwFpJ oLdzig7L50kCJn7rX5BNja52iD00XJgk+kHs2bqhVJ0e0aQGOdkqdQS77DsKyaQx zcFXXbm4Rg6tRIWKmEySQ7MsOcZNDRhcpyEeSigt2iHUWpBXlcrZK0iwOuXSwOA4 06N4Usjamx9h5zbQDcJZrpJDC86wER9mPa5YoLdP3nHOdw/OsDKCLSm9t6JaKjc1 bs58qy0/y9YQk1aLdPUZ =FsJE -END PGP SIGNATURE-
