Re: [discussion] release mirror structure.
On 11/23/13 5:18 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > Andrew Rist wrote: >> On 11/22/2013 1:52 AM, jan i wrote: >>> Not having the binaries on apache.org is for sure the simplest solution, >>> and if we can decide that, then I am sure infra wont have a problem. > > Actually, it was Infra who pushed for having the Apache mirrors as a > secondary mirror network, after we followed their advice not to offer > binaries from the Apache mirrors as a primary channel due to > size/bandwidth constraints. I like the idea to have a secondary mirror > network at Apache, while I find it too much if this delays our releases > or requires us to change our processes. > >> what if we have single install with all langs at apache.org? that way >> it is there, but considerably smaller from a real estate perspective but >> allows us to preserve binaries. >> For user downloads @ sourceforge, we continue to have the 1 per lang >> downloads that focus on the user. > > This sounds odd at first, but it could actually be a good solution. The > multi-language build can be added to the SourceForge ones with minimal > overhead, and it can be uploaded to the Apache mirrors very quickly. We > would still have the possibility (this is an important one) to measure > interest for the individual language builds by analyzing the SourceForge > download data, while we would have the multi-language build available on > both SF and Apache for archival and for those users who find this easier > than download language packs. To repeat myself such a mulit-language install set make only sense from my pov if the underlying code is able to select the UI language automatically and chose the correct one for the office UI. Minimal requirement would be an enhanced first start wizard that allow easy selection of the preferred language. Keep in mind we are producing an end user application and this kind of configuration should be done automatically for the user because many of our users would be confused. Juergen > > Regards, > Andrea. > > - > 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: [discussion] release mirror structure.
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > Andrew Rist wrote: >> >> On 11/22/2013 1:52 AM, jan i wrote: >>> >>> Not having the binaries on apache.org is for sure the simplest solution, >>> and if we can decide that, then I am sure infra wont have a problem. > > > Actually, it was Infra who pushed for having the Apache mirrors as a > secondary mirror network, after we followed their advice not to offer > binaries from the Apache mirrors as a primary channel due to size/bandwidth > constraints. I like the idea to have a secondary mirror network at Apache, > while I find it too much if this delays our releases or requires us to > change our processes. > > >> what if we have single install with all langs at apache.org? that way >> it is there, but considerably smaller from a real estate perspective but >> allows us to preserve binaries. >> For user downloads @ sourceforge, we continue to have the 1 per lang >> downloads that focus on the user. > > > This sounds odd at first, but it could actually be a good solution. The > multi-language build can be added to the SourceForge ones with minimal > overhead, and it can be uploaded to the Apache mirrors very quickly. We > would still have the possibility (this is an important one) to measure > interest for the individual language builds by analyzing the SourceForge > download data, while we would have the multi-language build available on > both SF and Apache for archival and for those users who find this easier > than download language packs. > Any estimate for how large this would be? I assume it would include all the dictionaries as well, yes? Another option could be to look at actual download numbers and package the most popular languages together, so maybe the top 15 languages or something like that. -Rob > Regards, > Andrea. > > > - > 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: FOSDEM 2014: Draft call for talks, funding proposal
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > Two small steps towards FOSDEM 2014 (Brussels, 1-2 February 2014): > > 1) I drafted a very generic Call for Talks. You can find it at > https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Conferences/FOSDEM/2014 > When/if approved, this will be the "official" call, shared between > OpenOffice and LibreOffice. It is an initial draft, not reviewed by the > LibreOffice project (or by Italo who is organizing the devroom on behalf of > LibreOffice) yet. I hope we can, through personal channels, get to a final > version in the next days and send it out. In the meantime, please have a > look and see if the text is OK. Remember that this text must be neutral and > basic: we have blogs and mailing lists for richer communication. > It looks good to me. There is now less than 1 month before the call for papers ends, so it would be good to publicize this via the blog, etc., if there are no more changes. -Rob > 2) We approved a budget for speaker reimbursements last year, but in the end > we didn't use it since no speakers asked for reimbursement. Our "events > budget" is thus mostly untouched so far. I think Oliver was handling the > issue and had decided for a flat fee. So I propose, subject to lazy > consensus and hopefully to finding someone who can take responsibility for > this, to have a flat reimbursement of 200 Euros for accepted speakers who > ask for it. It won't cover all expenses, but it may be a significant help > for some speakers. (I can't find how much Oliver proposed last year; feel > free to discuss a different amount). > > There's more to FOSDEM (namely, stand/booth and merchandising), but these > issues have a different timeline so I would focus on the two items above for > the time being. > > Regards, > Andrea. > > - > 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: [Discuss-proposal]Admin mail box for NLs forum
(Top posting) For the time being, on ES forums we implemented our own email address on a .org server kindly provided by Mauricio Baeza, the other forum admin. From now, every email communication from and to the ES forums goes through that email address. People writing to that address will receive an automatic email with general information about how to register and log-in. Admins have access to that email address through a web interface so any user with registration problems have now the possibility to communicate with the board. Maybe this is not the best solution, but at least it is a working solution. Regards, Ricardo 2013/10/6 Rob Weir > On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 2:02 PM, janI wrote: > > On 6 October 2013 19:30, Ricardo Berlasso wrote: > > > >> 2013/10/6 Rob Weir > >> > >> > On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 3:09 AM, janI wrote: > >> > > On 6 October 2013 01:25, Ricardo Berlasso > wrote: > >> > > > >> > >> 2013/10/2 janI > >> > >> > >> > >> > On 2 October 2013 22:18, Ricardo Berlasso > >> wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > New forum users with registration problems do not have an easy > way > >> > to > >> > >> > > communicate their problems to the board. In the past there was > an > >> > email > >> > >> > > address that sent an automated message to a particular forum > >> thread > >> > on > >> > >> > the > >> > >> > > private forum area. This system is not working since the move > to > >> > >> Apache. > >> > >> > > Until the automated reply is re-activated, a simple mail box > for > >> > each > >> > >> NL > >> > >> > > forum, accessible to forum admins and moderators will be more > than > >> > >> > enough, > >> > >> > > something like forum-admin-@aoo. > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > the automated message looks to be a simple configuration in > php2bb, > >> at > >> > >> > least as far as I can see. This could be a good challenge for new > >> > admins > >> > >> > (working in line with the proposal dave works on). > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks, Ian, > >> > >> > >> > > np (its Jan) > >> > > > >> > >> > >> > >> But even if simple, we need first an email address for each forum > so > >> > users > >> > >> can send a message. If there is an automated response then better, > but > >> > >> right now there is no way for a new user to "call for help". > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > > I can understand that, and agree its a good idea. I simply wanted to > >> make > >> > > you aware that you might need a appl. admin to change the > >> configuration. > >> > > The admin situation is up for discussion (headed by another pmc > >> member), > >> > > and have been discussed quite a lot, but no decision has been made. > The > >> > way > >> > > I worked and suggested to work in future seems to be too restrictive > >> for > >> > > some people, as a consequence the applications on our servers are > >> > currently > >> > > not being maintained, apart for security. > >> > > > >> > > As we both know, there is work in progress to start a admin ML, > which > >> > would > >> > > fit this purpose very well (headed by another pmc member), however > >> after > >> > > the initial discussion, is seems nothing happens (at least no jira > has > >> > been > >> > > created). I would not recommend a ML for each forum, the overhead > >> > > (moderators etc) are too big, instead have the mailer put the forum > >> name > >> > in > >> > > the header. > >> > > > >> > > >> > So is there a reason why the admin mailing list could not be used for > >> > this? > >> > >> > >> People here is quite used to mailing list, but most users don't. In > fact, I > >> know many people that will never send an email to a mailing list, > specially > >> if public: lot of people do not want to expose their email addresses on > >> public lists. > >> > >> > >> > >> > I assume the traffic level would be low enough that it would > >> > not be necessary to have N mailing lists for N forums. So using a > >> > single ML point of contact for admin questions could make sense here. > >> > > >> > The other alternative is an email alias. So no mailing list but just > >> > forwarding of emails to a group. > >> > > >> > >> That makes sense. We can open somewhere a free account for each NL forum > >> and then set an aoo alias to it. > >> > > > > I think I have lost something. > > > > If the users mail from inside the forum, they can do so through the > php2bb > > software with an aoo mail address (e.g. ooofo...@apache.org) to a > specific > > ML (subject would be: forum name and user name). > > > > If they mail from their own mail account, they will always end up in one > or > > more mailing lists (think of your own inbox). We can have the admin ML > (as > > rob mentioned in another thread) private so only the admins can read it. > > > > So I dont see the need for free accounts somewhere, what did I > > misunderstand ? > > > > Mailing list versus alias: > > - Do we need an archive for any important reason (record of past > actions, legal reasons, etc.?) > - Is
RE: Compiling OpenOffice in OpenSolaris
> > normally you need to run autoconf before configure > ΟΚ I was just copying/pasting some info from my notes and of course I forgot to mention that I did the autoconf and bootstrap steps. My bad. > > it cannot find your compiler, maybe because you did not run bootstrap. > No I did run bootstrap, I just forgot to mention it. > please remember solaris is not a supported plattform, so you might have > other problems. And I intend to solve them :-) A.S. -- Apostols Syropoulos Xanthi, Greece
Re: problem with http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/maillist.html
On 24 November 2013 12:18, Hagar Delest wrote: > Le 24/11/2013 12:05, jan i a écrit : > > On Nov 24, 2013 10:45 AM, "Rory O'Farrell" wrote: >> >>> >>> On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 10:23:57 +0100 >>> jan i wrote: >>> >>> Hi. Am I the only one, or is there a problem with http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/maillist.html I cannot see mails never than 22 November (independent if date/thread >>> view) >> >>> ? rgds jan I. >>> >>> With the URL as you give it, I get messages back to 12 November 2013, >>> >> with a link for earlier messages at bottom. >> >>> Perhaps you need to clear your browser cache? >>> >> going back is not the problem, I want to see 23 and 24. the newst I see is >> 22. >> > > Indeed, I see the same. There is definitively a problem. > I like mail-archive, I hope they will fix it soon. > > I had a look at some of their other lists and it seems that we are not > alone. Some show no messages after Nov. 20th. > Thanks, now at least I know its not a problem with my usage :-) have a nice sunday. rgds jan I. > > Hagar > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > >
Re: problem with http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/maillist.html
Le 24/11/2013 12:05, jan i a écrit : On Nov 24, 2013 10:45 AM, "Rory O'Farrell" wrote: On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 10:23:57 +0100 jan i wrote: Hi. Am I the only one, or is there a problem with http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/maillist.html I cannot see mails never than 22 November (independent if date/thread view) ? rgds jan I. With the URL as you give it, I get messages back to 12 November 2013, with a link for earlier messages at bottom. Perhaps you need to clear your browser cache? going back is not the problem, I want to see 23 and 24. the newst I see is 22. Indeed, I see the same. There is definitively a problem. I like mail-archive, I hope they will fix it soon. I had a look at some of their other lists and it seems that we are not alone. Some show no messages after Nov. 20th. Hagar - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Compiling OpenOffice in OpenSolaris
On Nov 24, 2013 11:45 AM, "Απόστολος Συρόπουλος" wrote: > > Hello, > > Since there is no binary package for any version of Solaris x86, I am trying to > compile OpenOffice on OpenSolaris in the hope that the resulting binaries > will work in later versions. > > I have downloaded the source code and I did the following: > > $ export LD_ALTEXEC=/usr/bin/gld > $ export ANT_HOME=/opt/gnu/ant/ > $ export JAVA_HOME=/usr/java normally you need to run autoconf before configure > $ ./configure --with-dmake-url= http://dmake.apache-extras.org.codespot.com/files/dmake-4.12.tar.bz2--with-epm-url= http://www.msweet.org/files/project2/epm-3.7-source.tar.gz --disable-odk --with-lang="el en" --with-junit=/extra/sources/OpenOffice/java/junit-4.11.jar --prefix=/opt/gnu normally you need to run bootstrap as the output from configure tells you to. > $ source SolarisX86GccEnv.Set > > Then I did the following: > > $ cd instsetoo_native > > and when I give the build --all command I get the following: > > build -- version: 275224 > > > = > Building module solenv > = > > Entering /extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo-4.0.1/main/solenv > > > ERROR! > Could not detect compiler version! > Please extend tg_compv.mk in > solenv/inc. > > g++ -dumpversion returns > 4.7.2 > > force_dmake_to_error > dmake: Error executing 'force_dmake_to_error': No such file or directory > dmake: Error code -1, while making 'compiler_version_error' it cannot find your compiler, maybe because you did not run bootstrap. please remember solaris is not a supported plattform, so you might have other problems. rgds jan i > > 1 module(s): > solenv > need(s) to be rebuilt > > Reason(s): > > ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making /extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo-4.0.1/main/solenv > > When you have fixed the errors in that module you can resume the build by running: > > build --all:solenv > > The system correctly finds the version of the compiler but it complains that it > cannot find the compiler version. I guess this is a bug, but I don't know where to > start. Can you please help me solve this problem so to actually start building? > > Best regards, > > Apostolos > > -- > Apostols Syropoulos > Xanthi, Greece > >
Re: problem with http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/maillist.html
On Nov 24, 2013 10:45 AM, "Rory O'Farrell" wrote: > > On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 10:23:57 +0100 > jan i wrote: > > > Hi. > > > > Am I the only one, or is there a problem with > > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/maillist.html > > > > I cannot see mails never than 22 November (independent if date/thread view) > > ? > > > > rgds > > jan I. > > With the URL as you give it, I get messages back to 12 November 2013, with a link for earlier messages at bottom. > Perhaps you need to clear your browser cache? going back is not the problem, I want to see 23 and 24. the newst I see is 22. rgds jan i > > > -- > Rory O'Farrell > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >
Compiling OpenOffice in OpenSolaris
Hello, Since there is no binary package for any version of Solaris x86, I am trying to compile OpenOffice on OpenSolaris in the hope that the resulting binaries will work in later versions. I have downloaded the source code and I did the following: $ export LD_ALTEXEC=/usr/bin/gld $ export ANT_HOME=/opt/gnu/ant/ $ export JAVA_HOME=/usr/java $ ./configure --with-dmake-url=http://dmake.apache-extras.org.codespot.com/files/dmake-4.12.tar.bz2 --with-epm-url=http://www.msweet.org/files/project2/epm-3.7-source.tar.gz --disable-odk --with-lang="el en" --with-junit=/extra/sources/OpenOffice/java/junit-4.11.jar --prefix=/opt/gnu $ source SolarisX86GccEnv.Set Then I did the following: $ cd instsetoo_native and when I give the build --all command I get the following: build -- version: 275224 = Building module solenv = Entering /extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo-4.0.1/main/solenv ERROR! Could not detect compiler version! Please extend tg_compv.mk in solenv/inc. g++ -dumpversion returns 4.7.2 force_dmake_to_error dmake: Error executing 'force_dmake_to_error': No such file or directory dmake: Error code -1, while making 'compiler_version_error' 1 module(s): solenv need(s) to be rebuilt Reason(s): ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making /extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo-4.0.1/main/solenv When you have fixed the errors in that module you can resume the build by running: build --all:solenv The system correctly finds the version of the compiler but it complains that it cannot find the compiler version. I guess this is a bug, but I don't know where to start. Can you please help me solve this problem so to actually start building? Best regards, Apostolos -- Apostols Syropoulos Xanthi, Greece
Re: problem with http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/maillist.html
On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 10:23:57 +0100 jan i wrote: > Hi. > > Am I the only one, or is there a problem with > > http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/maillist.html > > I cannot see mails never than 22 November (independent if date/thread view) > ? > > rgds > jan I. With the URL as you give it, I get messages back to 12 November 2013, with a link for earlier messages at bottom. Perhaps you need to clear your browser cache? -- Rory O'Farrell - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
problem with http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/maillist.html
Hi. Am I the only one, or is there a problem with http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@openoffice.apache.org/maillist.html I cannot see mails never than 22 November (independent if date/thread view) ? rgds jan I.
