date:20131201


Le 30/11/2013 23:15, Rob Weir a écrit :

In any case, the thing to keep in mind is that we are in no way
diminished if someone decides to use LibreOffice.   We should feel
good whenever anyone uses our code, whether in the original Apache
OpenOffice or whether in the winPenPack verison, the BSD port, the
OS/2 port, the Solaris port or in LibreOffice fork.  It is all good.


The problem is that they tend to diminish the work done by AOO.
It's like a hold-up...
The end user only see what's on the splash screen and how the icons look like 
in his file explorer. So less and less visibility will equal the death of AOO 
in users mind.

Hagar

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: 80 million downloads


Le 30/11/2013 22:10, Rory O'Farrell a écrit :

It would be best if the silent mapping of OpenOffice to LibreOffice on many 
linux distros could be stopped. Use a common linux distro, try to install 
OpenOffice using the package manager, and what does one get - LibreOffice.


Exactly.
We still have many users complaining that they can't install AOO because a 
libreoffice package (integrated in the default ubuntu install) is preventing 
the completion of the process.

There had been a discussion about AOO in the GNU/Linux distros some time ago. 
There had been good progress IIRC but I've lost sight of it. Should we make it 
a target for the next Ubuntu release for example?

I agree that GNU/Linux desktop for business is not something we should care for 
the moment but for the personal use, I think it's important.

Hagar

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: build breaker in solenv/bin/modules/install/logger.pm on ubuntu 12.04

2013-12-01 Thread Efi



On 11/30/2013 04:54 PM, jan i wrote:

Hi.


It seems the latest changes in logger.pm leads to a buildbreaker in
instset_native.

svn tell that this file was updated today, but I am not good at perl, at I
cannot see what the problem is.

Output from build --all:

... using package from pool
... creating epm list file epm_gid_Module_Root.lst ...
... checking pool package ...
Stack Trace:
/share/opensource/aoo/trunk/main/solenv/bin/modules/installer/logger.pm:206in
function installer::logger::Die
/share/opensource/aoo/trunk/main/solenv/bin/modules/installer/logger.pm:189in
function installer::logger::print
/share/opensource/aoo/trunk/main/solenv/bin/modules/installer/
packagepool.pm:172 in function installer::logger::printf
/share/opensource/aoo/trunk/main/solenv/bin/modules/installer/
packagepool.pm:667 in function
installer::packagepool::compare_package_content
/share/opensource/aoo/trunk/main/solenv/bin/make_installer.pl:930 in
function installer::packagepool::package_is_up_to_date
/share/opensource/aoo/trunk/main/solenv/bin/make_installer.pl:2140 in
function main::MakeNonWindowsBuild
newline at start of line at
/share/opensource/aoo/trunk/main/solenv/bin/modules/installer/logger.pmline 738.
dmake:  Error code 255, while making 'openoffice_en-US.rpm'

1 module(s):
 instsetoo_native


any advice ?

rgds
jan I.

I am getting a pretty similar error to yours , I use ubuntu 12.04 as 
well and I get the error:


ERROR: ERROR: More than one new package in directory 
/home/efi/AOO/aoo-trunk/main/instsetoo_native/unxlngi6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US_inprogress/DEBS 
( 
/home/efi/AOO/aoo-trunk/main/instsetoo_native/unxlngi6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US_inprogress/DEBS/openoffice-en-us-writer-4.1.0-1-linux-3.8-intel 
/home/efi/AOO/aoo-trunk/main/instsetoo_native/unxlngi6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/deb/install/en-US_inprogress/DEBS/openoffice-en-us-writer-4.1.0-1-linux-3.8-intel.deb)

in function: determine_new_packagename (packagepool)
**
stopping log at Sun Dec  1 14:23:20 2013
dmake:  Error code 255, while making 'openoffice_en-US.deb'

1 module(s):
instsetoo_native
need(s) to be rebuilt

Reason(s):

ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making 
/home/efi/AOO/aoo-trunk/main/instsetoo_native/util


here is the response I got for mine:
This seems very similar to the problem reported by Jan a few minutes 
after you wrote. If that is the problem, the culprit is revision 1546570 
and is not fixed yet, but you can go to your aoo-trunk directory and 
get an earlier revision to check that you can build it successfully. 
Something like: svn up -r 1546569, then reconfigure and rebuild.


You suspect the file logger.pm is causing the error so I moved to 
different revisions, specifically the 1546569, 1546568, 1545947 , and 
1538529 that is the revision when the logger.pm last changed before the 
1546570,when the logger.pm was updated.


Sadly none of them did the trick and I kept getting the same error. I am 
not sure it is the same as yours but it seems pretty close. Maybe trying 
a revision before the change would work for you.


Regards
Efi.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: 80 million downloads

2013-12-01 Thread Guy Waterval

Hi Hagar,


2013/12/1 Hagar Delest hagar.del...@laposte.net

 Le 30/11/2013 23:15, Rob Weir a écrit :

  In any case, the thing to keep in mind is that we are in no way
 diminished if someone decides to use LibreOffice.   We should feel
 good whenever anyone uses our code, whether in the original Apache
 OpenOffice or whether in the winPenPack verison, the BSD port, the
 OS/2 port, the Solaris port or in LibreOffice fork.  It is all good.


 The problem is that they tend to diminish the work done by AOO.
 It's like a hold-up...
 The end user only see what's on the splash screen and how the icons look
 like in his file explorer. So less and less visibility will equal the death
 of AOO in users mind.


 Yes, but doing so, they also discredit themselves and show clearly their
incoherences.
Difficult to be considered as serious when you announce the dead of a
projetct and after some months you recognize that you reuse massively  its
code.

A+
-- 
gw

Re: 80 million downloads

2013-12-01 Thread Rory O'Farrell

On Sun, 1 Dec 2013 13:43:12 +0100
Guy Waterval waterval@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi Hagar,
 
 
 2013/12/1 Hagar Delest hagar.del...@laposte.net
 
  Le 30/11/2013 23:15, Rob Weir a écrit :
 
   In any case, the thing to keep in mind is that we are in no way
  diminished if someone decides to use LibreOffice.   We should feel
  good whenever anyone uses our code, whether in the original Apache
  OpenOffice or whether in the winPenPack verison, the BSD port, the
  OS/2 port, the Solaris port or in LibreOffice fork.  It is all good.
 
 
  The problem is that they tend to diminish the work done by AOO.
  It's like a hold-up...
  The end user only see what's on the splash screen and how the icons look
  like in his file explorer. So less and less visibility will equal the death
  of AOO in users mind.
 
 
  Yes, but doing so, they also discredit themselves and show clearly their
 incoherences.
 Difficult to be considered as serious when you announce the dead of a
 projetct and after some months you recognize that you reuse massively  its
 code.
 
 A+
 -- 
 gw

Unfortunately, the ordinary computer user has no idea of the base of underlying 
code or of its source. He is only aware of the title of the package he uses, 
and this dominates perception.

-- 
Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: 80 million downloads

2013-12-01 Thread Απόστολος Συρόπουλος

On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote:
On Sun, 1 Dec 2013 13:43:12 +0100
Guy Waterval waterval@gmail.com wrote:

Hi Hagar,

2013/12/1 Hagar Delest hagar.del...@laposte.net

Le 30/11/2013 23:15, Rob Weir a écrit :

In any case, the thing to keep in mind is that we are in no way
diminished if someone decides to use LibreOffice. We should feel
good whenever anyone uses our code, whether in the original Apache
OpenOffice or whether in the winPenPack verison, the BSD port, the
OS/2 port, the Solaris port or in LibreOffice fork. It is all good.

The problem is that they tend to diminish the work done by AOO.
It's like a hold-up...
The end user only see what's on the splash screen and how the icons look
like in his file explorer. So less and less visibility will equal the death
of AOO in users mind.

Yes, but doing so, they also discredit themselves and show clearly their
incoherences.
Difficult to be considered as serious when you announce the dead of a
projetct and after some months you recognize that you reuse massively its
code.

A+
--
gw

Unfortunately, the ordinary computer user has no idea of the base of
underlying code or of its source. He is only aware of the title of the
package he uses, and this dominates perception.

True. But what are the facts? Our download numbers show that there
are relatively few Linux downloads. We have more AOO Windows users in
Poland than Linux users worldwide. And industry estimates are that
Linux desktop user share is around 2%. We even see diminished
investment in the Linux desktop. As you know, Suse pulled out of
LibreOffice. They are more interested in Linux on the server. Other
companies see the opportunity more with tablet and mobile Linux.
Linux desktop is shrinking. Or, as some would say. If we really want
to worry about getting more AOO users I think we'd achieve more with a
Hindi or a Bahasa Indonesian translation than we would with getting a
Linux version packaged with the distros.

(Note: I think we should continue Linux support. As a project AOO
supports diversity, of languages and well as platforms. Just because
there are relatively few Linux desktop users does not mean we don't
support them.)

As far as brand perceptions go, the data I have shows that the
OpenOffice brand is increasing, and is far stronger than the
LibreOffice brand [1]. In fact, some LibreOffice supporters interpret
these numbers as indicating that many LibreOffice users mistakenly
think that they are still using OpenOffice and refer to it as
OpenOffice. That just goes to show that we have some brand
perception paranoia on both sides!

Finally, the take away from the brand perception survey is that most
people have heard of neither OpenOffice nor LibreOffice. That is
where the greatest gains will gone from, increasing mainstream
awareness of OpenOffice.

Regards,

-Rob

[1]
http://www.robweir.com/blog/2013/10/the-power-of-brand-and-the-power-of-product-part-3.html

--
Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

RE: soltools need(s) to be rebuilt

Hello again,

I have downloaded the source code and I have reconfigured etc.
What I have observed so far is that there are a number of 
utilities that consist of C and C++ source files. In all these cases,
the build script uses the C compile and so obviously it fails to build
the object files. For example,

=
Building module soltools
=

Entering /extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo4/main/soltools/mkdepend

mkout -- version: 1.8
Compiling: soltools/mkdepend/cppsetup.c
cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, illegal item ignored: rvalueref 
cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, empty value ignored
Compiling: soltools/mkdepend/ifparser.c
cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, illegal item ignored: rvalueref 
cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, empty value ignored
Compiling: soltools/mkdepend/include.c
cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, illegal item ignored: rvalueref 
cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, empty value ignored
Compiling: soltools/mkdepend/main.c
cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, illegal item ignored: rvalueref 
cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, empty value ignored
Compiling: soltools/mkdepend/parse.c
cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, illegal item ignored: rvalueref 
cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, empty value ignored
parse.c, line 43: warning: identifier redeclared: find_includes
current : function() returning int
previous: function(pointer to struct filepointer {pointer to char f_p, 
pointer to char f_base, pointer to char f_end, long f_len, long f_line}, 
pointer to struct inclist {pointer to char i_incstring, pointer to char i_file, 
pointer to pointer to struct inclist {..} i_list, int i_listlen, unsigned char 
i_defchecked, unsigned char i_notified, unsigned char i_marked, unsigned char 
i_searched, unsigned char i_included_sym}, pointer to struct inclist {pointer 
to char i_incstring, pointer to char i_file, pointer to pointer to struct 
inclist {..} i_list, int i_listlen, unsigned char i_defchecked, unsigned char 
i_notified, unsigned char i_marked, unsigned char i_searched, unsigned char 
i_included_sym}, int, unsigned char, pointer to struct IncludesCollection {}, 
pointer to struct symhash {array[64] of pointer to struct pair {..} s_pairs}) 
returning int : def.h, line 169
parse.c, line 43: warning: Prototype mismatch in arg 5 for function 
find_includes:
function : old style declaration unsigned char promoted to int
prototype: unsigned char
Compiling: soltools/mkdepend/pr.c
cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, illegal item ignored: rvalueref 
cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, empty value ignored
pr.c, line 42: warning: identifier redeclared: add_include
current : function() returning void
previous: function(pointer to struct filepointer {pointer to char f_p, 
pointer to char f_base, pointer to char f_end, long f_len, long f_line}, 
pointer to struct inclist {pointer to char i_incstring, pointer to char i_file, 
pointer to pointer to struct inclist {..} i_list, int i_listlen, unsigned char 
i_defchecked, unsigned char i_notified, unsigned char i_marked, unsigned char 
i_searched, unsigned char i_included_sym}, pointer to struct inclist {pointer 
to char i_incstring, pointer to char i_file, pointer to pointer to struct 
inclist {..} i_list, int i_listlen, unsigned char i_defchecked, unsigned char 
i_notified, unsigned char i_marked, unsigned char i_searched, unsigned char 
i_included_sym}, pointer to char, unsigned char, unsigned char, pointer to 
struct IncludesCollection {}, pointer to struct symhash {array[64] of pointer 
to struct pair {..} s_pairs}) returning void : def.h, line 176
pr.c, line 42: warning: Prototype mismatch in arg 5 for function add_include:
function : old style declaration unsigned char promoted to int
prototype: unsigned char
pr.c, line 42: warning: Prototype mismatch in arg 6 for function add_include:
function : old style declaration unsigned char promoted to int
prototype: unsigned char
Compiling: soltools/mkdepend/collectdircontent.cxx
/extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo4/main/soltools/mkdepend/collectdircontent.hxx, 
line 6: Error: Could not open include fileset.
/extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo4/main/soltools/mkdepend/collectdircontent.hxx, 
line 7: Error: Could not open include filemap.
/extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo4/main/soltools/mkdepend/collectdircontent.hxx, 
line 8: Error: Could not open include filestring.
/extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo4/main/soltools/mkdepend/collectdircontent.hxx, 
line 17: Error: Could not open include fileiostream.
/extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo4/main/soltools/mkdepend/collectdircontent.hxx, 
line 21: Warning: Implicit int is not supported in C++.
/extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo4/main/soltools/mkdepend/collectdircontent.hxx, 
line 21: Error: Template set is not defined.
/extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo4/main/soltools/mkdepend/collectdircontent.hxx, 
line 22: Warning:

Re: 80 million downloads

2013-12-01 Thread Andrea Pescetti


On 30/11/2013 Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:

On 30-Nov-2013, at 16:22, Rob Weir wrote:

And let's not forget that Emilia-Romagna recently announced a
migration to OpenOffice


(the discussion has evolved into many interesting directions, but I'm 
picking this message for answering)


The main issue I see here is that the OpenOffice adoption (or 
non-adoption!) happens without the OpenOffice project being aware of 
anything.


It is natural that private or public entities considering a migration 
will have their established consultants and ask them. But we should have 
enough official information available to anybody who is considering a 
migration. Something that can immediately reassure them that the 
OpenOffice is dead meme is false, that a lot of innovation is ongoing 
at OpenOffice, that OpenOffice is not only maintained, but also getting 
much better.


There's a lot of work to be done here, not only by writing Why pages 
and wiki pages, but being more visible at small, local events and 
conferences. Technical excellence is to be pursued and is our main focus 
at the moment, but we also need to improve outreach and to get people to 
see correct information.


I learned that my region is migrating to OpenOffice from a post by Rob 
to this list. They had never contacted the project in public or in 
private. It's OK of course; they are not forced to do so; but it 
deserves a reflection. How many other silent decisions to migrate (or 
not to migrate) are taken every day without the project being aware of 
it? And can we as a project do something more for decision-makers to be 
properly informed?



And I would also
point to Italo V's rather heated denunciation of the migration and
AOO about it


To the benefit of those who do not speak Italian: that was later 
somewhat retracted/rectified, see same site. But I agree with other 
people on this list that everyone's focus should not be on which open 
source office suite is better; the real obstacle is persuading 
organizations to adopt free and open source software and do it with the 
right spirit. Fights over which variant is better undermine the 
credibility of free/open source in general, and contribute to keep more 
organizations tied to proprietary solutions.


Regards,
  Andrea.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: 80 million downloads


Le 01/12/2013 14:35, Rob Weir a écrit :

On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote:

Unfortunately, the ordinary computer user has no idea of the base of underlying 
code or of its source. He is only aware of the title of the package he uses, 
and this dominates perception.



True.  But what are the facts?   Our download numbers show that there
are relatively few Linux downloads.  We have more AOO Windows users in
Poland than Linux users worldwide.

But I guess that the download numbers don't take into account the repositories 
from the GNU/Linux distros.
So what you record is only those who want to switch from the distro delivered 
solution to AOO.



As far as brand perceptions go, the data I have shows that the
OpenOffice brand is increasing, and is far stronger than the
LibreOffice brand [1].  In fact, some LibreOffice supporters interpret
these numbers as indicating that many LibreOffice users mistakenly
think that they are still using OpenOffice and refer to it as
OpenOffice.  That just goes to show that we have some brand
perception paranoia on both sides!

Finally, the take away from the brand perception survey is that most
people have heard of neither OpenOffice nor LibreOffice.  That is
where the greatest gains will gone from, increasing mainstream
awareness of OpenOffice.

The problem is that even among the users who know about OO, LibO is gaining 
more and more visibility. If all articles deal with LibO and the proclaimed 
death of AOO, users who are considering moving away from MSFT will not even try 
to check about AOO.
FUD is becoming dangerous, especially with the kind of journalism we are 
seeing. Even if in the community we know it's FUD, we can't accept it anymore.

Hagar

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Think Marketing, WAS: Re: 80 million downloads

Changed subject.

On 01-Dec-2013, at 09:53, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:

 I learned that my region is migrating to OpenOffice from a post by Rob to 
 this list. They had never contacted the project in public or in private. It's 
 OK of course; they are not forced to do so; but it deserves a reflection. How 
 many other silent decisions to migrate (or not to migrate) are taken every 
 day without the project being aware of it? And can we as a project do 
 something more for decision-makers to be properly informed?

This is the way it is with open source. We're lucky if we get notified, but 
happy enough if we don't. The point of the knowing, as I see it, is that it 
gives substance to the companies interested in supporting the software. In this 
case, the few supporting LO do so, I imagine, because they can point to the 
rhetoric as substance; and it becomes, in a small measure, self-fulfilling.

For this reason, we created the various sites on Ye Olde OOo documenting usage, 
esp. by enterprise size groups. The point was not to move enterprises over, but 
to do give raison d'être to the ecosystem. It worked, sort of.

What I think we could do, given the limited resources is 

a) renew the Major Deployments page and update to AOO. The point: factual 
accounts of usage by enterprise. (Major deployments is here: 

https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Major_OpenOffice.org_Deployments

You will notice that it's old.

b) identify that we actually do invite support organizations and the like to 
constitute the ecosystem. 

And that as LO and AOO are functionally very similar, any support company 
stands to gain—they do not have to limit themselves only to AOO or LO; we, at 
least, probably won't enforce such a draconian limitation and we, at least, are 
not interested in invidious comparisons. I'm sure that the majority of the LO 
brethren are not, either.

I would also like to suggest that peripheral groups or people working on ODF 
editors for mobile devices gain more attention. Our focus is, to be sure, on 
the desktop. I get that. But we cannot ignore (and ought not) mobile devices. 
Here, I mean not ports of AOO, though those can be useful. I mean ODF editors. 
The point is to be able to edit an ODT document on a mobile device; not just 
view it, edit it.

louis
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: 80 million downloads


On 01-Dec-2013, at 10:01, Hagar Delest hagar.del...@laposte.net wrote:

 Le 01/12/2013 14:35, Rob Weir a écrit :
 On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote:
 Unfortunately, the ordinary computer user has no idea of the base of 
 underlying code or of its source. He is only aware of the title of the 
 package he uses, and this dominates perception.
 
 
 True.  But what are the facts?   Our download numbers show that there
 are relatively few Linux downloads.  We have more AOO Windows users in
 Poland than Linux users worldwide.
 But I guess that the download numbers don't take into account the 
 repositories from the GNU/Linux distros.
 So what you record is only those who want to switch from the distro delivered 
 solution to AOO.
 
I think those are not terribly crucial data. This is not a game about trying to 
impress with numbers. It is about using the data to validate the claim that AOO 
is a substantial application and active community and that it is not a flash in 
the pan, liable to disappear tomorrow or next year but is around for the long 
haul.

The point of this claim is that we can assuage anxieties that large 
organizations have about our credibility and substance, as an application 
getting better and being maintained and as a community that is more than one 
major company.

And the effect of this claim is to validate the choice that a large 
organization would make in favour of AOO and to further validate the business 
decision a small operator offering support services would risk by including AOO 
(or LO or both) in his or her portfolio of services.

And the outcome of these points and actions is to establish an ecosystem that 
contributes to an expanding community of contributors and engaged users. 
Engaged user is a term I just made up to represent users who may not actually 
contribute to the project substantially but who use its products mindfully and 
positively, and thus encourage others to use them, too.


 
 As far as brand perceptions go, the data I have shows that the
 OpenOffice brand is increasing, and is far stronger than the
 LibreOffice brand [1].  In fact, some LibreOffice supporters interpret
 these numbers as indicating that many LibreOffice users mistakenly
 think that they are still using OpenOffice and refer to it as
 OpenOffice.  That just goes to show that we have some brand
 perception paranoia on both sides!
 
 Finally, the take away from the brand perception survey is that most
 people have heard of neither OpenOffice nor LibreOffice.  That is
 where the greatest gains will gone from, increasing mainstream
 awareness of OpenOffice.
 The problem is that even among the users who know about OO, LibO is gaining 
 more and more visibility. If all articles deal with LibO and the proclaimed 
 death of AOO, users who are considering moving away from MSFT will not even 
 try to check about AOO.
 FUD is becoming dangerous, especially with the kind of journalism we are 
 seeing. Even if in the community we know it's FUD, we can't accept it anymore.

We've been through FUD before, many times before. I don't like to call what LO 
does is FUD, and I'd rather just focus on the fact about what we offer. We can 
surely untangle twisted accounts and ought to: being passive is for losers. But 
our goal, or at any rate, my goal, and I think that of others on the PMC, is to 
promote the qualities of AOO the product and the great community that makes it. 
And also to encourage those working on anything related to join us, in this 
effort, in this ecosystem.

If I were to be asked I should think that the latest versions of AOO are 
brilliant. They don't crash, they are easy to use, they do the job and then 
some. But I also think we need to encourage—and substantially encourage—mobile 
development. I think this is quite important and would be quite exciting; and 
mobile could be Android, iOS or anything like; even Tizen, Mozilla's, Jolla, 
etc. etc. 


 
 Hagar

-louis


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: 80 million downloads

On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Hagar Delest hagar.del...@laposte.net wrote:
 Le 01/12/2013 14:35, Rob Weir a écrit :

 On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote:

 Unfortunately, the ordinary computer user has no idea of the base of
 underlying code or of its source. He is only aware of the title of the
 package he uses, and this dominates perception.


 True.  But what are the facts?   Our download numbers show that there
 are relatively few Linux downloads.  We have more AOO Windows users in
 Poland than Linux users worldwide.

 But I guess that the download numbers don't take into account the
 repositories from the GNU/Linux distros.
 So what you record is only those who want to switch from the distro
 delivered solution to AOO.



 As far as brand perceptions go, the data I have shows that the
 OpenOffice brand is increasing, and is far stronger than the
 LibreOffice brand [1].  In fact, some LibreOffice supporters interpret
 these numbers as indicating that many LibreOffice users mistakenly
 think that they are still using OpenOffice and refer to it as
 OpenOffice.  That just goes to show that we have some brand
 perception paranoia on both sides!

 Finally, the take away from the brand perception survey is that most
 people have heard of neither OpenOffice nor LibreOffice.  That is
 where the greatest gains will gone from, increasing mainstream
 awareness of OpenOffice.

 The problem is that even among the users who know about OO, LibO is gaining
 more and more visibility. If all articles deal with LibO and the proclaimed

Again, look at the actual data cited in the link above.  OpenOffice is
gaining visibility faster than LibreOffice is.

And please acknowledge that Windows users far outnumber Linux users in
the world.  So you can then do apples-to-apples comparisons of Windows
downloads of AOO and LO on third party websites and see that this is
not even close:

AOO:  11,736 downloads in the last week (today is only Sunday,
remember, but check back later in the week to see the trend continue)

http://download.cnet.com/Apache-OpenOffice/3000-18483_4-10263109.html?tag=mncol;1

LO: 2,245 downloads in the last week:

http://download.cnet.com/LibreOffice/3000-18483_4-75337651.html?tag=mncol;1

 death of AOO, users who are considering moving away from MSFT will not even
 try to check about AOO.
 FUD is becoming dangerous, especially with the kind of journalism we are
 seeing. Even if in the community we know it's FUD, we can't accept it
 anymore.


I think you are confusing the perceptions within the echo-chamber of
open source insiders with the reality in the real world.   If you want
to do marketing in this area then you need a thick skin and be able to
do more than complain.  If you don't like the LibreOffice-promoted
stories about OpenOffice then just wait until you see the
Microsoft-promoted stories!

Regards,

-Rob


 Hagar


 -
 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: 80 million downloads


Le 01/12/2013 16:38, Rob Weir a écrit :

I think you are confusing the perceptions within the echo-chamber of
open source insiders with the reality in the real world.


But can't we use this echo-chamber too?
But ok, that's to be discussed in the proposed discussion by Louis.

Hagar

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: 80 million downloads

On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 10:49 AM, Hagar Delest hagar.del...@laposte.net wrote:
 Le 01/12/2013 16:38, Rob Weir a écrit :

 I think you are confusing the perceptions within the echo-chamber of
 open source insiders with the reality in the real world.


 But can't we use this echo-chamber too?

I don't see the value.  Remember, for all the FUD, for all the
LO-promoted press, for all the noise and negative campaigning against
AOO, LO could not even keep the founding company and primary sponsor,
Suse, from dropping their support of LibreOffice and reassigning their
developers who worked on LibreOffice.  And again, look at the actual
data, the downloads and the brand perception surveys.  The LO FUD
might be personally offensive and disturbing to you.  But it has not
been effective.  That's why I think a thick skin is needed to do
marketing.  You need to look at data more than feelings.   If download
numbers were declining then I'd feel bad.  If brand perception was
declining then I'd feel bad.  But biased press articles inside the
open source echo-chamber?  Who cares?  Dogs bark as well.  I try not
to take it personally and focus instead on reality.

Regards,

-Rob

 But ok, that's to be discussed in the proposed discussion by Louis.


 Hagar

 -
 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: 80 million downloads

Hagar,

On 01-Dec-2013, at 10:43, Hagar Delest hagar.del...@laposte.net wrote:

 Le 01/12/2013 16:17, Louis Suárez-Potts a écrit :
 But our goal, or at any rate, my goal, and I think that of others on the 
 PMC, is to promote the qualities of AOO the product and the great community 
 that makes it. And also to encourage those working on anything related to 
 join us, in this effort, in this ecosystem.
 
 But our promotion is one step behind LibO. Why do they get all that attention 
 in articles? Why hear about migration frmo a LiBO perspective, even if the 
 migration idea started a long time ago? They are quite good at it.
 
 Were they fair with AOO, I would not have any problem with that, it would be 
 just good competition between projects. But I can't see it like that yet. So 
 maybe we need to be more vocal to re-establish the facts.
 
 Hagar


Welcome to the world. Journalism, even outside of IT, is not about fairness nor 
even much about accuracy, unless you think that those two qualities have made 
the Murdoch empire, for instance, what it is. (And not just a betrayal of what 
one would hope for in journalism.)

Journalists, everywhere, work with what they have. LO gains attention because 
it fits into a classic narrative: it satisfies the narrative of the community 
once downtrodden but now resurgent, thus demonstrating the power of the people 
united to fend off oppression and even succeed, despite the crushing bulk of 
heartless corporations.

And LO and TDF also satisfy a basic journalistic need: They present the data 
desired in a form that is easy to reuse.

And, finally, LO surfs on the froth, so it is in the journalists' and editors' 
minds.

There are solutions to this. I've suggested a few. But we need a new subject 
for this discussion.

louis
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: 80 million downloads


On 01-Dec-2013, at 10:55, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:

 On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 10:49 AM, Hagar Delest hagar.del...@laposte.net 
 wrote:
 Le 01/12/2013 16:38, Rob Weir a écrit :
 
 I think you are confusing the perceptions within the echo-chamber of
 open source insiders with the reality in the real world.
 
 
 But can't we use this echo-chamber too?
 
 I don't see the value.  Remember, for all the FUD, for all the
 LO-promoted press, for all the noise and negative campaigning against
 AOO, LO could not even keep the founding company and primary sponsor,
 Suse, from dropping their support of LibreOffice and reassigning their
 developers who worked on LibreOffice.  And again, look at the actual
 data, the downloads and the brand perception surveys.  The LO FUD
 might be personally offensive and disturbing to you.  But it has not
 been effective.  That's why I think a thick skin is needed to do
 marketing.  You need to look at data more than feelings.   If download
 numbers were declining then I'd feel bad.  If brand perception was
 declining then I'd feel bad.  But biased press articles inside the
 open source echo-chamber?  Who cares?  Dogs bark as well.  I try not
 to take it personally and focus instead on reality.
 

I agree with Rob. And one really really does need a thick skin. We, Rob and I, 
at least, and probably many others reading this, have been personally attacked, 
if not (only) by LO's adherents, then by, in my case, also Microsoft's, albeit 
long ago. (MSFT sings a sweeter tune now.)  

The attacks puzzle me. They also puzzled, as recently as last October, in 
Paris, some of LO's founding members. Why the harshness, the vitriol? Why make 
it personal? (Why even have attacks at all?)

But so it goes. 


 Regards,
 
 -Rob

-louis
 
 But ok, that's to be discussed in the proposed discussion by Louis.
 
 
 Hagar
 
 -
 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

Reporting a problem with the OpenOffice website

2013-12-01 Thread Hitesh kamat

Hi i have problem with my mac after i update my iOS . can u help me so i don’t 
have to use microsoft 
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: soltools need(s) to be rebuilt

2013-12-01 Thread jan i

On 1 December 2013 15:44, Απόστολος Συρόπουλος
asyropoulos...@hotmail.comwrote:

 Hello again,

 I have downloaded the source code and I have reconfigured etc.
 What I have observed so far is that there are a number of
 utilities that consist of C and C++ source files. In all these cases,
 the build script uses the C compile and so obviously it fails to build
 the object files. For example,

 =
 Building module soltools
 =

 Entering /extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo4/main/soltools/mkdepend

 mkout -- version: 1.8
 Compiling: soltools/mkdepend/cppsetup.c
 cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, illegal item ignored:
 rvalueref
 cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, empty value ignored

This can be something as simple as your cc not supporting --features.

You have to look at the actual cc statement (it copied to stdout), to get
an idea whats wrong.


 Compiling: soltools/mkdepend/ifparser.c
 cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, illegal item ignored:
 rvalueref
 cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, empty value ignored
 Compiling: soltools/mkdepend/include.c
 cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, illegal item ignored:
 rvalueref
 cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, empty value ignored
 Compiling: soltools/mkdepend/main.c
 cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, illegal item ignored:
 rvalueref
 cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, empty value ignored
 Compiling: soltools/mkdepend/parse.c
 cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, illegal item ignored:
 rvalueref
 cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, empty value ignored
 parse.c, line 43: warning: identifier redeclared: find_includes
 current : function() returning int
 previous: function(pointer to struct filepointer {pointer to char f_p,
 pointer to char f_base, pointer to char f_end, long f_len, long f_line},
 pointer to struct inclist {pointer to char i_incstring, pointer to char
 i_file, pointer to pointer to struct inclist {..} i_list, int i_listlen,
 unsigned char i_defchecked, unsigned char i_notified, unsigned char
 i_marked, unsigned char i_searched, unsigned char i_included_sym}, pointer
 to struct inclist {pointer to char i_incstring, pointer to char i_file,
 pointer to pointer to struct inclist {..} i_list, int i_listlen, unsigned
 char i_defchecked, unsigned char i_notified, unsigned char i_marked,
 unsigned char i_searched, unsigned char i_included_sym}, int, unsigned
 char, pointer to struct IncludesCollection {}, pointer to struct symhash
 {array[64] of pointer to struct pair {..} s_pairs}) returning int :
 def.h, line 169
 parse.c, line 43: warning: Prototype mismatch in arg 5 for function
 find_includes:
 function : old style declaration unsigned char promoted to int
 prototype: unsigned char


This is normally caused be wrong compiler options, or an unsupported
compiler.

To me it looks at if you should change your ./configure statement. Look in
wiki.openoffice.org for different options.


 Compiling: soltools/mkdepend/pr.c
 cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, illegal item ignored:
 rvalueref
 cc: Warning: illegal use of -features option, empty value ignored
 pr.c, line 42: warning: identifier redeclared: add_include
 current : function() returning void
 previous: function(pointer to struct filepointer {pointer to char f_p,
 pointer to char f_base, pointer to char f_end, long f_len, long f_line},
 pointer to struct inclist {pointer to char i_incstring, pointer to char
 i_file, pointer to pointer to struct inclist {..} i_list, int i_listlen,
 unsigned char i_defchecked, unsigned char i_notified, unsigned char
 i_marked, unsigned char i_searched, unsigned char i_included_sym}, pointer
 to struct inclist {pointer to char i_incstring, pointer to char i_file,
 pointer to pointer to struct inclist {..} i_list, int i_listlen, unsigned
 char i_defchecked, unsigned char i_notified, unsigned char i_marked,
 unsigned char i_searched, unsigned char i_included_sym}, pointer to char,
 unsigned char, unsigned char, pointer to struct IncludesCollection {},
 pointer to struct symhash {array[64] of pointer to struct pair {..}
 s_pairs}) returning void : def.h, line 176
 pr.c, line 42: warning: Prototype mismatch in arg 5 for function
 add_include:
 function : old style declaration unsigned char promoted to int
 prototype: unsigned char
 pr.c, line 42: warning: Prototype mismatch in arg 6 for function
 add_include:
 function : old style declaration unsigned char promoted to int
 prototype: unsigned char
 Compiling: soltools/mkdepend/collectdircontent.cxx
 /extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo4/main/soltools/mkdepend/collectdircontent.hxx,
 line 6: Error: Could not open include fileset.
 /extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo4/main/soltools/mkdepend/collectdircontent.hxx,
 line 7: Error: Could not open include filemap.
 /extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo4/main/soltools/mkdepend/collectdircontent.hxx,
 line 8: Error: Could not open

Re: 80 million downloads

2013-12-01 Thread Ariel Constenla-Haile

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 02:23:02PM -0500, Rob Weir wrote:
 Yesterday we reached 80,072,389 downloads.

It would be good to update the charts at
http://www.openoffice.org/stats/downloads.html The most recent data is
from 29/10 with 75 million downloads.


Regards
-- 
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina


pgpRgq__I97Jj.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: 80 million downloads

2013-12-01 Thread Απόστολος Συρόπουλος

On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
arie...@apache.org wrote:
 On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 02:23:02PM -0500, Rob Weir wrote:
 Yesterday we reached 80,072,389 downloads.

 It would be good to update the charts at
 http://www.openoffice.org/stats/downloads.html The most recent data is
 from 29/10 with 75 million downloads.


Yes, I'll do that tomorrow.  I want to get the full month data for November.

-Rob


 Regards
 --
 Ariel Constenla-Haile
 La Plata, Argentina

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

RE: soltools need(s) to be rebuilt

After reading the reply by  jan I. I decided to try again with GCC.
Now, compilation proceeds with no stupid problems as before.
BTW, main/soltools/adjustvisibility/adjustvisibility.c does not
compile with g++ but it compiles with CC so this is the only
thing I had to do manually. However, now compilation stops
as follows:

Entering /extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo4/main/sal/osl/unx

tr -d \015  asm/interlck_x86.s  ../../unxsogi.pro/misc/interlck_x86.s
/usr/bin/gas  -o ../../unxsogi.pro/obj/interlck.o 
../../unxsogi.pro/misc/interlck_x86.s
touch ../../unxsogi.pro/obj/interlck.obj
Making:cpposl.lib
/usr/bin/gas  -o ../../unxsogi.pro/slo/interlck.o 
../../unxsogi.pro/misc/interlck_x86.s
touch ../../unxsogi.pro/slo/interlck.obj
Making:cpposl.lib
dmake:  Warning: -- Target [../../unxsogi.pro/misc/s_interlck.dpcc] was made 
but the time stamp has not been updated.
dmake:  Warning: -- Target [../../unxsogi.pro/misc/o_interlck.dpcc] was made 
but the time stamp has not been updated.

Entering /extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo4/main/sal/textenc


Entering /extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo4/main/sal/osl/all


Entering /extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo4/main/sal/util

Making:sal.lib
Making:asal.lib
Making:libsal.a
ar: creating ../unxsogi.pro/lib/libsal.a
Making:libuno_sal.so.3
: ERROR: ld.so.1: checkdll: fatal: relocation error: file 
../unxsogi.pro/lib/check_libuno_sal.so.3: symbol osl_isSingleCPU: referenced 
symbol not found
dmake:  Error code 1, while making '../unxsogi.pro/lib/libuno_sal.so.3'

1 module(s): 
sal
need(s) to be rebuilt

Reason(s):

ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making 
/extra/sources/OpenOffice/aoo4/main/sal/util

When you have fixed the errors in that module you can resume the build by 
running:

build --all:sal


I see that file interlck_x86.s is old... but I have no idea why linking fails. 
Any ideas and/or suggestions?

Rgds,

A.S.
--
Apostols Syropoulos
Xanthi, Greece

Re: Reporting a problem with the OpenOffice website

2013-12-01 Thread F C. Costero

There are people who would be happy to help on the user mailing list or on
one of the forums (https://forum.openoffice.org/). Your message was sent to
the developer mailing list. You might get help here, but that is not the
primary purpose of the list. Please describe your problem in detail when
you do post on one of the user support sites.
Best regards,
Francis


On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 9:00 AM, Hitesh kamat kalutobok...@icloud.comwrote:

 Hi i have problem with my mac after i update my iOS . can u help me so i
 don’t have to use microsoft
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Reporting a problem with the OpenOffice website

2013-12-01 Thread Frank R Walker

How soon will you have a version for OS X  10.9?

Really miss your software.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Reporting a problem with the OpenOffice website

2013-12-01 Thread Larry Gusaas

On 2013-12-01, 3:34 PM Frank R Walker wrote concerning Reporting a problem with the OpenOffice 
website:

How soon will you have a version for OS X  10.9?

Really miss your software.

Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 works on OSX verion 10.9 (Mavericks).
Download it here:  http://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html

--

As a courtesy I have sent a copy of this reply to you as well as to the mailing 
list. Do Not reply to me personally but just to the list  - replies to my 
personal email address will be ignored.

Since you are not subscribed to this list you may not see all the replies to 
your query.To subscribe Apache OpenOffice mailing lists go to
http://openoffice.apache.org/mailing-lists.html

For user support you can also use The OpenOffice.org Community Forum
http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/

 _

Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs. - 
Edgard Varese



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Reg: Info about Bug

2013-12-01 Thread Dhananjayan Santhanakrishnan

Hi,
I wish to take up this bug and work on it. How to proceed?

https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=56998

Regards,
Dhananjayan.

Re: 80 million downloads

2013-12-01 Thread Kay Schenk

On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 5:56 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts lui...@gmail.comwrote:


 On 30-Nov-2013, at 17:45, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote:

  On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts lui...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
  Hi,
 
  On 30-Nov-2013, at 16:06, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
 
  On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Hagar Delest 
 hagar.del...@laposte.net
  wrote:
  Le 27/11/2013 20:23, Rob Weir a écrit :
 
  Yesterday we reached 80,072,389 downloads.
 
 
  Well, I also saw this:
  https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=49t=62425(South
  Tyrol government to standardise on LibreOffice) and especially the
 quote
  from last post: We opted for LibreOffice over OpenOffice because we
  think
  this gives us more guarantees. It has a more consistent and constantly
  growing community of developers and by statute has to be independent
  from
  corporations, Pfeifer said.
 
 
  7000 desktops?  Really?  We get more than that many downloads every
  *hour*, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year (on average).  Just because
  our users are anonymous does not make them any less relevant.
 
  Quite.
 
  LibO is getting more and more momentum (French referential uses LibO
  too,
  something that will be implemented in more and more institutions). I
  wonder
  why AOO doesn't report similar successes.
 
 
  South Tyrol has been migration to OpenOffice for nearly a decade now.
  I remember seeing them give a presentation on this at the Orvietto
  OpenOffice.org conference, for example.  Hopefully one of these years
  they will complete this task.  But this is hardly news.
 
 
  Indeed. In fact, their effort has gone in cycles, and those cycles seem
 to
  me related to the job tenacity of a few. Of more interest, as it
 relates to
  actualities, would be Munich's migration but also other cities' in
 Italy.
 
 
  Are we lacking marketing power? Or key people?
 
 
  It depends on what you are trying to accomplish.  Any one migrating to
  a free office suite as part of a migration to Linux will either take
  LibreOffice or Calligra.  If we want to give them the easy choice of
  AOO as well then we need to get AOO packages for the distros.
  Personally I don't think the Linux desktop is worth the effort.  That
  is my personal view, and I don't force it on anyone else, but that's
  my honest opinion.
 
  I agree with Rob.
 
 
  but...as a Linux person, this is somewhat sad for me -- although I
  personally have NO problems with installation. This said, the ease of
  installation on Linux seems to depend a lot on how easy your distro makes
  installing non-repo packages. My major concern at this point in the
  continuation of Linux packaging for AOO in some form.
 

 I think Rob means here that the effort to strongly market Linux in the
 face of corporate marketing muscle by Canonical is not worth it; that good
 Linux may also be reached by the high road, anyway. Besides, I personally
 think that Ubuntu's days are numbered, given the better alternatives out
 there and the very fast, very positive energies Linux engages.


I know what Rob is saying and we actually had a similar discussion a while
back with respect to a Fedora build/package. Once we/a volunteer decides to
package for a particular distro, how to keep up this maintenanceit's an
issue. What we are doing with respect to Linux distribution is perfectly
fine in my opinion, but it's sad it is not fine for others.

Some distros make it very difficult for the typical Linux end user to
install  anything NOT in the distro's repository. This is NOT why I
switched to Linux, I can assure you.


 (At any rate, that's what I would mean. Given the choice of OSs, for a lot
 of stuff I tend toward Linux. It's easier. But I tend then toward
 non-Canonical Linuxes. Even easier.)

 And try installing OOo in the latest Ubuntu *as a non-developer.* Tell us
 about it :-).


I have only used one Linux distro since I started. I do not use Ubuntu and
likely never will. I got away from MS because of all kinds of restrictions
and I don't need to trade one environment like that for another.



 best
 louis
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org




-- 
-
MzK

Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time,
 for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect.
   -- James Mason

Re: 80 million downloads


On 01-Dec-2013, at 18:03, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote:

 Some distros make it very difficult for the typical Linux end user to
 install  anything NOT in the distro's repository. This is NOT why I
 switched to Linux, I can assure you.

It's only—only—been my experience with Ubuntu. With *all* other LInuxes, I get 
joy. (I've not used all there are, I refer just to those I've used; and at 
that, via my virtualized environment. Ubuntu pretends to the ease of OS X but 
is actually more—!!—tight with proprietary constraints, if you can imagine 
that: if it don't come from Canonical, it ain't canonical.)
 
 
 (At any rate, that's what I would mean. Given the choice of OSs, for a lot
 of stuff I tend toward Linux. It's easier. But I tend then toward
 non-Canonical Linuxes. Even easier.)
 
 And try installing OOo in the latest Ubuntu *as a non-developer.* Tell us
 about it :-).
 
 
 I have only used one Linux distro since I started. I do not use Ubuntu and
 likely never will. I got away from MS because of all kinds of restrictions
 and I don't need to trade one environment like that for another.

Quite. And I love Linux (and also, for that matter, OS X) because it's logical 
in its layout and thus easy to navigate, work with, use. Whereas I dislike 
MSFT's Windows because it is seemingly arbitrary in layout and operation; and 
though one can finally *get* that its logic is about property (MY MY MY 
things), still, one must then deal with mairzy doats and dozy doats and liddle 
lazy divey and not mares and does and lambs scarfing oats  ivy.)

louis
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Reg: Info about Bug

2013-12-01 Thread Regina Henschel


Hi Dhananjayan,

Dhananjayan Santhanakrishnan schrieb:

Hi,
I wish to take up this bug and work on it. How to proceed?

https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=56998

Regards,
Dhananjayan.



You are hanya (hanya.r...@gmail.com) in Bugzilla?

When you have attached a patch you choose the flag ? for that patch. It 
will generate a mail to the dev list, with request for review.


Kind regards
Regina

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: 80 million downloads

2013-12-01 Thread Ian Lynch

We use Ubuntu throughout the company and don't have any problems with it -
well certainly no more than Windows and Apple Users seem to have. I suggest
if AOO is difficult to install in Ubuntu for a non-developer its really up
to those that have the skills and knowledge to change that..well that
assumes that the project isn't just giving up on Ubuntu and leaving it to
LO. I have to say AOO is one of the most difficult to install applications
on Ubuntu. We can blame Ubuntu or Canonical or we can fix it. Depends on
whether the Ubuntu market is seen as important because companies like ours
are not going to switch platforms just to run AOO.


On 1 December 2013 23:25, Louis Suárez-Potts lui...@gmail.com wrote:


 On 01-Dec-2013, at 18:03, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote:

  Some distros make it very difficult for the typical Linux end user to
  install  anything NOT in the distro's repository. This is NOT why I
  switched to Linux, I can assure you.

 It's only—only—been my experience with Ubuntu. With *all* other LInuxes, I
 get joy. (I've not used all there are, I refer just to those I've used; and
 at that, via my virtualized environment. Ubuntu pretends to the ease of OS
 X but is actually more—!!—tight with proprietary constraints, if you can
 imagine that: if it don't come from Canonical, it ain't canonical.)
 
 
  (At any rate, that's what I would mean. Given the choice of OSs, for a
 lot
  of stuff I tend toward Linux. It's easier. But I tend then toward
  non-Canonical Linuxes. Even easier.)
 
  And try installing OOo in the latest Ubuntu *as a non-developer.* Tell
 us
  about it :-).
 
 
  I have only used one Linux distro since I started. I do not use Ubuntu
 and
  likely never will. I got away from MS because of all kinds of
 restrictions
  and I don't need to trade one environment like that for another.

 Quite. And I love Linux (and also, for that matter, OS X) because it's
 logical in its layout and thus easy to navigate, work with, use. Whereas I
 dislike MSFT's Windows because it is seemingly arbitrary in layout and
 operation; and though one can finally *get* that its logic is about
 property (MY MY MY things), still, one must then deal with mairzy doats and
 dozy doats and liddle lazy divey and not mares and does and lambs scarfing
 oats  ivy.)

 louis
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org




-- 
Ian

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications https://theingots.org/community/faq#7.0

Headline points in the 2014 and 2015 school league tables

www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940

The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, Unit 4D Gagarin, Lichfield
Road Industrial Estate, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 7GN. Reg No:
05560797, Registered in England and Wales.

Re: 80 million downloads

2013-12-01 Thread Glenn Harvey Liwanag

Pardon for not reading the whole thread, but is Ubuntu not shipped with
AOO? Last time I installed Ubuntu, it had AOO. Or was it LibreOffice?


On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 8:22 AM, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote:

 We use Ubuntu throughout the company and don't have any problems with it -
 well certainly no more than Windows and Apple Users seem to have. I suggest
 if AOO is difficult to install in Ubuntu for a non-developer its really up
 to those that have the skills and knowledge to change that..well that
 assumes that the project isn't just giving up on Ubuntu and leaving it to
 LO. I have to say AOO is one of the most difficult to install applications
 on Ubuntu. We can blame Ubuntu or Canonical or we can fix it. Depends on
 whether the Ubuntu market is seen as important because companies like ours
 are not going to switch platforms just to run AOO.


 On 1 December 2013 23:25, Louis Suárez-Potts lui...@gmail.com wrote:

 
  On 01-Dec-2013, at 18:03, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote:
 
   Some distros make it very difficult for the typical Linux end user to
   install  anything NOT in the distro's repository. This is NOT why I
   switched to Linux, I can assure you.
 
  It's only—only—been my experience with Ubuntu. With *all* other LInuxes,
 I
  get joy. (I've not used all there are, I refer just to those I've used;
 and
  at that, via my virtualized environment. Ubuntu pretends to the ease of
 OS
  X but is actually more—!!—tight with proprietary constraints, if you can
  imagine that: if it don't come from Canonical, it ain't canonical.)
  
  
   (At any rate, that's what I would mean. Given the choice of OSs, for a
  lot
   of stuff I tend toward Linux. It's easier. But I tend then toward
   non-Canonical Linuxes. Even easier.)
  
   And try installing OOo in the latest Ubuntu *as a non-developer.* Tell
  us
   about it :-).
  
  
   I have only used one Linux distro since I started. I do not use Ubuntu
  and
   likely never will. I got away from MS because of all kinds of
  restrictions
   and I don't need to trade one environment like that for another.
 
  Quite. And I love Linux (and also, for that matter, OS X) because it's
  logical in its layout and thus easy to navigate, work with, use. Whereas
 I
  dislike MSFT's Windows because it is seemingly arbitrary in layout and
  operation; and though one can finally *get* that its logic is about
  property (MY MY MY things), still, one must then deal with mairzy doats
 and
  dozy doats and liddle lazy divey and not mares and does and lambs
 scarfing
  oats  ivy.)
 
  louis
  -
  To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
  For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
 
 


 --
 Ian

 Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications 
 https://theingots.org/community/faq#7.0

 Headline points in the 2014 and 2015 school league tables

 www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940

 The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, Unit 4D Gagarin, Lichfield
 Road Industrial Estate, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 7GN. Reg No:
 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.

Re: Openoffice is being sold on ebay

On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Donald Whytock dwhyt...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Regina Henschel
 rb.hensc...@t-online.dewrote:

 But I'm concerned about the way the product is shown. For example in
 http://www.ebay.com/itm/Microsoft-Office-Word-Excel-
 Compatible-Open-Office-Professional-Edition-2013/281137965681
 Either it is not our OpenOffice, then it may not named so, or it is our
 OpenOffice, then Apache and trade mark is missing.

 Or this http://www.ebay.com/itm/Open-Office-Microsoft-Word-Excel-
 2007-2010-Compatible-Pro-Professional-Software/150935048983
 From content is is likely an OpenOffice.org 3.4.1, but the box says MT
 Software Solutions OpenOffice Suite. It gives the impression, that the
 application is developed by MT Software Solution.


 I seem to recall from the handoff from Oracle that OpenOffice isn't an
 Apache trademark...that we have Apache OpenOffice now, and that
 OpenOffice.org came with the license, but we didn't receive OpenOffice
 because it was being used in too many different countries by too many
 different people.

 So as long as they're not actually using Apache trademarks (including the
 gulls, the feather, etc.) I suppose they can call it whatever they want,
 even if it's just a hello world VBscript inside.


No one can use a a name that confusingly similar to our trademarks.
Confusion is not limited to literal identity with our trademark.  For
example, Apache Open Office (with a space) or OpenOffice (without
the Apache part),  if used in the context of office productivity
software, could be a problem.  So our claiming of Apache OpenOffice
essentially subsumes OpenOffice and similar variants.

As far as eBay goes, if they are selling Apache OpenOffice and calling
it OpenOffice then this might be covered under the doctrine of
nominative use [1].

I think it is useful to consider these cases:

1) Someone sells OpenOffice and calls it OpenOffice.  This is probably
covered by nominative use

2) Someone sells something other than OpenOffice but calls it
OpenOffice.  This could be trademark abuse

3) Someone sells OpenOffice but calls it something else.  For example,
NeoOffice, BrOffice, Symphony, LibreOffice, etc., did this.

Note that there are other possible issues, unrelated to trademarks.
For example, if someone takes OpenOffice and loads it up with malware
and offers it for download, then this might run afoul of consumer
protection laws.  And if someone takes OpenOffice and claims that it
is Microsoft Office then this may violate Microsoft's trademarks and
also constitute consumer fraud.   I've seen both of these kinds of
things happen.  They are very annoying, but if they are not misuses of
our trademarks then there is little we can do on our side.

One solution here is to develop a redistributors code of conduct and
feature on our website such distributors that agree to these terms.
The idea would be to change the dynamic a bit by actively encouraging
legitimate distributors.  This has been discussed on the list before
but never was brought to completion.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_use

Regards,

-Rob

 Don - not a lawyer

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: 80 million downloads


On 01-Dec-2013, at 19:22, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote:

  We can blame Ubuntu or Canonical or we can fix it. 


This is not a new thing and I've asked that we provide clear clear instructions 
to naive users (like, oh, me) about how to change it without going geek.

If you, or anyone wants to script a simple How-To that can be tacked to a 
wiki/download page, great; if a better solution, such as an embedded script 
that recognizes Ubuntu (yikes, says the script, Ubuntu!), and then behaves 
appropriately (without exclamations), then better yet.

louis
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: 80 million downloads