Re: OOo4Kids & OOoLight Status

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 13/02/2015 jonathon wrote:

Were these projects (OOo4Kids, OooLight) included, when OOo became an
Apache project?


No. But as several people pointed out, they have always been independent 
projects. Eric's messages to this list cover pretty much all discussions 
we had about them:

http://markmail.org/search/?q=list%3Aorg.apache.incubator.ooo-dev+from%3A%22eric+b%22

(note that discussions referring to OOo4Kids being "included" do not 
refer to the source code; they refer to it being listed in the 
https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/ header for support).



If so, have they since been abandoned?


No idea, but they are managed independently of the Apache OpenOffice 
project.


Regards,
  Andrea.

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

Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

[Alexandro Colorado]

I think is a good idea to use Git as a full fledge repo.

+1

On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:43 AM, jan i  wrote:
>
> > Hi.
> >
> > We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.
> >
> > Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
> > participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract
> new
> > people) by lowering the barrier.
> >
> > For more documentation on Git at Apache see
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
> >
> > Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean
> giving
> > up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git
> instead.
> >
> > The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.
> >
> > thoughts ?
> >
> > rgds
> > jan I.
> >
>
> I'm not sure I understand the comment about making things easier but then
> I'm not a git user currently. I'm good with svn.
> I know we have read only git right now.
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> -
> MzK
>
> "An old horse for a long, hard road,
>  a young pony for a quick ride."
> -- Texas Bix Bender
>



-- 
Alexandro Colorado
Apache OpenOffice Contributor
882C 4389 3C27 E8DF 41B9  5C4C 1DB7 9D1C 7F4C 2614

Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

[Regina Henschel]

Hi Jan,

jan i schrieb:

Hi.

We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.

Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
people) by lowering the barrier.

For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/

Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.

The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.

thoughts ?


I do not think, that a move is needed. New developers without commit 
rights do not need it, because they create patches.


I'm surely no professional developer and commit only patches from time 
to time. I use "git svn" and that works for me.


Kind regards
Regina


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

Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

[Pedro Giffuni]

Hello;

I don't currently use git but what I use is not really important:
if a move to git were to be considered, it would only make sense
if we can rescue the pre-apache history and in particular the
Hg CWSs.

Just my $0.02,

Pedro.

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

RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

OK, I finally cloned Apache/OpenOffice from GitHub.

I learned two things:

 1. The git repo takes just under 3GB on my hard drive.  That's considerably 
less than the 4.35GB SVN working copy for the AOO SVN trunk.

 2. Although I have paired my apache.org ID and my GitHub ID and it was 
confirmed a couple of months ago, I cannot do a Sync that pushes a small change 
from my computer to the GitHub repo.  So I get that there is no good way to 
push to GitHub for this repo. 

 3. I also cloned and made a push to Apache/commons-cli and this also reported 
that I evidently do not have permission to do that.  Am I to conclude that my 
pairing of IDs is failing or is it the case that all Apache repos on GitHub are 
read-only mirrors?

As I said, I have no objection to the proposal and I have confirmed a problem 
that it definitely solves for committers at least.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org] 
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 09:04
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; dennis.hamil...@acm.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

On Friday, February 13, 2015, Dennis E. Hamilton 
wrote:

> I don’t understand the response.  I said GitHub Mirror, which anyone can
> make a push request to from another GitHub repo (a GitHub fork) and from a
> clone of the Mirror not on GitHub.  If I push a change to the OpenOffice
> Mirror on GitHub, won’t the pull of those changes show up in the AOO SVN
> and the AOO Git wherever it is (since I am a recognized ASF committer)?

no it will not,because it is a mirror and not the canocial repo.


>
> Is this not the easy case for newcomers?  Is this not supported with the
> AOO Mirror on GitHub already?

no it is not, fisrt of all our current mirror is read only.

>
> I also notice that the GitHub app will work with a local repo clone that
> is not from a GitHub repo as well (at least on Windows).  That is how I
> push and pull with the incubator-corinthia repository on ASF infrastructure.
>
> If there are now more Git commits than SVN commits, don’t the pulls of
> those also end up in the SVN?  I thought there was bidirectional
> synchronization.

no there is not a bidirectional sync, it is either svn or git at the
canocial repo.

>
> Can you please explain what doesn’t work already?  Although I use the AOO
> SVN, I don’t think I miss any commits made via Git.  How am I mistaken?

may I please suggest you read the links I gave.

>
> Is this rather a concern for infrastructure server demand and performance?

no idea what you mean.

rgds
jan I


>
> -   Dennis
>
> From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org ]
> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 04:41
> To: dev; Dennis Hamilton
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
>
>
>
> On 13 February 2015 at 13:13, Dennis E. Hamilton    > wrote:
> Isn't having the mirror on GitHub an effective way to push changes to the
> SVN, especially for Apache committers who have project rights to the GitHub
> repo?  Non-committer pull requests are as complicated either way, it seems
> to me, and the GitHub mirror might be superior for that.
> no it is not. You cannot push from github to either git or svn at apache.
> Please be aware that I wrote git, not github. ASF has its own git server,
> which is mandatory to use.
>
>
> I assume the proposal is do-able, but I wonder what kind of disruption
> cost there is for current work.
> Well it is not only do-able, at the moment about half of all ASF projects
> work that way. The disruption cost is an infra ticket, and about 3-4 hours
> downtime.
> We have today more git commits than svn commits.
> rgds
> jan i.
>
>
>  - Dennis
>
> Below, I have no opinion, just wonder if these are also relevant
> considerations?
>
> PS: Our current SVN repo is also used for source control of openoffice.org
>  , So I assume it is not a total give-up.  Also,
> we have SVN tags and branches that might be problematic, I think.
>
> PPS: The AOO repo is also a bit larger than what Linus apparently thinks
> is cool.  This gets back to how could the AOO repo be refactored in order
> to modularize the software and simplify (re-)building and staged evolution
> of features.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org   > ]
> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 03:44
> To: dev
> Subject: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
>
> Hi.
>
> We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.
>
> Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
> participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
> people) by lowering the barrier.
>
> For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
>
> Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
> up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.
>
> The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.
>
> thoughts ?
>
> rgds
>

Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

[Marcus]

Am 02/13/2015 06:13 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:

On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:43 AM, jan i  wrote:


Hi.

We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.

Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
people) by lowering the barrier.

For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/

Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.

The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.

thoughts ?

rgds
jan I.



I'm not sure I understand the comment about making things easier but then
I'm not a git user currently. I'm good with svn.
I know we have read only git right now.


I'm not a core developer but working here and there on the website. So, 
at least I don't need Git - of course that's not counting. ;-)


However, does staging and publishing the website also work via Git?

Regarding the argument "to attract more new developers":
I don't know if this is the reality as I haven't see any comment from 
newbies like "If you would use Git I would start working" or similar. 
So, I'm not sure if a change would give us more developers.


When changing then it will be more because of technical reasons - like 
branching could be easier than in SVN.


My 2 ct.

Marcus


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

Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

[jan i]

On 13 February 2015 at 18:13, Kay Schenk  wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:43 AM, jan i  wrote:
>
> > Hi.
> >
> > We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.
> >
> > Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
> > participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract
> new
> > people) by lowering the barrier.
> >
> > For more documentation on Git at Apache see
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
> >
> > Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean
> giving
> > up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git
> instead.
> >
> > The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.
> >
> > thoughts ?
> >
> > rgds
> > jan I.
> >
>
> I'm not sure I understand the comment about making things easier but then
> I'm not a git user currently. I'm good with svn.
> I know we have read only git right now.
>

I did not mean for you and me, and others who are used to svn...using GIT
might make it just a little bit easier for new developers.

I have no strong feelings for the one or other solution, I am simply seeing
it as a possibility to lower the level required to help.

rgds
jan I.


>
>
>
>
> --
>
> -
> MzK
>
> "An old horse for a long, hard road,
>  a young pony for a quick ride."
> -- Texas Bix Bender
>

Re: APACHE OPENOFFICE Project Volunteering

[Keith N. McKenna]

贾麒 wrote:
> Greeting!
> This is Jackey and am a first year undergraduate who currently studies
> Computer Science. I am from Toronto and studies at University of Waterloo.
> With the interest in Open Sources Community and Computer Science, I believe
> that I can make contributions to the Open Office projects, as well, learn
> and gain some experiences. I am interested in the QA and programming
> Opportunities, and I really hope my works can help to improve the
> OpenOffice Projects.
> 
> Sincerely Yours,
> Jackey
> 
Welcome Jackey;

My first suggestion would be that you subscribe to this list as it is
the main communication vehicle for the project and for development. To
subscribe send a blank message to dev-subscr...@openoffice.apache.org
and follow the instructions in the reply that you will receive.

Than take a look at our Orientation pages at
http://openoffice.apache.org/orientation/index.html. The first levels
are general information about how projects work at Apache, and our
infrastructure. The next levels deal with more in-depth knowledge in
various areas.

Again welcome
Keith





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

[Kay Schenk]

On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:43 AM, jan i  wrote:

> Hi.
>
> We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.
>
> Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
> participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
> people) by lowering the barrier.
>
> For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
>
> Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
> up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.
>
> The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.
>
> thoughts ?
>
> rgds
> jan I.
>

I'm not sure I understand the comment about making things easier but then
I'm not a git user currently. I'm good with svn.
I know we have read only git right now.




-- 
-
MzK

"An old horse for a long, hard road,
 a young pony for a quick ride."
-- Texas Bix Bender

Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

[jan i]

On Friday, February 13, 2015, Dennis E. Hamilton 
wrote:

> I don’t understand the response.  I said GitHub Mirror, which anyone can
> make a push request to from another GitHub repo (a GitHub fork) and from a
> clone of the Mirror not on GitHub.  If I push a change to the OpenOffice
> Mirror on GitHub, won’t the pull of those changes show up in the AOO SVN
> and the AOO Git wherever it is (since I am a recognized ASF committer)?

no it will not,because it is a mirror and not the canocial repo.


>
> Is this not the easy case for newcomers?  Is this not supported with the
> AOO Mirror on GitHub already?

no it is not, fisrt of all our current mirror is read only.

>
> I also notice that the GitHub app will work with a local repo clone that
> is not from a GitHub repo as well (at least on Windows).  That is how I
> push and pull with the incubator-corinthia repository on ASF infrastructure.
>
> If there are now more Git commits than SVN commits, don’t the pulls of
> those also end up in the SVN?  I thought there was bidirectional
> synchronization.

no there is not a bidirectional sync, it is either svn or git at the
canocial repo.

>
> Can you please explain what doesn’t work already?  Although I use the AOO
> SVN, I don’t think I miss any commits made via Git.  How am I mistaken?

may I please suggest you read the links I gave.

>
> Is this rather a concern for infrastructure server demand and performance?

no idea what you mean.

rgds
jan I


>
> -   Dennis
>
> From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org ]
> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 04:41
> To: dev; Dennis Hamilton
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
>
>
>
> On 13 February 2015 at 13:13, Dennis E. Hamilton    > wrote:
> Isn't having the mirror on GitHub an effective way to push changes to the
> SVN, especially for Apache committers who have project rights to the GitHub
> repo?  Non-committer pull requests are as complicated either way, it seems
> to me, and the GitHub mirror might be superior for that.
> no it is not. You cannot push from github to either git or svn at apache.
> Please be aware that I wrote git, not github. ASF has its own git server,
> which is mandatory to use.
>
>
> I assume the proposal is do-able, but I wonder what kind of disruption
> cost there is for current work.
> Well it is not only do-able, at the moment about half of all ASF projects
> work that way. The disruption cost is an infra ticket, and about 3-4 hours
> downtime.
> We have today more git commits than svn commits.
> rgds
> jan i.
>
>
>  - Dennis
>
> Below, I have no opinion, just wonder if these are also relevant
> considerations?
>
> PS: Our current SVN repo is also used for source control of openoffice.org
>  , So I assume it is not a total give-up.  Also,
> we have SVN tags and branches that might be problematic, I think.
>
> PPS: The AOO repo is also a bit larger than what Linus apparently thinks
> is cool.  This gets back to how could the AOO repo be refactored in order
> to modularize the software and simplify (re-)building and staged evolution
> of features.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org   > ]
> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 03:44
> To: dev
> Subject: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
>
> Hi.
>
> We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.
>
> Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
> participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
> people) by lowering the barrier.
>
> For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
>
> Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
> up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.
>
> The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.
>
> thoughts ?
>
> rgds
> jan I.
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>   >
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>  
>
>

-- 
Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.

RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

I don’t understand the response.  I said GitHub Mirror, which anyone can make a 
push request to from another GitHub repo (a GitHub fork) and from a clone of 
the Mirror not on GitHub.  If I push a change to the OpenOffice Mirror on 
GitHub, won’t the pull of those changes show up in the AOO SVN and the AOO Git 
wherever it is (since I am a recognized ASF committer)?
 
Is this not the easy case for newcomers?  Is this not supported with the AOO 
Mirror on GitHub already?
 
I also notice that the GitHub app will work with a local repo clone that is not 
from a GitHub repo as well (at least on Windows).  That is how I push and pull 
with the incubator-corinthia repository on ASF infrastructure. 
 
If there are now more Git commits than SVN commits, don’t the pulls of those 
also end up in the SVN?  I thought there was bidirectional synchronization.
 
Can you please explain what doesn’t work already?  Although I use the AOO SVN, 
I don’t think I miss any commits made via Git.  How am I mistaken?
 
Is this rather a concern for infrastructure server demand and performance?
 
-   Dennis
 
From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org] 
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 04:41
To: dev; Dennis Hamilton
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
 
 
 
On 13 February 2015 at 13:13, Dennis E. Hamilton mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org> > wrote:
Isn't having the mirror on GitHub an effective way to push changes to the SVN, 
especially for Apache committers who have project rights to the GitHub repo?  
Non-committer pull requests are as complicated either way, it seems to me, and 
the GitHub mirror might be superior for that.
no it is not. You cannot push from github to either git or svn at apache.
Please be aware that I wrote git, not github. ASF has its own git server, which 
is mandatory to use.
 

I assume the proposal is do-able, but I wonder what kind of disruption cost 
there is for current work.
Well it is not only do-able, at the moment about half of all ASF projects work 
that way. The disruption cost is an infra ticket, and about 3-4 hours downtime.
We have today more git commits than svn commits.
rgds
jan i.
 

 - Dennis

Below, I have no opinion, just wonder if these are also relevant considerations?

PS: Our current SVN repo is also used for source control of openoffice.org 
 , So I assume it is not a total give-up.  Also, we have 
SVN tags and branches that might be problematic, I think.

PPS: The AOO repo is also a bit larger than what Linus apparently thinks is 
cool.  This gets back to how could the AOO repo be refactored in order to 
modularize the software and simplify (re-)building and staged evolution of 
features.

-Original Message-
From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org  ]
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 03:44
To: dev
Subject: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

Hi.

We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.

Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
people) by lowering the barrier.

For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/

Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.

The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.

thoughts ?

rgds
jan I.


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

Re: Sourceforge and commercial ads

[Roberto Galoppini]

Just confirming it has been blocked 5 mins ago.

Thanks again,

Roberto

2015-02-13 17:29 GMT+01:00 Roberto Galoppini :

> Thanks for heads up, I've just passed this onto our AdOps team, it will be
> removed shortly.
>
> roberto
>
> 2015-02-13 17:09 GMT+01:00 FR web forum :
>
>> Hello list,
>>
>> New ad to have a fake AOO.
>> See: http://hpics.li/73a635e
>>
>> This ad jump to a para-site:
>> h**p://www.maribiz.net
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
>

Re: Sourceforge and commercial ads

[Roberto Galoppini]

Thanks for heads up, I've just passed this onto our AdOps team, it will be
removed shortly.

roberto

2015-02-13 17:09 GMT+01:00 FR web forum :

> Hello list,
>
> New ad to have a fake AOO.
> See: http://hpics.li/73a635e
>
> This ad jump to a para-site:
> h**p://www.maribiz.net
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

APACHE OPENOFFICE Project Volunteering

[贾麒]

Greeting!
This is Jackey and am a first year undergraduate who currently studies
Computer Science. I am from Toronto and studies at University of Waterloo.
With the interest in Open Sources Community and Computer Science, I believe
that I can make contributions to the Open Office projects, as well, learn
and gain some experiences. I am interested in the QA and programming
Opportunities, and I really hope my works can help to improve the
OpenOffice Projects.

Sincerely Yours,
Jackey

Sourceforge and commercial ads

[FR web forum]

Hello list,

New ad to have a fake AOO.
See: http://hpics.li/73a635e

This ad jump to a para-site:
h**p://www.maribiz.net



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

Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

[jan i]

On 13 February 2015 at 13:13, Dennis E. Hamilton 
wrote:

> Isn't having the mirror on GitHub an effective way to push changes to the
> SVN, especially for Apache committers who have project rights to the GitHub
> repo?  Non-committer pull requests are as complicated either way, it seems
> to me, and the GitHub mirror might be superior for that.
>
no it is not. You cannot push from github to either git or svn at apache.

Please be aware that I wrote git, not github. ASF has its own git server,
which is mandatory to use.


>
> I assume the proposal is do-able, but I wonder what kind of disruption
> cost there is for current work.
>
Well it is not only do-able, at the moment about half of all ASF projects
work that way. The disruption cost is an infra ticket, and about 3-4 hours
downtime.

We have today more git commits than svn commits.

rgds
jan i.


>
>  - Dennis
>
> Below, I have no opinion, just wonder if these are also relevant
> considerations?
>
> PS: Our current SVN repo is also used for source control of openoffice.org,
> So I assume it is not a total give-up.  Also, we have SVN tags and branches
> that might be problematic, I think.
>
> PPS: The AOO repo is also a bit larger than what Linus apparently thinks
> is cool.  This gets back to how could the AOO repo be refactored in order
> to modularize the software and simplify (re-)building and staged evolution
> of features.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 03:44
> To: dev
> Subject: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
>
> Hi.
>
> We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.
>
> Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
> participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
> people) by lowering the barrier.
>
> For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
>
> Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
> up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.
>
> The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.
>
> thoughts ?
>
> rgds
> jan I.
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

Isn't having the mirror on GitHub an effective way to push changes to the SVN, 
especially for Apache committers who have project rights to the GitHub repo?  
Non-committer pull requests are as complicated either way, it seems to me, and 
the GitHub mirror might be superior for that.

I assume the proposal is do-able, but I wonder what kind of disruption cost 
there is for current work.

 - Dennis

Below, I have no opinion, just wonder if these are also relevant considerations?

PS: Our current SVN repo is also used for source control of openoffice.org, So 
I assume it is not a total give-up.  Also, we have SVN tags and branches that 
might be problematic, I think.

PPS: The AOO repo is also a bit larger than what Linus apparently thinks is 
cool.  This gets back to how could the AOO repo be refactored in order to 
modularize the software and simplify (re-)building and staged evolution of 
features.  

-Original Message-
From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org] 
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 03:44
To: dev
Subject: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

Hi.

We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.

Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
people) by lowering the barrier.

For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/

Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.

The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.

thoughts ?

rgds
jan I.


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

[PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.

[jan i]

Hi.

We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo.

Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to
participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new
people) by lowering the barrier.

For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/

Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving
up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead.

The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work.

thoughts ?

rgds
jan I.

RE: OOo4Kids & OOoLight Status

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

My recollection is that OOo4Kids was intended to remain downstream and under 
LGPL in any case.  

The OOo4Kids developer participated on the AOO Podling.  There was a 
complicated disagreement (not about licensing and more about AOO's 
unwillingness to arbitrate a conflict between third parties) that had the 
developer bolt from AOO.

Please do not trust my recollection.  It is better to see what is on the AOO 
dev archive back in 2011-2012.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: RA Stehmann [mailto:anw...@rechtsanwalt-stehmann.de] 
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 00:43
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: OOo4Kids & OOoLight Status

On 13.02.2015 09:05, jan i wrote:

> 
> 
>> I cannot see them included in the original IP clearance, so my best guess
>> is that they were forgotten, but others might know more.
> 

I think, that both products are derived works from OpenOffice.org.

Maybe the people, who developed both projects, have not all signed a
copyright assignment contract with SUN or Oracle.

So we have to aware some legal problems.

We should find out first, who are the developers of these products and
how we can contact them.

OOo4Kids is a fine product and can be important for the success of Free
Software.

Kind regards
Michael







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

Re: OOo4Kids & OOoLight Status

[FR web forum]

>who are the developers of these products and
>how we can contact them.
See Eric Bachard
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/User:Ericb

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

Re: OOo4Kids & OOoLight Status

[RA Stehmann]

On 13.02.2015 09:05, jan i wrote:

> 
> 
>> I cannot see them included in the original IP clearance, so my best guess
>> is that they were forgotten, but others might know more.
> 

I think, that both products are derived works from OpenOffice.org.

Maybe the people, who developed both projects, have not all signed a
copyright assignment contract with SUN or Oracle.

So we have to aware some legal problems.

We should find out first, who are the developers of these products and
how we can contact them.

OOo4Kids is a fine product and can be important for the success of Free
Software.

Kind regards
Michael







signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: OOo4Kids & OOoLight Status

[jonathon]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 13/02/15 08:05, jan i wrote:

>so my best guess is that they were forgotten, 

That would be "forgotten by developers".

The current Trinidad and Tobago DVD contains OOo4Kids.

jonathon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
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=GSg+
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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

Re: OOo4Kids & OOoLight Status

[Dave Barton]

jan i wrote:
> On 13 February 2015 at 08:58, jonathon  wrote:
> 
> All:
> 
> My impression was that when Apache Foundation accepted OOo, they also
> accepted the OOo4Kids and OOoLight projects.
> 
> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Education_Project/OOo4Kids says that
> the OOo4Kids has been depreciated, and points to
> http://educoo.org/OOo4Kids.php as the main page.
> 
> As far as OOoLight goes, the only hit on the Apache Wiki is
> 
> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%9E%D0%BE_%D0%9F%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8:_%D1%83%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%82%D1%8B_%D0%9E%D0%9E%D0%BE
> ,
> which is a description of things that can be removed from OOo, to
> improve performance/reduce the CPU/memory requirements.
> 
> OOo4Kids 1.3 can be downloaded from
> http://educoo.org/TelechargerOOo4Kids.php, and is licenced under the
> LGPL 3.0.
> 
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/educooo/ lists December 2013 as the date
> of OOo4Kids 1.3.1, as the most recent release.
> 
> OOoLight 1.1 can be downloaded from
> http://educoo.org/TelechargerOOoLight.php.
> 
> OOoLight_1.1_120609_LinuxIntel_install_rpm.tar.gz is listed at
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/educooo/files/OOoLight/Linux/1.1/en-US/
> with a modification date of 2013-12-30. The sourceforge site implies
> that it is LGPL 3.0.
> 
> Were these projects (OOo4Kids, OooLight) included, when OOo became an
> Apache project?
> If so, have they since been abandoned?
> 
> 
>> I cannot see them included in the original IP clearance, so my best guess
>> is that they were forgotten, but others might know more.
> 
>> rgds
>> jan i
> 
> 
> jonathon

These were independent projects forked from OOo. They were not part of
the original IP clearance, because Sun/Oracle never owned them.

Dave


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

Re: OOo4Kids & OOoLight Status

[Yakov Reztsov]

Пятница, 13 февраля 2015, 7:58 UTC от jonathon :
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>Hash: SHA1
>
>All:
>
>My impression was that when Apache Foundation accepted OOo, they also
>accepted the OOo4Kids and OOoLight projects.
>
>https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Education_Project/OOo4Kids says that
>the OOo4Kids has been depreciated, and points to
>http://educoo.org/OOo4Kids.php as the main page.
>
>As far as OOoLight goes, the only hit on the Apache Wiki is
>https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%9E%D0%BE_%D0%9F%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8:_%D1%83%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%82%D1%8B_%D0%9E%D0%9E%D0%BE
> ,
>which is a description of things that can be removed from OOo, to
>improve performance/reduce the CPU/memory requirements.
>
>OOo4Kids 1.3 can be downloaded from
>http://educoo.org/TelechargerOOo4Kids.php , and is licenced under the
>LGPL 3.0.
>
>http://sourceforge.net/projects/educooo/ lists December 2013 as the date
>of OOo4Kids 1.3.1, as the most recent release.
>
>OOoLight 1.1 can be downloaded from
>http://educoo.org/TelechargerOOoLight.php .
>
>OOoLight_1.1_120609_LinuxIntel_install_rpm.tar.gz is listed at
>http://sourceforge.net/projects/educooo/files/OOoLight/Linux/1.1/en-US/
>with a modification date of 2013-12-30. The sourceforge site implies
>that it is LGPL 3.0.
>
>

This versions are based on  OpenOffice.org 3.2
-- 

Yakov Reztsov

Re: OOo4Kids & OOoLight Status

[jan i]

On 13 February 2015 at 08:58, jonathon  wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> All:
>
> My impression was that when Apache Foundation accepted OOo, they also
> accepted the OOo4Kids and OOoLight projects.
>
> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Education_Project/OOo4Kids says that
> the OOo4Kids has been depreciated, and points to
> http://educoo.org/OOo4Kids.php as the main page.
>
> As far as OOoLight goes, the only hit on the Apache Wiki is
>
> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%9E%D0%BE_%D0%9F%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8:_%D1%83%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%82%D1%8B_%D0%9E%D0%9E%D0%BE
> ,
> which is a description of things that can be removed from OOo, to
> improve performance/reduce the CPU/memory requirements.
>
> OOo4Kids 1.3 can be downloaded from
> http://educoo.org/TelechargerOOo4Kids.php, and is licenced under the
> LGPL 3.0.
>
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/educooo/ lists December 2013 as the date
> of OOo4Kids 1.3.1, as the most recent release.
>
> OOoLight 1.1 can be downloaded from
> http://educoo.org/TelechargerOOoLight.php.
>
> OOoLight_1.1_120609_LinuxIntel_install_rpm.tar.gz is listed at
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/educooo/files/OOoLight/Linux/1.1/en-US/
> with a modification date of 2013-12-30. The sourceforge site implies
> that it is LGPL 3.0.
>
> Were these projects (OOo4Kids, OooLight) included, when OOo became an
> Apache project?
> If so, have they since been abandoned?
>

I cannot see them included in the original IP clearance, so my best guess
is that they were forgotten, but others might know more.

rgds
jan i

>
> jonathon
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1
>
> iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJU3a61AAoJEKG7hs8nSMR7PEcP/1E7WrHGr7MsLsov6l9+QVNC
> BAwJcFO3elkz37Ds4CGYVjEvSgznOzukd4bLvnuezQ6KCg309Lzgj8KgL8u9Rtn9
> dafUiMu2pgZwU9lhzxD+Xx59ZpJUHrYw/yP3tw9cWfnp44eVCuKxWxLqLghwvftR
> Zt5HKvEnvUEt3isl87fjK3Jtujq1iy0aqzhpQbMg9wPcWYcbPgbICs/E/fZDbLNh
> 6NEM2OapCw4ZandD4WstGWXWYW3vwCubIcldwWskNfeucq7CmKQS7bRA43b6I/zC
> TgAE2aTJlFcfwVEN5ONZBzTEYQ1xwK85Vk8KA3YTI1EOxHUl1ftfMCxi06qzcGn6
> cjbyMECWQUZN4pkWZSHjtaCv+t/80geXwfGHO6ICB493T2FJab43JUXY05AWlf/p
> QL15dfPQNtaQcIKmG5tT5Fym6bJptQW/OK5AdXt3ojYgAhQaxearbkoPSMZi6Aa/
> 20yB1cgXrj5G4HO6jJLH7AgNcA90nWkNI9s5I8lZWslA/FDZfaGE4rjONRYejU3s
> qR/z5Km5WbxKazrcLVv3jCZFGQL9g9P+Ezt1+4Kx/eDXm6T5Urp/LmeqOnNepDAT
> FKXVoZ013zYo4Gj3QZb5e3wHGTovRyJgZrJ8RJ8qHIPqW9FcdcdkS3847VDgwkLa
> DuJc3Pleq6Cx02tUrW1v
> =ZtSS
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

OOo4Kids & OOoLight Status

[jonathon]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

All:

My impression was that when Apache Foundation accepted OOo, they also
accepted the OOo4Kids and OOoLight projects.

https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Education_Project/OOo4Kids says that
the OOo4Kids has been depreciated, and points to
http://educoo.org/OOo4Kids.php as the main page.

As far as OOoLight goes, the only hit on the Apache Wiki is
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%9E%D0%BE_%D0%9F%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8:_%D1%83%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%82%D1%8B_%D0%9E%D0%9E%D0%BE,
which is a description of things that can be removed from OOo, to
improve performance/reduce the CPU/memory requirements.

OOo4Kids 1.3 can be downloaded from
http://educoo.org/TelechargerOOo4Kids.php, and is licenced under the
LGPL 3.0.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/educooo/ lists December 2013 as the date
of OOo4Kids 1.3.1, as the most recent release.

OOoLight 1.1 can be downloaded from
http://educoo.org/TelechargerOOoLight.php.

OOoLight_1.1_120609_LinuxIntel_install_rpm.tar.gz is listed at
http://sourceforge.net/projects/educooo/files/OOoLight/Linux/1.1/en-US/
with a modification date of 2013-12-30. The sourceforge site implies
that it is LGPL 3.0.

Were these projects (OOo4Kids, OooLight) included, when OOo became an
Apache project?
If so, have they since been abandoned?

jonathon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
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=ZtSS
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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