download problems
I can’t download the latest Open Office software 4.1.1 because you don’t have listed Window 8 or 8.1 operating systems. You just have EXE version. Also I can’t printout anything with my existing Open Office software with my new wireless printer. I can print out emails and PDF but I can’t printout any template from your software. Sent from Windows Mail
Re: download problems
Am 03/11/2015 05:50 PM, schrieb Joseph PISTACHIO: I can’t download the latest Open Office software 4.1.1 because you don’t have listed Window 8 or 8.1 operating systems. You just have EXE version. have you actually tried it? It seems not. ;-) You can download and install what you have seen. It's working fine on Windows 8[.1]. Also I can’t printout anything with my existing Open Office software with my new wireless printer. I can print out emails and PDF but I can’t printout any template from your software. For this problem please see our support forum [1]. Here you can report the issue and get answers from many other users. [1] https://forum.openoffice.org/ Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Breach of confidentiality
You will want to refer to http://openoffice.apache.org/mailing-lists.html before you make the personal choice to send any further messages to this public, archived mailing list. S. (I am just a member of the public who subscribes to the list along with around 450 other subscribers and public archivers) On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 6:38 PM, Grampa Renato, GB renato.gra...@prysmiangroup.com wrote: Sirs, You have made public one of my message without my authorization. http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.openoffice.devel/18648 I highlight that the message contained a Confidentiality Notice that you have deliberately and blatantly breached. You are put on notice that intend to take legal actions against your organisation for this issue and for all direct and indirect damages you have caused. I ask you to remove immediately the message from the web and cancel it from your records by c.o.b. 16 March 2015. I await your confirmation before the above deadline. regards Renato Grampa CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and its attachments (if any) may contain confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information and it for the use of the intended recipient(s). No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any incorrect transmission. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that you must not use, disseminate, copy it in any form or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error, please, delete it (and any copies of it) and kindly inform the sender of this e-mail by replying or going to www.prysmiangroup.com http://www.prysmiangroup.com/ on contact us. All liability for viruses is excluded to the fullest extent permitted by law.
Breach of confidentiality
Sirs, You have made public one of my message without my authorization. http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.openoffice.devel/18648 I highlight that the message contained a Confidentiality Notice that you have deliberately and blatantly breached. You are put on notice that intend to take legal actions against your organisation for this issue and for all direct and indirect damages you have caused. I ask you to remove immediately the message from the web and cancel it from your records by c.o.b. 16 March 2015. I await your confirmation before the above deadline. regards Renato Grampa CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and its attachments (if any) may contain confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information and it for the use of the intended recipient(s). No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any incorrect transmission. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that you must not use, disseminate, copy it in any form or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error, please, delete it (and any copies of it) and kindly inform the sender of this e-mail by replying or going to www.prysmiangroup.comhttp://www.prysmiangroup.com/ on contact us. All liability for viruses is excluded to the fullest extent permitted by law.
Re: [MWiki] Account creation
On 05/03/2015 Kay Schenk wrote: On 03/05/2015 02:41 AM, Keith Alcock wrote: I don't really want access to the Wiki, but I do want someone who does to fix the page https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Text/TextViewCursor Keith, thanks and I've just created an account for you, so it will be easier for you to make changes now but also in future. You should have received a password by mail. These mehtods are defined in com/sun/star/view/XViewCursor http://www.openoffice.org/api/docs/common/ref/com/sun/star/view/XViewCursor.html the wiki doc needs to be changed. Generally the api docs are more current. I was attempting to make note ... in the discussion part of the page and couldn't. Feel free to edit the page (see the note by Kay above) instead of using the discussion page. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Double licence ALv2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0
On 11.03.2015 10:53, jan i wrote: On 11 March 2015 at 10:33, Guy Waterval waterval@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, As it seems that I will be retired in advance (4 years) in July, I will have more time and I plan to join another project. As this project uses a different licence (CC-BY-SA 3.0), I would use for my original contributions, currently under ALv2.0, a double licence (ALv2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0) to make my contributions regarding OpenOffice (currently docs only) available for the 2 projects. We do not have a problem with double licensing, actually it is in use for quite a number of places. The preferred way is of course to submit the original with the ALv2 license, and then add the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license when committing to the second project. This is the standard way with absolutely no problems independent of how closed or open the second license is. You can also add the double license directly in our repo, here we would need to look more careful at the license to see if it limits our own usage or that of downstream projects. A second license in addition to ALv2.0 can't limit the usage because the user has the choice to contract one or both of the licenses. But: if a user creates a derived work and puts it unter CC-BY_SA only, Apache can't use the derived work. (Use includes also improve and share.) So the problem is the use of improvements. Kind regards Michael signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Double licence ALv2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0
On Wednesday, March 11, 2015, RA Stehmann anw...@rechtsanwalt-stehmann.de wrote: On 11.03.2015 10:53, jan i wrote: On 11 March 2015 at 10:33, Guy Waterval waterval@gmail.com javascript:; wrote: Hi all, As it seems that I will be retired in advance (4 years) in July, I will have more time and I plan to join another project. As this project uses a different licence (CC-BY-SA 3.0), I would use for my original contributions, currently under ALv2.0, a double licence (ALv2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0) to make my contributions regarding OpenOffice (currently docs only) available for the 2 projects. We do not have a problem with double licensing, actually it is in use for quite a number of places. The preferred way is of course to submit the original with the ALv2 license, and then add the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license when committing to the second project. This is the standard way with absolutely no problems independent of how closed or open the second license is. You can also add the double license directly in our repo, here we would need to look more careful at the license to see if it limits our own usage or that of downstream projects. A second license in addition to ALv2.0 can't limit the usage because the user has the choice to contract one or both of the licenses. But: if a user creates a derived work and puts it unter CC-BY_SA only, Apache can't use the derived work. he cannot remove the ALv2 license legally, so he needs to write explicitly that the changes are only available as CC-BY_SA, something most users do not do. To write it explicitly is important because once the code is inserted into the file, nobody can see which part is which license, therefore both licenses will apply to the full file. If you have a file with 2 licenses and no exceptions you can choose between the 2 or maybe add a 3rd. I have lately had talks with people specializing in this, and it seems life is actually quite simple, but we often tend to make it complicated especially because we know about version control, something a lawyer do not care about. rgds jan i (Use includes also improve and share.) So the problem is the use of improvements. Kind regards Michael -- Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.
Double licence ALv2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0
Hi all, As it seems that I will be retired in advance (4 years) in July, I will have more time and I plan to join another project. As this project uses a different licence (CC-BY-SA 3.0), I would use for my original contributions, currently under ALv2.0, a double licence (ALv2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0) to make my contributions regarding OpenOffice (currently docs only) available for the 2 projects. I plan to produce images extensions for AOO in the biological area (principally Hematology, Microbiology and Histology) with original images that I have myself already produced on my own equipment or that I could obtain with an authorization from labs where I have some contacts. So, the big question. Is such a material, under such a double licence, reachable for the AOO project in case of it would reuse it. A collaboration with www.wikimedia.ch could bring to me the advantage of hooking my old wagon to a locomotive which has success in Switzerland and has the necessary contacts with the education area and media. I think that it could bring locally more visibility to the AOO project than if I try to push the wagon alone. I don't have contacted them up to now, I'm waiting for your advice before to do it. Regards -- gw
Re: Double licence ALv2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0
Hi Michael, Hi all, 2015-03-11 12:14 GMT+01:00 RA Stehmann anw...@rechtsanwalt-stehmann.de: [...] But: if a user creates a derived work and puts it unter CC-BY_SA only, Apache can't use the derived work. (Use includes also improve and share.) So the problem is the use of improvements. This is the problem I thought. For cliparts extensions it's not an issue, because they can be produced under different licences as they stay external to the AOO project itself. But a documentation on OpenOffice is more sensible because the improvements could quickly produce 2 different versions, which is not really interesting. Regards -- gw
Macro -form controls development
hi, Macro development I want to OpenOffice, but not on the form controls development information, please tell me where I can find this information? Thank you.
