Re: IMPORTANT: Board report second version.
On 04/05/2015 11:35 AM, Alexandro Colorado wrote: Wow, it sounds so depressive, I would really want to sound it more optimistic as more matter of fact. I think for a report is way too emotional. Just list what is being done (or not), is it still on planning stage, and what it's being done to get it off planning stage into development or execution. Thanks for your feedback. Now that we have a few more days to mull this over, I hope many on this list will take the opportunity to look at the changes suggested at: http://markmail.org/message/vrvxuwxr6ugfgbs7 Meanwhile, as Jan says, let's get some work done! :) On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 7:24 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: HI. I am starting a new thread where we can hopefully concentrate on making a final board report. Just to sum up, I have replaced the original report in the board agenda, with a dummy report. The original board report sits untouched in https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/2015+Apr Whatever the community finds consensus about should go in there (I will only have very limited time to make edits, because I am already overloaded), and tthe 12th (or maybe 22th, if the board meeting is postponed) I will take the content reformat it, and submit it for board approval. For once I can sit back and relax, because I feel the report is a good compromise, made by many people. As a note to the PMC, I will drop the private, unless the PMC ask me to include something. Let us stop bashing each other, and get some work done !!! rgds jan I. -- - MzK “What is the point of being alive if you don't at least try to do something remarkable?” -- John Green, An Abundance of Katherines - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
review requested: [Issue 95167] XIRR() function gives Err:502 : [Attachment 84634] New patch for the financial.cxx
Driss driss.zoub...@gmail.com has asked for review: Issue 95167: XIRR() function gives Err:502 https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=95167 Attachment 84634: New patch for the financial.cxx https://bz.apache.org/ooo/attachment.cgi?id=84634action=edit - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
review canceled: [Issue 95167] XIRR() function gives Err:502 : [Attachment 84632] Patch for finanical.cxx
Driss driss.zoub...@gmail.com has canceled Driss driss.zoub...@gmail.com's request for review: Issue 95167: XIRR() function gives Err:502 https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=95167 Attachment 84632: Patch for finanical.cxx https://bz.apache.org/ooo/attachment.cgi?id=84632action=edit - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: IMPORTANT: Board report second version.
On 05 Apr 2015, at 07:24, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: HI. I am starting a new thread where we can hopefully concentrate on making a final board report. Thanks. Just to sum up, I have replaced the original report in the board agenda, with a dummy report. The original board report sits untouched in https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/2015+Apr Whatever the community finds consensus about should go in there (I will only have very limited time to make edits, because I am already overloaded), and tthe 12th (or maybe 22th, if the board meeting is postponed) I will take the content reformat it, and submit it for board approval. For once I can sit back and relax, because I feel the report is a good compromise, made by many people. relax? :-) As a note to the PMC, I will drop the private, unless the PMC ask me to include something. Let us stop bashing each other, and get some work done !!! rgds jan I. -louis signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: Board report proposal, please comment before April 5.
On Sunday, April 5, 2015, jonathon toki.kant...@gmail.com wrote: On 05/04/15 00:37, jan i wrote: felt that I as new AOO chair, had formulated the report too negative and against the wishes of the community I'm going to suggest that said PMC Member was simply shocked at the radical difference in reporting styles. Just to clarify, this did not come from a AOO PMC! It came from a ASF Member who read the board mailing list. No AOO PMC has at this point in time, written that I have acted against the interest of the community. You (Jan) do not like negative surprises. Consequently, your reports reflect that POV. Andrea is more surprise-tolerant, and consequently reports reflect that POV. Both reports are accurate. The difference is simply one of managerial style --- mention potential risks, or only mention documented risks. Both styles have their virtues. Both styles have their vices. The people kicked upstairs can be traumatized by the difference in reporting styles, during the transition process. Agreed, I will however, due to pressure, from non AOO PMC, change the report, and have a new discussion start on this mailing list. I have asked the people in question to come forward in here and explain their opinions. I apologize to the community, for not having realized that consensus in AOO, is not enough, when making a board report. rgds jan i jonathon * English - detected * English * English javascript:void(0); -- Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.
IMPORTANT: Board report second version.
HI. I am starting a new thread where we can hopefully concentrate on making a final board report. Just to sum up, I have replaced the original report in the board agenda, with a dummy report. The original board report sits untouched in https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/2015+Apr Whatever the community finds consensus about should go in there (I will only have very limited time to make edits, because I am already overloaded), and tthe 12th (or maybe 22th, if the board meeting is postponed) I will take the content reformat it, and submit it for board approval. For once I can sit back and relax, because I feel the report is a good compromise, made by many people. As a note to the PMC, I will drop the private, unless the PMC ask me to include something. Let us stop bashing each other, and get some work done !!! rgds jan I.
Re: Windows buildbot failures -- can you help?
Hello Ariel, --html will give you something like this: http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/buildlogs/linux64/log/unxlngx6.pro.build.html thanks, will try again ;-) I saw these errors but since I am not on Windows, I didn't know how to interpret them. Are you saying that AOO will not compile with this version of MSPDBBD.DLL or, is something now wrong with this DLL? i found this versions of MSPDB80.DLL in my build vm: C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 9.0\VC\bin\amd64 mspdb80.dll 9.0.30729.1 29.07.2008 236.032 Bytes C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 9.0\Common7\IDE mspdb80.dll 9.0.30729.1 29.07.2008 193.536 Bytes Best Regards Oliver Regards - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Community Board Report - with suggested changes.
On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 5:23 AM, Gavin McDonald ga...@16degrees.com.au wrote: Hi Folks, So here is the original report as submitted to the board, and I annotate inline the changes I suggested be considered. As originally stated, please feel free to incorporate any or none of the changes at your leisure - I won’t be offended :) The intent of my changes was to put a more positive angle to some aspects of the report - potential newcomers read these publicly published reports too, so some encouragement for possible contributions can be made there as well as on the mailing lists and wikis et al. As another commenter on the board report here is my original mail to that list in full: Thanks, --tim * Hi Jan, I hope you'll take a moment and re-read Gav's email. It strikes me that his constructive feedback is less about a board report and more about leadership in general. Beyond the board report, there's a saying that a leader's attitude is contagious. And, your PMC is the leadership of your project. Unfortunately, and to Gav's point, that contagion works for both positive and negative attitudes; so while you think you're giving an honest assessment, the negative tone with which you do it may be fueling a downward spiral instead of helping turn it around. He offered good ways to get the gravity of the situation across without causing harm. Without speaking for him, when he said I think that the community that remains would rather see a more positive spin... I think he didn't mean to suggest literally the community was at odds or didn't review what you sent - he meant the broader community would be better off [i.e. healthier] with a more positive tone. It's also helpful to note that nothing that's been said has anything to do with being direct or honest; it has to do with tact. Anyway, I hope that you'll reconsider the tone of the report with the positive energy I've known you to have in other challenging situations. --tim - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
review requested: [Issue 81637] AOO filepicker: Replace column header Title by Name : [Attachment 84633] patch for fileview
Driss driss.zoub...@gmail.com has asked for review: Issue 81637: AOO filepicker: Replace column header Title by Name https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=81637 Attachment 84633: patch for fileview https://bz.apache.org/ooo/attachment.cgi?id=84633action=edit - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
review requested: [Issue 95167] XIRR() function gives Err:502 : [Attachment 84632] Patch for finanical.cxx
Driss driss.zoub...@gmail.com has asked for review: Issue 95167: XIRR() function gives Err:502 https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=95167 Attachment 84632: Patch for finanical.cxx https://bz.apache.org/ooo/attachment.cgi?id=84632action=edit - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Board report proposal, please comment before April 5.
On 5 Apr 2015, at 8:07 am, Guy Waterval waterval@gmail.com wrote: Hi Jan, Hi all, 2015-04-05 8:20 GMT+02:00 jan i j...@apache.org: On Sunday, April 5, 2015, jonathon toki.kant...@gmail.com wrote: On 05/04/15 00:37, jan i wrote: felt that I as new AOO chair, had formulated the report too negative and against the wishes of the community I'm going to suggest that said PMC Member was simply shocked at the radical difference in reporting styles. Is it so important ? What are the possible consequences of a bad report ? I thought it was only a simple information about the activities in a project. Ok so I think a negative report can have a negative impact on a community, rather than encouraging more volunteer time it may be seen as all doom and gloom and perhaps push potential volunteers away. Sure, if a project is in trouble, then that needs to be reported, but there are ways of doing so. If someone new pops up on a project and sees doom and gloom, sees the folks that are already there talking down the project, instead of talking it up, I reckon they’ll turn tail and scarper. I suggested (that is the word suggested; and yes it was me!) that some sentences be reworded slightly - to say the same thing, but in a more positive light, in such a way as that it might actually encourage more folks to step forward. That is what is needed here right? I’ll post my reworded version of the original submitted community consensus report on this list for folks to mull over. Again, it was clear that I made suggestions, and I also made it clear that everyone was free to ignore any and all of them and submit the report as is. I felt by making those suggestions, it may help the project. You folks are doing a grand job here, and so you’ll do whats best. Gav… Regards -- gw - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Community Board Report - with suggested changes.
Hi Folks, So here is the original report as submitted to the board, and I annotate inline the changes I suggested be considered. As originally stated, please feel free to incorporate any or none of the changes at your leisure - I won’t be offended :) The intent of my changes was to put a more positive angle to some aspects of the report - potential newcomers read these publicly published reports too, so some encouragement for possible contributions can be made there as well as on the mailing lists and wikis et al. —begin report ## Description: Apache OpenOffice is an open-source, office-document productivity suite providing six productivity applications based around the OpenDocument Format (ODF). OpenOffice is released on multiple platforms and in dozens of languages. ## Activity: Andrea Pescetti resigned as Chair, and Jan Iversen was elected as new Chair, the change went as expected smoothly. ‘...After two and half years at the helm - since OpenOffice came to the ASF, Andrea Pescetti has decided to step down as Chair and pass the baton on to someone new for this challenging yet rewarding role. We thank Andrea for his time and effort as VP...’ The mailing lists for users and the development list are fairly active, while specialized lists see a lower, but steady, activity. New volunteers for development show up regularly, but without mentors we have not been able to keep them motivated and on the project. “…New volunteers for development show up regularly, but there is a need for other more experienced devs on the project to guide them in the right direction and encourage contributions. Those contributions then need to be dealt with in a timely manner…” The level of commits on trunk remain low, only a few simple fixes have been committed. “… The level of commits on trunk is running at a low pace, whilst patches that come in are being applied…” Nobody has shown interest in becoming the new release manager, which have been missing for approx. last 5 months, Very negative sentence here, I quite like :- “… The search continues for someone to step up to the very challenging role as the next Release Manager (RM) for the next public release of Apache OpenOffice. This mammoth task requires dedication and commitment over a period of time. optional It may need someone with vision to rewrite the whole release process and simplify things to make future releases less of a burden than they currently are /optional …” The 2 MAC (buildbot) delivered Q3/14 from Infra are not operational, due to lack of a volunteer to install the AOO development platform. “… A volunteer or two are still needed in order to make use of two MAC (buildbot slave) machines. We will send another note to both the dev and user lists to see if anyone is willing, accompanied by a description of what the role entails…” Proof of concept for Digital Signing was made mid. 2014, no further work have been done. “… Proof of concept for the ASF Digital Signing service was made mid 2014, and needs revisiting to take advantage…” OpenOffice was present at FOSDEM (January 2015 in Brussels, Belgium), with talks as well as a table. A BoF is being arranged for CSDN OSTC (March 2015, China). 2 Volunteers took on preparing a AOO track for Austin, in the end, no presentation was submitted (CFP). Traditionally Europe is stronger for AOO so we look forward to Budapest. [private] After informal approaches at FOSDEM in February 2015, the PMC received an initial proposal/mail from TDF, which was clearly unacceptable even as a start of negotiations, and later after informal talks between jani and TDF, the PMC recieved another proposal/mail on behalf of the TDF Board which was considered too vague by part of the PMC There is understanding (not consensus) in the PMC that power to exploit cooperation possibilities with TDF on behalf on the PMC will not be delegated to an individual. The PMC has for the last 2 month collected information, mainly why the proposals from TDF/LO was unacceptable. no responses or counter proposals have been formulated, and all activity including the informal talks have stalled. [/private] ## Issues: The current CMS discussion based on a proposal to decommission the tool and ask projects to find other solutions would cause a significant problem for AOO. The AOO Web pages depend on the features of CMS that cannot be easily ported to other tools. If Infra is to stop the service, AOO will need to either only maintain only a few pages or run CMS on a project VM. The Board should remember to look at the total cost of this change, not only the Infra costs. A major issue for AOO is the current activity level (practically no development) which combined with minimal interest in discussing solutions, are a potential problem, that might cause a community breakdown. The community only has a few developers left, which makes
Re: Board report proposal, please comment before April 5.
On Sun, Apr 05, 2015 at 02:37:46AM +0200, jan i wrote: ... Background is that after the report was submitted, a ASF Member (not board member and not part of our community) felt that I as new AOO chair, had formulated the report too negative and against the wishes of the community against the wishes of the community is simply untrue. That was never said. Else-thread, Gavin has said he hoped for a more positive report that wouldn't scare people away. ... at no point, in his original message, or any other message, did people say the report was not representative of the AOO community. Totally false. Then, you effectively deleted the Board report out of the meeting agenda, pending further discussion here. That is certainly the wrong path. IMO, the most appropriate response would be to just bring the concerns about positive/negative, and then discuss modifications. Lastly: the submission deadline is April 10. The Board is likely to postpone its meeting by a week, giving the AOO PMC yet another week to (re)submit a report. -g - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Office Application BoF @ OSTC, Beijing 2015/3/28
Dear Imacat, it was a pleasure meeting you at the Office Apps BoF in Beijing. Although we were a small group we certainly had an interesting discussion. Thanks again for having organized the event. Kindest regards Peter On 14/03/15 18:37, imacat wrote: Dear Peter, Peter Junge on 2015/03/14 15:50 said: Hi Imacat, thanks a lot for proposing the Office Apps BoF. You can certainly count me in. Is the venue and time finally confirmed yet? I would also like to announce the BoF on the Beijing LUG website because some people who are or were involved in AOO, LO, OOo and RedOffice are frequently checking it. Yes, it's confirmed. The time is 12:20-13:40 and the venue is the speaker's lunch room. The staff in OSTC will announce it in the conference, too. Ross shall join us. Please help us announce it at BLUG and encourage BLUG members to come. Many thanks. ^_^ /Peter On 12/03/15 19:16, imacat wrote: Dear all, Is there anybody that will attend to OSTC 2015, Beijing at the end of this month (3/28)? I would like to call for a BoF on Office Application at the noon of OSTC. We may have some talks and know each other, and have some small discussion about the development of OpenOffice in the future. Ross Gardler, one of the board of directors of ASF, will join us in the event. And we are still asking for more guests, maybe from MS OOXML. So if you are interested in the development of OpenOffice, or simply want to know more friends in the community, please reply and let us know so we can arrange the venue. ^_^ - 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: Board report proposal, please comment before April 5.
On 5 Apr 2015, at 7:20 am, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: On Sunday, April 5, 2015, jonathon toki.kant...@gmail.com wrote: On 05/04/15 00:37, jan i wrote: felt that I as new AOO chair, had formulated the report too negative and against the wishes of the community I'm going to suggest that said PMC Member was simply shocked at the radical difference in reporting styles. Just to clarify, this did not come from a AOO PMC! It came from a ASF Member who read the board mailing list. Yep, that was me. No AOO PMC has at this point in time, written that I have acted against the interest of the community. And neither did I — in fact you couldn’t act against the interest of the community because you posted a report created by the community , correct? So I made ‘suggestions’ based on a community based board report. In other words, none of this is an attack on you Jan, or an attack of any kind. Please lets not over-react to what was just some helpful notes. Gav… You (Jan) do not like negative surprises. Consequently, your reports reflect that POV. Andrea is more surprise-tolerant, and consequently reports reflect that POV. Both reports are accurate. The difference is simply one of managerial style --- mention potential risks, or only mention documented risks. Both styles have their virtues. Both styles have their vices. The people kicked upstairs can be traumatized by the difference in reporting styles, during the transition process. Agreed, I will however, due to pressure, from non AOO PMC, change the report, and have a new discussion start on this mailing list. I have asked the people in question to come forward in here and explain their opinions. I apologize to the community, for not having realized that consensus in AOO, is not enough, when making a board report. rgds jan i jonathon * English - detected * English * English javascript:void(0); -- Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Board report proposal, please comment before April 5.
On Sun, Apr 05, 2015 at 11:49:44AM +0200, jan i wrote: ... I have never thought or said this was about my person, it has nothing to do with my person. It has to do with the free will of a community versus discussions on private list outside the reach of the community. As the AOO VP, it is your responsibility to bring concerns from those private lists, back to this public list/community. The Foundation does not participate on this mailing list, but it *does* have concerns and feedback. Thus, the Foundation appoints VP to act as the go-between, and expects the VP to perform that role as a liaison. Fact is, that I have received multiple suggestions on the private board list to implement some of your wording or similar wording, these mails (not from you, but a reaction to your mail) ignores the fact, that there was consensus in the community to submit the report. Incorrect. None of the responses even implied such a problem. Absent such, and as *usual* for the board mailing list, it was absolutely recognized this was the AOO report submitted by the PMC and its community. Some edits/suggestions were made. That is all. Nothing more. For reference, your wording was in a mail to a private list, so only the PMC has seen the content. Yes. I have on the private board list rejected to change the wording, without a public discussion on this list. That's your prerogative. For myself, I have great concern about how you *carried* those concerns back to the community. Your job as VP is to bring concerns from the Foundation to the community, and to bring community concerns to the Foundation. Doing a full-reset on the report isn't constructive. Please lets not over-react to what was just some helpful notes. I actually took your mail positively, and based on your mail started a discussion with the PMC, if we should change the wording. I would have wished you had participated in the original public discussion. The Foundation does not participate on all dev@ lists. You should expect feedback from all corners, and from people who do not participate here. Again: your job is to bring *that* feedback back here for further contemplation. It is not reasonable to expect all Directors and ASF Members and others to participate here, to formulate your report to the Board. But you *should* expect those others to respond to a submitted report. They will see it when the report gets submitted, and will review it at that time. But the mails that followed suggesting that I should change the report are an, to me, unacceptable attempt to bypass the community. Nobody suggested you change it unilaterally. Stop mischaracterizing the suggestions. Again, as VP your job is to bring those concerns, suggestions, and edits to the community if you feel that is proper. Nobody told you what to do. You made the choices on pulling the report, and (mis)characterizing the feedback. Thanks for presenting your very relavant views in public, and let us get consensus on a text acceptable both to this community and the readers of the board list. You do not have to do anything for the readers of the board list. That is your mistake. And it was only a few people. The board list has over a hundred people on it. Your report needs to come from the community, and be reported to the Board. That is quite simple. The Board accepts 99% of the reports submitted. There are some that get rejected (like the one you've left in the agenda right now). But there are also MANY that receive feedback and get updated before the Board reviews/discusses them. So. Be like those other folks. Take some feedback. Discuss it. Update. -g - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Board report proposal, please comment before April 5.
On 5 April 2015 at 12:35, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Apr 05, 2015 at 11:49:44AM +0200, jan i wrote: ... I have never thought or said this was about my person, it has nothing to do with my person. It has to do with the free will of a community versus discussions on private list outside the reach of the community. As the AOO VP, it is your responsibility to bring concerns from those private lists, back to this public list/community. The Foundation does not participate on this mailing list, but it *does* have concerns and feedback. Thus, the Foundation appoints VP to act as the go-between, and expects the VP to perform that role as a liaison. Fact is, that I have received multiple suggestions on the private board list to implement some of your wording or similar wording, these mails (not from you, but a reaction to your mail) ignores the fact, that there was consensus in the community to submit the report. Incorrect. None of the responses even implied such a problem. Absent such, and as *usual* for the board mailing list, it was absolutely recognized this was the AOO report submitted by the PMC and its community. Some edits/suggestions were made. That is all. Nothing more. For reference, your wording was in a mail to a private list, so only the PMC has seen the content. Yes. I have on the private board list rejected to change the wording, without a public discussion on this list. That's your prerogative. For myself, I have great concern about how you *carried* those concerns back to the community. Your job as VP is to bring concerns from the Foundation to the community, and to bring community concerns to the Foundation. Doing a full-reset on the report isn't constructive. I simply do not get it !!! I replaced the original board report in the agenda, with a dummy report, to prevent the original report from accidentally go to the board meeting. The original report still sits untouched in our cwiki, where it belongs as long as we discuss it. Please do not escalate this into something it is not. Replacing the report in the board agenda is a protective action, where a full-reset would be a highly offensive action, which I have NOT done, nor had intention of doing. rgds jan i. Please lets not over-react to what was just some helpful notes. I actually took your mail positively, and based on your mail started a discussion with the PMC, if we should change the wording. I would have wished you had participated in the original public discussion. The Foundation does not participate on all dev@ lists. You should expect feedback from all corners, and from people who do not participate here. Again: your job is to bring *that* feedback back here for further contemplation. It is not reasonable to expect all Directors and ASF Members and others to participate here, to formulate your report to the Board. But you *should* expect those others to respond to a submitted report. They will see it when the report gets submitted, and will review it at that time. But the mails that followed suggesting that I should change the report are an, to me, unacceptable attempt to bypass the community. Nobody suggested you change it unilaterally. Stop mischaracterizing the suggestions. Again, as VP your job is to bring those concerns, suggestions, and edits to the community if you feel that is proper. Nobody told you what to do. You made the choices on pulling the report, and (mis)characterizing the feedback. Thanks for presenting your very relavant views in public, and let us get consensus on a text acceptable both to this community and the readers of the board list. You do not have to do anything for the readers of the board list. That is your mistake. And it was only a few people. The board list has over a hundred people on it. Your report needs to come from the community, and be reported to the Board. That is quite simple. The Board accepts 99% of the reports submitted. There are some that get rejected (like the one you've left in the agenda right now). But there are also MANY that receive feedback and get updated before the Board reviews/discusses them. So. Be like those other folks. Take some feedback. Discuss it. Update. -g - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Board report proposal, please comment before April 5.
On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Gavin McDonald ga...@16degrees.com.au wrote: I suggested (that is the word suggested; and yes it was me!) that some sentences be reworded slightly - to say the same thing, but in a more positive light, in such a way as that it might actually encourage more folks to step forward. That is what is needed here right? I would usually agree with this sentiment, were it not for the fact that exactly that strategy has been used for all previous Board reports from AOO and yet we have still seen the decline in participation that [LWN has reported][1]. Given that decline -- which appears to have continued -- and the resulting lack of a release manager and of any active core code feature implementers on the project, it seems appropriate to make a report to the Board that highlights those facts rather than tries to make everything seem OK. S. [1] http://lwn.net/Articles/637735/
Re: Board report proposal, please comment before April 5.
On Sunday, April 5, 2015, Gavin McDonald ga...@16degrees.com.au wrote: On 5 Apr 2015, at 7:20 am, jan i j...@apache.org javascript:; wrote: On Sunday, April 5, 2015, jonathon toki.kant...@gmail.com javascript:; wrote: On 05/04/15 00:37, jan i wrote: felt that I as new AOO chair, had formulated the report too negative and against the wishes of the community I'm going to suggest that said PMC Member was simply shocked at the radical difference in reporting styles. Just to clarify, this did not come from a AOO PMC! It came from a ASF Member who read the board mailing list. Yep, that was me. No AOO PMC has at this point in time, written that I have acted against the interest of the community. And neither did I — in fact you couldn’t act against the interest of the community because you posted a report created by the community , correct? I cannot quote your enail, but there is a sentence in there suggesting very directly, that the wording used, was not what the community wanted. I am sure your suggestions was sent with a positive attitude, but we should not discuss what the comnunity want on a list the community cannot read. So I made ‘suggestions’ based on a community based board report. In other words, none of this is an attack on you Jan, or an attack of any kind. I have never thought or said this was about my person, it has nothing to do with my person. It has to do with the free will of a community versus discussions on private list outside the reach of the community. Fact is, that I have received multiple suggestions on the private board list to implement some of your wording or similar wording, these mails (not from you, but a reaction to your mail) ignores the fact, that there was consensus in the community to submit the report. For reference, your wording was in a mail to a private list, so only the PMC has seen the content. I have on the private board list rejected to change the wording, without a public discussion on this list. Please lets not over-react to what was just some helpful notes. I actually took your mail positively, and based on your mail started a discussion with the PMC, if we should change the wording. I would have wished you had participated in the original public discussion. But the mails that followed suggesting that I should change the report are an, to me, unacceptable attempt to bypass the community. Thanks for presenting your very relavant views in public, and let us get consensus on a text acceptable both to this community and the readers of the board list. rgds jan i Gav… You (Jan) do not like negative surprises. Consequently, your reports reflect that POV. Andrea is more surprise-tolerant, and consequently reports reflect that POV. Both reports are accurate. The difference is simply one of managerial style --- mention potential risks, or only mention documented risks. Both styles have their virtues. Both styles have their vices. The people kicked upstairs can be traumatized by the difference in reporting styles, during the transition process. Agreed, I will however, due to pressure, from non AOO PMC, change the report, and have a new discussion start on this mailing list. I have asked the people in question to come forward in here and explain their opinions. I apologize to the community, for not having realized that consensus in AOO, is not enough, when making a board report. rgds jan i jonathon * English - detected * English * English javascript:void(0); -- Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org javascript:; For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org javascript:; -- Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.
Re: Board report proposal, please comment before April 5.
On Sun, Apr 05, 2015 at 02:17:01AM +0100, Simon Phipps wrote: ... The report should stand as-is rather than be voided by a private request that seems to fly in the face of the public evidence. Agreed, Simon. Jan voided the report after feedback from (3) individuals, speaking as such. The only entity which can direct the PMC is the Board, and it certainly didn't speak up. This was Jan's choice/decision. -g - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Board report proposal, please comment before April 5.
On Sunday, April 5, 2015, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Apr 05, 2015 at 02:37:46AM +0200, jan i wrote: ... Background is that after the report was submitted, a ASF Member (not board member and not part of our community) felt that I as new AOO chair, had formulated the report too negative and against the wishes of the community against the wishes of the community is simply untrue. That was never said. Else-thread, Gavin has said he hoped for a more positive report that wouldn't scare people away. ... at no point, in his original message, or any other message, did people say the report was not representative of the AOO community. Totally false. I was about to give proof, that I was not untrue, but I will let Gavin decide, if he wants to make that sentence public, since I have received a private mail from you. Then, you effectively deleted the Board report out of the meeting agenda, pending further discussion here. That is certainly the wrong path. IMO, the most appropriate response would be to just bring the concerns about positive/negative, and then discuss modifications. I agree it was an extreme measure, but leaving the report untouched would have continued the discussions on the board list, so I had to chose between 2 bad choices. You have the full right to feel I should have acted differently, but I stand by my actions. Lastly: the submission deadline is April 10. The Board is likely to postpone its meeting by a week, giving the AOO PMC yet another week to (re)submit a report. This is good news, hopefully we, the community, can reach consensus and submit a new real report. rgds jan I. -g - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Board report proposal, please comment before April 5.
Hi Jan, Hi all, 2015-04-05 8:20 GMT+02:00 jan i j...@apache.org: On Sunday, April 5, 2015, jonathon toki.kant...@gmail.com wrote: On 05/04/15 00:37, jan i wrote: felt that I as new AOO chair, had formulated the report too negative and against the wishes of the community I'm going to suggest that said PMC Member was simply shocked at the radical difference in reporting styles. Is it so important ? What are the possible consequences of a bad report ? I thought it was only a simple information about the activities in a project. Regards -- gw
Re: Board report proposal, please comment before April 5.
I have now filed a new board report. I have done so, to give us time to rethink the report. I apologize for not having sought consensus on the new report, but speed was essential, to stop a discussion on board@, I hope the community will support my action. Just to avoid any misunderstanding, the PMC supported the old report, and nobody in the PMC has asked to withdraw the old report This is a copy of the new report: Based on the reactions on this Mailing List, I as chair, have filed a press conform report, hoping the AOO community will support my action. A new discussion is started on AOO dev@ to formulate a report, that has consensus in the AOO community (which the old one had) as well as satisfies the readers of this mailing list. I do not expect that discussion to be finalized in time for the board meeting. As Chair and member I would like to raise my concern, that this discussion, which basically ask me to void a public consensus discussion, takes place on a private list, without the participation of the AOO community. Everybody who has an opinion on the content of the AOO board report, are more than welcome, to participate in the public discussion on dev@ but please stop discussing, in a place where the AOO community cannot participate. committed board report: ## Description: Apache OpenOffice is an open-source, office-document productivity suite providing six productivity applications based around the OpenDocument Format (ODF). OpenOffice is released on multiple platforms and in dozens of languages. ## Activity: No new activity, not already covered in the jannuary report. ## Issues: No urgent issues, not already reported. ## PMC/Committership changes: - Currently 140 committers and 29 PMC members in the project. - New PMC members: - Jan Iversen was added to the PMC on Wed Feb 11 2015 - Mechtilde Stehmann was added to the PMC on Sat Jan 03 2015 - Dr. Michael Stehmann was added to the PMC on Sat Jan 03 2015 - Dennis E. Hamilton was added to the PMC on Fri Feb 13 2015 - Last committer addition was Tal Daniel at Tue Apr 29 2014 ## Releases: - Last release was 4.1.1 on Thu Aug 21 2014 ## Mailing list activity: - us...@openoffice.apache.org: - 569 subscribers (down -16 in the last 3 months): - 917 emails sent to list (866 in previous quarter) - dev@openoffice.apache.org: - 500 subscribers (up 0 in the last 3 months): - 1377 emails sent to list (1195 in previous quarter) Now please let us have an open discussion about the content of the report, and to me more importantly which signal we want to sent. The old report was negative, but based on facts. My goal was to do a wake-up call, instead of continuing the no news is good news we have been using for quite a while. Rgds jan i.
Re: Board report proposal, please comment before April 5.
On 5 Apr 2015, at 2:17 am, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote: On 5 Apr 2015 02:05, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: I can replace the report with a short note stating the I (as chair) have removed it, because the community need more time to discuss the content. That seems crazy, given the long review window and the absence of criticism on this list. The report was openly discussed for longer than I recall any other Board report. Any member claiming there was community opposition should produce evidence to that effect. Ok so nobody has said there was any community opposition at all. I thought that the report was worded negatively and suggested a few changes to give it a more positive flow that might help the project. The report should stand as-is rather than be voided by a private request that seems to fly in the face of the public evidence. My suggestions were just that, and I made it clear they could be incorporated or ignored at leisure. I’m totally fine with whatever is decided. Gav… S. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
review granted: [Issue 81637] AOO filepicker: Replace column header Title by Name : [Attachment 84633] patch for fileview
Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org has granted review: Issue 81637: AOO filepicker: Replace column header Title by Name https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=81637 Attachment 84633: patch for fileview https://bz.apache.org/ooo/attachment.cgi?id=84633action=edit --- Comment #11 from Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org --- Comment on attachment 84633 -- https://bz.apache.org/ooo/attachment.cgi?id=84633 patch for fileview The patch looks good. Thanks for your contribution. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: stupid address robots that don't work.
On Sun, 5 Apr 2015 11:04:57 -0400 Joseph Gardner jog...@gmail.com wrote: I was made to signup with ms mail system to communicate with you and that doesn't work . I hope this gets to you because I can't even complain to ms to have them fix the problem using gmail which is the only mail that seems to work. Here's my problem with Openoffice: when I try to add extensions they get directed to files that have nothing to do with Openoffice. can you fix this for me. Can you pleas tell us one of the extension links that doesn't work and what the resulting file name is? I presume you are using Windows. Which version? If not Windows, then which operating system and version, please? -- 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: review requested: [Issue 95167] XIRR() function gives Err:502 : [Attachment 84632] Patch for finanical.cxx
Hi, bugzi...@apache.org schrieb: Driss driss.zoub...@gmail.com has asked for review: Issue 95167: XIRR() function gives Err:502 https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=95167 Attachment 84632: Patch for finanical.cxx https://bz.apache.org/ooo/attachment.cgi?id=84632action=edit It doesn't build with MSVC 9.0 Express. Compiling: scaddins/source/analysis/financial.cxx C:/AOO_debugbuild_420/trunk/main/scaddins/source/analysis/financial.cxx(570) : error C3861: 'isnan': identifier not found C:/AOO_debugbuild_420/trunk/main/scaddins/source/analysis/financial.cxx(570) : error C3861: 'isinf': identifier not found C:/AOO_debugbuild_420/trunk/main/scaddins/source/analysis/financial.cxx(570) : error C3861: 'isnan': identifier not found C:/AOO_debugbuild_420/trunk/main/scaddins/source/analysis/financial.cxx(570) : error C3861: 'isinf': identifier not found dmake: Error code 2, while making '../../wntmsci12/slo/financial.obj' ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making /cygdrive/c/AOO_debugbuild_420/trunk/main/scaddins/source/analysis What compiler do you have used for building? isnan and isinf is not available in the old MSVC. Use ::rtl::math::isNan and ::rtl::math::isInf instead. Perhaps ::boost::math::isinf works too, but I have not tested it. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: IMPORTANT: Board report second version.
Wow, it sounds so depressive, I would really want to sound it more optimistic as more matter of fact. I think for a report is way too emotional. Just list what is being done (or not), is it still on planning stage, and what it's being done to get it off planning stage into development or execution. On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 7:24 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: HI. I am starting a new thread where we can hopefully concentrate on making a final board report. Just to sum up, I have replaced the original report in the board agenda, with a dummy report. The original board report sits untouched in https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/2015+Apr Whatever the community finds consensus about should go in there (I will only have very limited time to make edits, because I am already overloaded), and tthe 12th (or maybe 22th, if the board meeting is postponed) I will take the content reformat it, and submit it for board approval. For once I can sit back and relax, because I feel the report is a good compromise, made by many people. As a note to the PMC, I will drop the private, unless the PMC ask me to include something. Let us stop bashing each other, and get some work done !!! rgds jan I. -- Alexandro Colorado Apache OpenOffice Contributor 882C 4389 3C27 E8DF 41B9 5C4C 1DB7 9D1C 7F4C 2614
Re: Office Application BoF @ OSTC, Beijing 2015/3/28
Peter Junge wrote: it was a pleasure meeting you at the Office Apps BoF in Beijing. Although we were a small group we certainly had an interesting discussion. Thanks again for having organized the event. ...and be sure that I will ask you to consider writing a blog post! Really, https://blogs.apache.org/ooo/ needs some new content and I've been the only one putting something there lately. If we don't publish new content there, we reduce the visibility of our activities. A double post English/Chinese (two texts in one post) is of course OK if this is more suitable in this case. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
stupid address robots that don't work.
I was made to signup with ms mail system to communicate with you and that doesn't work . I hope this gets to you because I can't even complain to ms to have them fix the problem using gmail which is the only mail that seems to work. Here's my problem with Openoffice: when I try to add extensions they get directed to files that have nothing to do with Openoffice. can you fix this for me. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: review requested: [Issue 95167] XIRR() function gives Err:502 : [Attachment 84632] Patch for finanical.cxx
Hallo Regina, I am using gcc compiler. I have tested the code under linux and has worked. Now I will test the code using ::rtl::math::isNan and ::rtl::math::isInf (But under Ubuntu) and upload new patch. regards Driss 2015-04-05 20:07 GMT+02:00 Regina Henschel rb.hensc...@t-online.de: Hi, bugzi...@apache.org schrieb: Driss driss.zoub...@gmail.com has asked for review: Issue 95167: XIRR() function gives Err:502 https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=95167 Attachment 84632: Patch for finanical.cxx https://bz.apache.org/ooo/attachment.cgi?id=84632action=edit It doesn't build with MSVC 9.0 Express. Compiling: scaddins/source/analysis/financial.cxx C:/AOO_debugbuild_420/trunk/main/scaddins/source/analysis/financial.cxx(570) : error C3861: 'isnan': identifier not found C:/AOO_debugbuild_420/trunk/main/scaddins/source/analysis/financial.cxx(570) : error C3861: 'isinf': identifier not found C:/AOO_debugbuild_420/trunk/main/scaddins/source/analysis/financial.cxx(570) : error C3861: 'isnan': identifier not found C:/AOO_debugbuild_420/trunk/main/scaddins/source/analysis/financial.cxx(570) : error C3861: 'isinf': identifier not found dmake: Error code 2, while making '../../wntmsci12/slo/financial.obj' ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making /cygdrive/c/AOO_debugbuild_ 420/trunk/main/scaddins/source/analysis What compiler do you have used for building? isnan and isinf is not available in the old MSVC. Use ::rtl::math::isNan and ::rtl::math::isInf instead. Perhaps ::boost::math::isinf works too, but I have not tested it. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Board report proposal, please comment before April 5.
Hi Gavin, 2015-04-05 10:57 GMT+02:00 Gavin McDonald ga...@16degrees.com.au: On 5 Apr 2015, at 8:07 am, Guy Waterval waterval@gmail.com wrote: Hi Jan, Hi all, 2015-04-05 8:20 GMT+02:00 jan i j...@apache.org: On Sunday, April 5, 2015, jonathon toki.kant...@gmail.com wrote: On 05/04/15 00:37, jan i wrote: felt that I as new AOO chair, had formulated the report too negative and against the wishes of the community I'm going to suggest that said PMC Member was simply shocked at the radical difference in reporting styles. Is it so important ? What are the possible consequences of a bad report ? I thought it was only a simple information about the activities in a project. Ok so I think a negative report can have a negative impact on a community, rather than encouraging more volunteer time it may be seen as all doom and gloom and perhaps push potential volunteers away. Sure, if a project is in trouble, then that needs to be reported, but there are ways of doing so. If someone new pops up on a project and sees doom and gloom, sees the folks that are already there talking down the project, instead of talking it up, I reckon they’ll turn tail and scarper. I suggested (that is the word suggested; and yes it was me!) that some sentences be reworded slightly - to say the same thing, but in a more positive light, in such a way as that it might actually encourage more folks to step forward. That is what is needed here right? I understand perfectly your point of view, but for me, changing the wrapping paper will not change the content of the box. Your version is certainly more diplomatic, the pill goes better, but the difficulties described are a reality and sooner or later they will come back on the mat. The arrival of new volunteers is not a magic solution. We must also have the strategy to coach them when they are before the door. Regards -- gw - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
