Re: installation cd or dvd

2015-06-18 Thread michael maloney
No, you've obviously have never used linux.  This has nothing to do with a 
stable or unstable internet connection.  It has everything to do with tar gz 
and deb files which are a pain in the #$%#$.  It has everything to do with that 
fact that Apache Open Office is user unfriendly for linux users.  

WPS Kingsoft for instance is really easy to install - a simpleton like myself 
has no problem installing their stuff, including their patches.  And I didn't 
have to uninstall libre first or any thing like that.  Maybe look into seeing 
how they do it so easily.

I like, but I'm not in love with their software which is why i keep coming back 
to Apache.  But until you all figure something out, I'll keep on using WPS and 
Freeware, which I like less.
Thank you for the quick reply though.  I really didn't expect to get 
one.Michael Maloney 


 On Thursday, June 18, 2015 3:46 PM, Marcus marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote:
   

 Am 06/18/2015 02:01 AM, schrieb michael maloney:
 This would be a huge help for those of us using linux.  I used to use
  open office on my window xp years ago and I refuse to spend anymore
  man hours attempting to download open office for ubuntu unsuccessfully
  using deb files or anything.

CDs/DVDs are not available from Apache. But I also don't know what the 
problem should be to download it - except that fast/stable Internet 
access is not available everywhere on the world.

Furthermore please make sure do use always the original sources for 
downloading software. For Apache OpenOffice it is this [1].

A simple solution would be to download the needed installation files by 
someone, burn it on the CD and give it to them they need it.

[1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html

HTH

Marcus



  

Re: installation cd or dvd

2015-06-18 Thread Marco A.G.Pinto
Could someone suggest Linux creators to add a setting during OS 
installation to choose either to install OpenOffice or LibreOffice?


Thanks!

Kind regards,
  Marco A.G.Pinto
--


On 18/06/2015 16:27, Marcus wrote:

Am 06/18/2015 05:03 PM, schrieb michael maloney:
No, you've obviously have never used linux.  This has nothing to do 
with a stable or unstable internet connection.  It has everything to 
do with tar gz and deb files which are a pain in the #$%#$.  It has 
everything to do with that fact that Apache Open Office is user 
unfriendly for linux users.


as Fedora is working with the other package manager (RPM) I don't know 
the problems with DEB files. But that the Linux distributors prefer LO 
*and* don't leave a way for alternative software is indeed a problem. 
Then you have (possibly) to deinstall LO and delete remaining files 
first before getting AOO problem-free onto disk.


Sorry that this is not going as smoothly as it could be.

Marcus



  On Thursday, June 18, 2015 3:46 PM, 
Marcusmarcus.m...@wtnet.de  wrote:



  Am 06/18/2015 02:01 AM, schrieb michael maloney:

This would be a huge help for those of us using linux.  I used to use

open office on my window xp years ago and I refuse to spend anymore
man hours attempting to download open office for ubuntu 
unsuccessfully

using deb files or anything.

CDs/DVDs are not available from Apache. But I also don't know what the
problem should be to download it - except that fast/stable Internet
access is not available everywhere on the world.

Furthermore please make sure do use always the original sources for
downloading software. For Apache OpenOffice it is this [1].

A simple solution would be to download the needed installation files by
someone, burn it on the CD and give it to them they need it.

[1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html

HTH

Marcus


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





--


Re: [RAT REPORT] - 30 files with an unknown or no License Header

2015-06-18 Thread jan i
HI.

did anybody note the rat-scan output, seems we have 6 files still that are
a problem (a probably should be deleted):

Unapproved Licenses:
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaOOXMLParser/.settings/org.eclipse.jdt.core.prefs
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.classpath
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.project
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.settings/org.eclipse.jdt.core.prefs
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/OOXMLViewer/.classpath
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/OOXMLViewer/.project

rgds
jan i.


On 16 June 2015 at 08:27, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 11/06/15 18:23, jan i wrote:
  On 8 June 2015 at 16:58, Regina Henschel rb.hensc...@t-online.de
 wrote:
 
  Hi Jürgen,
 
  is it OK to commit the patch?
 
  if it not ok to commit the patch, then I wonder how the files was
 committed
  in the first place.
 
  If it is not ok, then the files should be deleted. We cannot have files
 in
  trunk without the proper
  ALv2 license.
 
  Furthermore we cannot make a release with these files.
 
  I recommend applying the patch. Deleting the files might have
 sideeffects.
 

 No it have no sideeffect and yes it is ok to apply the patch. As I
 explained before these files are part of the started but currently
 stopped new OOXML framework. It's part of the parser generator ...

 Anyway it is a eclipse project in Java and the license headers were
 simply forgotten in the first shot. If you want a Java tooling that
 would have created C++ stubs and parser for doing the ground work for
 OOXML parsing ...

 Again these files should not be part of y source release and can be
 filtered out as some other things as well.

 Applying the patch and adding the license header is even better and more
 clean for future purpose.

 Juergen


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




Re: dmake location question?

2015-06-18 Thread Kay Schenk

On 06/17/2015 04:03 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
 Hi Kay;
 
 You want to check this email in the archives:
 
 http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openoffice-dev/201408.mbox/%3C540130E6.3060709%40apache.org%3E

Ok, yes, this is where I ended up downloading from. OK, I *thought* I
had downloaded a binary at one time. The location in this email you
reference contains sources. So I followed the build instructions and all
is now well.

 
 
 Also note that Apache extras (and google code) is
 basically dying this year.

Yes...

 
 BTW, we will have to do something about OOo-extras.
 I will probably just have the apache-extras project deleted
 before the deadline since there is no repository history
 to preserve.
 
 Pedro.
 


-- 

MzK

We can all sleep easy at night knowing that
 somewhere at any given time,
 the Foo Fighters are out there fighting Foo.
  -- David Letterman

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



Re: dmake location question?

2015-06-18 Thread Pedro Giffuni

Hello;

On 17/06/2015 06:03 p.m., Pedro Giffuni wrote:

...

BTW, we will have to do something about OOo-extras.
I will probably just have the apache-extras project deleted
before the deadline since there is no repository history
to preserve.



FWIW, delete means the website and the svn repository
will disappear but the download links will remain for as long
as google keeps them up(?). This is not very different to what
will happen by doing nothing: on August the
repository will stop working (it is empty now).

For alternatives, there is bintray[1] or something could be
out with sourceforge.

Pedro.

[1]
https://bintray.com/




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



Re: installation cd or dvd

2015-06-18 Thread Rory O'Farrell
On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 17:27:04 +0200
Marcus marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote:

 Am 06/18/2015 05:03 PM, schrieb michael maloney:
  No, you've obviously have never used linux.  This has nothing to do with a 
  stable or unstable internet connection.  It has everything to do with tar 
  gz and deb files which are a pain in the #$%#$.  It has everything to do 
  with that fact that Apache Open Office is user unfriendly for linux users.
 
 as Fedora is working with the other package manager (RPM) I don't know 
 the problems with DEB files. But that the Linux distributors prefer LO 
 *and* don't leave a way for alternative software is indeed a problem. 
 Then you have (possibly) to deinstall LO and delete remaining files 
 first before getting AOO problem-free onto disk.
 
 Sorry that this is not going as smoothly as it could be.
 
 Marcus

If one wishes to install OpenOffice on a Linux system it is helpful to 
completely remove LibreOffice.  One does this quite easily on any computer 
using DEB files by (in a terminal):

sudo apt-get purge libreoffice*

Installation of the OpenOffice DEB files is quite simple - I download the
Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.1_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-GB.tar.gz package, as that 
is my choice for language and bitness  - a different language or bitness choice 
will use a different filename and unpack directory.

Then I use Archive Manager to extract its files into ~/Downloads/en-GB, start a 
terminal and issue the following sequence of commands:

cd ~/Download/en-GB/DEBS
sudo dpkg -i *.deb
cd desktop-integration
sudo dpkg -i *.deb

and OpenOffice is installed without problems. All done and installed in about 
three minutes.


On Thursday, June 18, 2015 3:46 PM, Marcusmarcus.m...@wtnet.de  
  wrote:
 
 
Am 06/18/2015 02:01 AM, schrieb michael maloney:
  This would be a huge help for those of us using linux.  I used to use
  open office on my window xp years ago and I refuse to spend anymore
  man hours attempting to download open office for ubuntu unsuccessfully
  using deb files or anything.
 
  CDs/DVDs are not available from Apache. But I also don't know what the
  problem should be to download it - except that fast/stable Internet
  access is not available everywhere on the world.
 
  Furthermore please make sure do use always the original sources for
  downloading software. For Apache OpenOffice it is this [1].
 
  A simple solution would be to download the needed installation files by
  someone, burn it on the CD and give it to them they need it.
 
  [1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html
 
  HTH
 
  Marcus
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
 
 


-- 
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: [RAT REPORT] - 30 files with an unknown or no License Header

2015-06-18 Thread jan i
Thanks for applying the patch.

I will check the next RAT-Scan to see if the files sill appear.

rgds
jan I.


On 18 June 2015 at 19:36, Regina Henschel rb.hensc...@t-online.de wrote:

 Hi Jan,

 jan i schrieb:

 HI.

 did anybody note the rat-scan output, seems we have 6 files still that are
 a problem (a probably should be deleted):

 Unapproved Licenses:

 /home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaOOXMLParser/.settings/org.eclipse.jdt.core.prefs

 /home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.classpath

 /home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.project

 /home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.settings/org.eclipse.jdt.core.prefs

 /home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/OOXMLViewer/.classpath

 /home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/OOXMLViewer/.project


 I had submitted the patch from Gavin McDonald. But that patch contains the
 lines
 Index: main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.classpath
 ===
 Cannot display: file marked as a binary type.
 svn:mime-type = application/xml
 Index: main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.project
 ===
 Cannot display: file marked as a binary type.
 svn:mime-type = application/xml

 and
 Index: main/ooxml/source/framework/OOXMLViewer/.classpath
 ===
 Cannot display: file marked as a binary type.
 svn:mime-type = application/xml
 Index: main/ooxml/source/framework/OOXMLViewer/.project
 ===
 Cannot display: file marked as a binary type.
 svn:mime-type = application/xml

 so for those no change exists in the patch. I read that, but did not
 notice the consequence.

 The files

 main/ooxml/source/framework/OOXMLViewer/.settings/org.eclipse.jdt.core.prefs
 +main/ooxml/source/framework/SchemaParser/.settings/org.eclipse.jdt.core.prefs

 should have entries in rat-excludes, at least I see that in the commit
 message of r1684976.

 Kind regards
 Regina



 rgds
 jan i.


 On 16 June 2015 at 08:27, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:

  On 11/06/15 18:23, jan i wrote:

 On 8 June 2015 at 16:58, Regina Henschel rb.hensc...@t-online.de

 wrote:


  Hi Jürgen,

 is it OK to commit the patch?

  if it not ok to commit the patch, then I wonder how the files was

 committed

 in the first place.

 If it is not ok, then the files should be deleted. We cannot have files

 in

 trunk without the proper
 ALv2 license.

 Furthermore we cannot make a release with these files.

 I recommend applying the patch. Deleting the files might have

 sideeffects.



 No it have no sideeffect and yes it is ok to apply the patch. As I
 explained before these files are part of the started but currently
 stopped new OOXML framework. It's part of the parser generator ...

 Anyway it is a eclipse project in Java and the license headers were
 simply forgotten in the first shot. If you want a Java tooling that
 would have created C++ stubs and parser for doing the ground work for
 OOXML parsing ...

 Again these files should not be part of y source release and can be
 filtered out as some other things as well.

 Applying the patch and adding the license header is even better and more
 clean for future purpose.

 Juergen


 -
 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: [RAT REPORT] - 30 files with an unknown or no License Header

2015-06-18 Thread Regina Henschel

Hi Jan,

jan i schrieb:

HI.

did anybody note the rat-scan output, seems we have 6 files still that are
a problem (a probably should be deleted):

Unapproved Licenses:
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaOOXMLParser/.settings/org.eclipse.jdt.core.prefs
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.classpath
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.project
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.settings/org.eclipse.jdt.core.prefs
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/OOXMLViewer/.classpath
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/OOXMLViewer/.project


I had submitted the patch from Gavin McDonald. But that patch contains 
the lines

Index: main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.classpath
===
Cannot display: file marked as a binary type.
svn:mime-type = application/xml
Index: main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.project
===
Cannot display: file marked as a binary type.
svn:mime-type = application/xml

and
Index: main/ooxml/source/framework/OOXMLViewer/.classpath
===
Cannot display: file marked as a binary type.
svn:mime-type = application/xml
Index: main/ooxml/source/framework/OOXMLViewer/.project
===
Cannot display: file marked as a binary type.
svn:mime-type = application/xml

so for those no change exists in the patch. I read that, but did not 
notice the consequence.


The files
main/ooxml/source/framework/OOXMLViewer/.settings/org.eclipse.jdt.core.prefs
+main/ooxml/source/framework/SchemaParser/.settings/org.eclipse.jdt.core.prefs 

should have entries in rat-excludes, at least I see that in the commit 
message of r1684976.


Kind regards
Regina



rgds
jan i.


On 16 June 2015 at 08:27, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:


On 11/06/15 18:23, jan i wrote:

On 8 June 2015 at 16:58, Regina Henschel rb.hensc...@t-online.de

wrote:



Hi Jürgen,

is it OK to commit the patch?


if it not ok to commit the patch, then I wonder how the files was

committed

in the first place.

If it is not ok, then the files should be deleted. We cannot have files

in

trunk without the proper
ALv2 license.

Furthermore we cannot make a release with these files.

I recommend applying the patch. Deleting the files might have

sideeffects.




No it have no sideeffect and yes it is ok to apply the patch. As I
explained before these files are part of the started but currently
stopped new OOXML framework. It's part of the parser generator ...

Anyway it is a eclipse project in Java and the license headers were
simply forgotten in the first shot. If you want a Java tooling that
would have created C++ stubs and parser for doing the ground work for
OOXML parsing ...

Again these files should not be part of y source release and can be
filtered out as some other things as well.

Applying the patch and adding the license header is even better and more
clean for future purpose.

Juergen


-
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



Unable to build soltools module on Mac

2015-06-18 Thread aronsoyol
Hi all:

I got this error when build soltool module.
My system is Mac  10.10
Source is cloned from apache openoffice's repo on github.
The head is on ea4c3e19069b2746928af62788be6a65e07c03e9.
Could anyone guide me to resolve the issue?
Best regards.

Making:all_soltools_support.dpslo
Making:all_soltools_support.dpobj
Compiling: soltools/support/simstr.cxx
/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Toolchains/XcodeDefault.xctoolchain/usr/bin/clang++
-arch x86_64 -std=c++11 -fsigned-char -fmessage-length=0 -c  -g -O0
-DENABLE_LAYOUT=0 -DENABLE_LAYOUT_EXPERIMENTAL=0   -I.
-I../unxmaccx.pro/inc/soltools_support -I../inc -I../inc/pch -I../inc
-I../aqua/inc -I../unxmaccx.pro/inc -I.
-I/Users/aron/dev/openoffice/main/solver/420/unxmaccx.pro/incdont_use_stl
-I/Users/aron/dev/openoffice/main/solver/420/unxmaccx.pro/inc/external
-I/Users/aron/dev/openoffice/main/solver/420/unxmaccx.pro/inc
-I/Users/aron/dev/openoffice/main/solenv/unxmaccx/inc
-I/Users/aron/dev/openoffice/main/solenv/inc
-I/Users/aron/dev/openoffice/main/res
-I/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Toolchains/XcodeDefault.xctoolchain/usr/include/c++/v1/
-I/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Platforms/MacOSX.platform/Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.10.sdk/System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/Headers
 -I/Users/aron/dev/openoffice/main/solver/420/unxmaccx.pro/inc/offuh
-I. -I../res -I. -pipe -fsigned-char -Wno-ctor-dtor-privacy -g -Wall
-Wendif-labels -Wno-ctor-dtor-privacy -Wno-non-virtual-dtor   -fPIC
-fno-common -DMACOSX -DUNX -DVCL -DCLANG -DDUMMY_CVER -DX86_64
-DGLIBC=2 -D_PTHREADS -D_REENTRANT -DNO_PTHREAD_PRIORITY -DX86_64
-D_USE_NAMESPACE=1
-DMAC_OS_X_VERSION_MAX_ALLOWED=MAC_OS_X_VERSION_10_7 -DQUARTZ
-DHAVE_GCC_VISIBILITY_FEATURE -isysroot
/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Platforms/MacOSX.platform/Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.10.sdk
-DHAVE_STL_INCLUDE_PATH -I../v1/ -D__DMAKE -


DUNIX -DCPPU_ENV=s5abi -DSUPD=420 -DDEBUG -DPRODUCT -DNDEBUG
-DOSL_DEBUG_LEVEL=2 -DCUI -DSOLAR_JAVA -fno-exceptions
-DEXCEPTIONS_OFF  -o ../unxmaccx.pro/obj/simstr.o
/Users/aron/dev/openoffice/main/soltools/support/simstr.cxx
:  
DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH=/Users/aron/dev/openoffice/main/solver/420/unxmaccx.pro/lib${DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:${DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH}}
http://unxmaccx.pro/lib$%7BDYLD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$%7BDYLD_LIBRARY_PATH%7D%7D
../unxmaccx.pro/bin/makedepend
@/var/folders/3d/_ctd1d7x0ln5jqs_78y4__6mgp/T//mkKFox05 
../unxmaccx.pro/misc/o_simstr.dpcc
/bin/bash http://unxmaccx.pro/misc/o_simstr.dpcc/bin/bash: line 1:
16694 Abort trap: 6
DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH=/Users/aron/dev/openoffice/main/solver/420/unxmaccx.pro/lib${DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:${DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH}}
http://unxmaccx.pro/lib$%7BDYLD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$%7BDYLD_LIBRARY_PATH%7D%7D
../unxmaccx.pro/bin/makedepend
@/var/folders/3d/_ctd1d7x0ln5jqs_78y4__6mgp/T//mkKFox05 
../unxmaccx.pro/misc/o_simstr.dpcc
dmake:  Error code 134, while making '../unxmaccx.pro/obj/simstr.obj'
dmake:  '../unxmaccx.pro/obj/simstr.obj' removed.



./configure \
--with-epm-url=http://www.msweet.org/files/project2/epm-3.7-source.tar.gz \
--with-ant-home=/Users/aron/dev/apache-ant-1.9.4 \
--with-jdk-home=/Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.7.0_79.jdk/Contents/Home
\
--with-build-version=$(date +MacD%Y-%m-%d) \
--with-vendor=ARONSOYOL \
--with-lang=ja zh-CN mn \
--without-stlport \
--without-junit \
--with-system-python \
--enable-debug \
--enable-verbose \
--enable-category-b \
--enable-wiki-publisher \
--enable-ccache-skip \
--disable-nss-module  \
--disable-systray

checking whether configure is up-to-date... yes

*  *
*   Apache OpenOffice build configuration. *
*  *
*   The configure process checks your platform to see whether  *
*   you can build Apache OpenOffice on it. *
*   This process checks all pre-requisites and generates a file*
*   containing the necessary environment variables.*
*   Source this file after configure has ended successfully.   *
*  *
*   Warnings that are generated during the configure process   *
*   must be taken into account since it can be a reason for*
*   an unsuccessful build of Apache OpenOffice.*
*  *



*  *
*   Checking the platform pre-requisites.  *
*  *


checking for grep that handles long lines and 

Re: installation cd or dvd

2015-06-18 Thread Marcus

Am 06/18/2015 02:01 AM, schrieb michael maloney:

This would be a huge help for those of us using linux.  I used to use

 open office on my window xp years ago and I refuse to spend anymore
 man hours attempting to download open office for ubuntu unsuccessfully
 using deb files or anything.

CDs/DVDs are not available from Apache. But I also don't know what the 
problem should be to download it - except that fast/stable Internet 
access is not available everywhere on the world.


Furthermore please make sure do use always the original sources for 
downloading software. For Apache OpenOffice it is this [1].


A simple solution would be to download the needed installation files by 
someone, burn it on the CD and give it to them they need it.


[1] http://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html

HTH

Marcus


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



Re: dmake location question?

2015-06-18 Thread Marcus
I also don't see a reason to delete them manually before Apache Extras 
is really going down. Please keep the content alive as long as possible.


Marcus



Am 06/18/2015 08:19 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:

On 18/06/2015 Pedro Giffuni wrote:

I will probably just have the apache-extras project deleted
before the deadline since there is no repository history
to preserve.


Why deleted? When is the deadline and what options do we have? The main
reason for me to see this as problematic is that we have hard-coded
references to Apache Extras in all our source releases so far. So if
there is an option to keep files online indefinitely I would be for that
one.


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