Re: Commit/Merge translations

[Tal Daniel]

Try to contact Jeurgen Schmidt.

בתאריך 30 בדצמ׳ 2016 08:03,‏ "Pedro Albuquerque" 
כתב:

> Hi,
>
> I was wondering if there is any page where I can learn how to commit/merge
> an updated translation from Pootle to trunk.
> From what I read, I understand a .sdf file must be generated and probably
> after that, a commit could be made.
>
> But how do I generate that file? Does it include the help .po files also?
> Do they have to be all in the same folder?
>
> I know I have to use translate toolkit and that there are a number of .po
> checks that can be done, like msgfmt.
> Also, I read somewhere that gsicheck should be used but I can't find a
> link to it.
>
>
> Can someone please give some information on this process?
>
> --
> Regards,
> Pedro.
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

Re: Community building: give our User a chance to contribute!

[Dr. Michael Stehmann]

Hi,

IMO Raphael's suggestion will work under Apache rules. It is normal that
developers of Apache projects are paid by companies etc. to contribute
to the project.

Whether Raphael`s plan will work as a "business model", we will see.

Kind regards
Michael




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Community building: give our User a chance to contribute!

[Raphael Bircher]

Hi Jörg

Am .01.2017, 22:16 Uhr, schrieb Jörg Schmidt :


-Original Message-
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@apache.org]



Apache Projects all produce software free to the public.
Nothing more.


Is a office-programming-projekt under Apache Licence not a free project?


Coming into the Incubator means operating
under the Incubator PMC with an existing *software* project
that can stand on its feet better as part of Apache Community.


yes, clear


I think it is appropriate to find the simplest thing that can
possibly work.

I recommend following Raphael's recommendation.


Sorry, but my interest is the original (= Openoffice) and no third party  
project.


I do not think the ASF would allow a crowd funding campaign for AOO   
and a crowd funding campaign war Raphaels suggestion.



If at least
that can work, then one has a foundation for something.


Yes, for a third party project ... for that I have no interest.


You got here something wrong. It's not needed to make a fork. You can do  
the whole work at Apache OpenOffice. You have only to follow the  
Development guide lines of OpenOffice. But that's not a problem I think.


The only thing that has to be done outside ASF is the founding. And you  
don't collect Money for OpenOffice itself. You collect money to develop  
some features or to fix a list of bugs. This is a small bat important  
difference. And you collect the money not as the ASF or Apache OpenOffice,  
you collect it as an individual.


The development will go the ordinary way. there is no difference between  
paid work and volunteered work.


Regards, Raphael


--
Mein Blog: https://raphaelbircher.blogspot.ch

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

Re: Community building: give our User a chance to contribute!

[Jörg Schmidt]

> -Original Message-
> From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@apache.org] 

> Apache Projects all produce software free to the public.  
> Nothing more.  

Is a office-programming-projekt under Apache Licence not a free project?

> Coming into the Incubator means operating 
> under the Incubator PMC with an existing *software* project 
> that can stand on its feet better as part of Apache Community.

yes, clear

> I think it is appropriate to find the simplest thing that can 
> possibly work.
> 
> I recommend following Raphael's recommendation. 

Sorry, but my interest is the original (= Openoffice) and no third party 
project.

I do not think the ASF would allow a crowd funding campaign for AOO  and a 
crowd funding campaign war Raphaels suggestion.

> If at least 
> that can work, then one has a foundation for something.

Yes, for a third party project ... for that I have no interest.



My summary is:
I am absolutely incomprehensible why in an Apache project always to point to 
the way out of a third party project, instead of thinking about developing own 
rules further.

If we continue to do so, we will weaken the "OpenOffice" brand, although we 
should strengthen this brand.


Greetings,
Jörg


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

RE: Community building: give our User a chance to contribute!

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

> -Original Message-
> From: Jörg Schmidt [mailto:joe...@j-m-schmidt.de]
> Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2017 03:48
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Community building: give our User a chance to contribute!
> 
> 
> > From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net]
> 
> > Go ahead, but you are missing my point. Managing money like
> > you propose is not something Apache Members want to do.
> 
> Ok, clear.
> 
> I myself will continue to try to convince, so this opinion changes.
> 
> > Having a good working relationship with a third party is
> > something the ASF does all the time.
> 
> OK, but: I have no great interest in a third party, I want to help
> improve the original (=OpenOffice).
> 
> 
> But a question:
> Is it right that the ASF would _absolutely not accept_ an incubator
> project which is the goal of running crowfunding to pay developers to
> develop OpenOffice? I mean an incubator project, which might be called
> "Apache Developers for OpenOffice".
[orcmid] 

Apache Projects all produce software free to the public.  Nothing more.  Coming 
into the Incubator means operating under the Incubator PMC with an existing 
*software* project that can stand on its feet better as part of Apache 
Community.

I think it is appropriate to find the simplest thing that can possibly work.

I recommend following Raphael's recommendation.  If at least that can work, 
then one has a foundation for something.


> 
> Please note: This is not a concrete plan, but I would like a response if
> this way is completely excluded.
> 
> 
> Jörg
> 
> 
> -
> 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: What is the oldest Linux that AOO can run on? Is there a policy wrt baseline libraries/distro release?

[Fernando Cassia]

> For the current 4.1.x series the baseline is so far going to stay CentOS 5.x;
> They will need glibc >= 2.5; this requirement is deliberately chosen  so that 
> it is satisfied by
> virtually all Linux-based desktop systems available today.

Thanks Andrea. That was exactly what I was looking for!.

FC

On 1/19/17, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
> On 13/01/2017 Fernando Cassia wrote:
>> I wonder what are the older Linux version that AOO-current (whatever
>> is the latest version) will run on?
>
> Version 4.1.3 is built on CentOS 5 with glibc 2.5.
>
>> And I'm trying to create a VM with the oldest possible, still
>> supported Linux version, with AOO on it.
>> CentOS 5.5 is still a target platform?
>
> We use the latest CentOS 5, so this would be CentOS 5.11. But binaries
> will work on all the CentOS 5.x series and everything newer than it
> (which basically means any modern, non-modern and even quite old
> Linux-based desktop system).
>
>> And going forward, what do you plan to use as a base? is there a
>> policy? like "the oldest version of CentOS still supported"? or
>> "latest CentOS -1" or what?
>
> For the current 4.1.x series the baseline is so far going to stay CentOS
> 5.x; I expect we may want to revise this after 4.1.4 is released, but
> for the moment this was not discussed.
>
>> Or are the AOO Linux binaries just expected to work on any Linux
>> regardless of glibc version?
>
> They will need glibc >= 2.5; this requirement is deliberately chosen  so
> that it is satisfied by virtually all Linux-based desktop systems
> available today.
>
> Regards,
>Andrea.
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>


-- 
During times of Universal Deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary
act
Durante épocas de Engaño Universal, decir la verdad se convierte en un Acto
Revolucionario
- George Orwell

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

Community Building: Development business next steps

[Raphael Bircher]

Hi at all

Ok, we have had a long discussion about. if we want, what's the  
possibilities and how we can setup a way that user can invest money in  
Apache OpenOffice.


It seams to be clear, that the whole thing has to be done outside ASF. I  
got also really clear statement on the dev@community.a.o list from some  
long standing ASF members.


I think the way is:
- Find work that could be done
- Find a company that is willing to do it.
- Find a crowd funding platform
- Find ways, to rich out our users.
- founding (external)
- development (i propose to develop directly here)

I never said, that the way is easy. But I believe we have to do it. I'm  
honest, after all this years at this project I don't expect to much. Most  
of our user probably simply want a free program and have no interest in  
paying anything. But at our user base, even a small group can be really  
big. So let's work on this, for Apache OpenOffice and for our users.


Regards, Raphael
--
Mein Blog: https://raphaelbircher.blogspot.ch

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

Re: Community building: give our User a chance to contribute!

[Jörg Schmidt]

> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 

> Go ahead, but you are missing my point. Managing money like 
> you propose is not something Apache Members want to do.

Ok, clear.

I myself will continue to try to convince, so this opinion changes.

> Having a good working relationship with a third party is 
> something the ASF does all the time.

OK, but: I have no great interest in a third party, I want to help improve the 
original (=OpenOffice).


But a question:
Is it right that the ASF would _absolutely not accept_ an incubator project 
which is the goal of running crowfunding to pay developers to develop 
OpenOffice? I mean an incubator project, which might be called "Apache 
Developers for OpenOffice".

Please note: This is not a concrete plan, but I would like a response if this 
way is completely excluded.


Jörg


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

Re: Community building: give our User a chance to contribute!

[Jörg Schmidt]

> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 

> Read to the bottom. Don't mistake my opposition to the 
> following statement as opposition to a way forward to funding 
> of a third party.
> 
> > and one more note:
> > Our PMC is a PMC of an Apache project and it must be loyal 
> to the ASF and the OpenOffice project.
> > If, however, there are single points that are contentious, 
> then the PMC must first represent the interests of OpenOffice.
> 
> Not true. 

Are you clear what the difference is between different opinions and the 
determination that someone says something untrue?

My opinion is my opinion and not the untruth, because my opinion is not a 
representation of facts, but only describes what I want or prefer.

> I am a Member of the Apache Software Foundation. 
> That is just like a shareholder. For me that comes first. 
> Then come PMC memberships and AOO is but one of mine.

OK, I'll remember.

> A clear separation between the third party and the ASF and 
> the project MUST be kept.

Exactly so _I_ see this synonymous and therefore I want the OpenOffice _within_ 
the ASF Apache is further developed. Others see it differently and I have to 
accept it.

> I am ALL for a third party. Any developers and other 
> employees/volunteers from that group who demonstrate merit 
> here would have my support for committer status.

OK.

> A third party might have a distribution powered by Apache 
> OpenOffice. That could solicit. 

yes, clear ... but:

_Absolutely no interest on my part._

I want help to improve the original (=OpenOffice) and not a software only based 
on OO. Otherwise, I could also work for LibreOffice.



Greetings
Jörg


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

Re: Question -- building AOO 4.1.3 on Windows

[Damjan Jovanovic]

Firstly, it looks like there's a bug in our configure script: the
dependencies that are checked for in bulk, are different from the
dependencies that are tested individually and reported as missing, so a
missing dependency can be wrongly reported.

I've just committed a fix for it, so please "svn update", "autoconf", and
try "configure" again. If you still get errors, please attach the output
and your config.log.

Damjan

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 3:38 AM, Hong  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Now I am building AOO under Win7. Most of my settings are exactly the same
> as the instruction.
>
> I keep seeing this package missing error when I did "./configure". Can
> someone please help? I already kept trying the entire afternoon.
>
>
> ​
> As you can see I did a check, it was installed, but just "./configure"
> complains it is missing.
>
> Someone reported this issue before, but the status is fixed now
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-12629
>
> Also the buildbot does not have this issue. What could be wrong with my
> environment? https://ci.apache.org/builders/aoo-win7/builds/602
>
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Hong  wrote:
>
>> Hi again,
>>
>> I now encountered this error,
>>
>> checking for PSDK files... configure: error: Some (all?) PSDK files not
>> found, please check if all needed Platform SDKs
>> are installed or use --with-psdk-home .
>>
>> I suspect it was that I installed Windows SDK v10, or maybe that I did
>> not install under the default "Program Files (x86)" ?
>>
>> The instruction said the Windows SDK is v7. Does it need to be strictly
>> followed?
>>
>> A more general question is does everything in https://wiki.openoffice.org
>> /wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step needs to be strictly
>> followed? I am using a Windows 10 machine, but things like .NET 3.5, MSVC
>> 2008 and GDI needs to come out of Win XP sound a bit outdated.
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 9:26 PM, Hong  wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks, will try to find it.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Damjan Jovanovic 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 The "autoconf" tool is part of Cygwin.

 On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 7:07 AM, Hong  wrote:

 > As in my screenshot, I did not see an autoconf file in my download as
 well.
 > I was curious why was it too. Autoconf is a project file, not a Cygwin
 > command/tool?
 >
 > On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 9:03 PM, Damjan Jovanovic 
 > wrote:
 >
 > > Hi
 > >
 > > Please run "autoconf" first, which will generate "configure" from "
 > > configure.in".
 > >
 > > Damjan
 > >
 > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Hong  wrote:
 > >
 > > > Hello all,
 > > >
 > > > I am trying to build AOO 4.1.3 on a Windows machine.
 > > >
 > > > My source code was from this page, https://openoffice.apache.org/
 > > > downloads.html (from the zip, not from the svn checkout)
 > > >
 > > > I was following through this guide, https://wiki.openoffice.org/
 > > > wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step
 > > >
 > > > I could follow the "Windows 7, Windows 8, Windows 10" section up
 until
 > > > this,
 > > >
 > > > SDK_PATH="/cygdrive/c/Microsoft_SDKs/Windows/v7.0"
 > > > ./configure \
 > > > --with-frame-home="$SDK_PATH" \
 > > > --with-psdk-home="$SDK_PATH" \
 > > > --with-midl-path="$SDK_PATH/bin" \
 > > > --with-ant-home="/cygdrive/c/apache-ant-1.8.4" \
 > > > --with-jdk-home="C:/PROGRA~2/Java/JDK18~1.0_7" \
 > > > --with-csc-path="C:/Windows/Microsoft.NET/Framework/v3.5" \
 > > > --with-cl-home="C:/PROGRA~2/MI1DCA~1.0/VC" \
 > > > --with-asm-home="C:/PROGRA~2/MI1DCA~1.0/VC/bin" \
 > > > --with-dmake-url="http://sourceforge.net/projects/
 > > > oooextras.mirror/files/dmake-4.12.tar.bz2" \
 > > > --with-epm-url="https://sourceforge.net/projects/
 > > > oooextras.mirror/files/epm-3.7.tar.gz" \
 > > > --disable-pch \
 > > > --disable-atl \
 > > > --disable-activex \
 > > > --disable-nss-module \
 > > > --without-junit
 > > >
 > > > Assuming this is Cygwin code, typing in Cygwin gave me "bash:
 > > ./configure:
 > > > No such file or directory"
 > > >
 > > > Also the main directory does not seem to have a "configure", but
 only
 > > > configure.cmd and configure.in
 > > >
 > > >
 > > >
 > > > Any thoughts what was the problem here? Am I following the right
 > > > instruction?​
 > > >
 > >
 >

>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Community building: give our User a chance to contribute!

[Peter Kovacs]

Thanks Dave and Dennis for the explanations. I did not consider it this way.
I hope I did not upset you in any ways. I am sorry, I have started to talk
ahead without profound research. I will have to think about it.
This might sound strange but I agree with you.

@Dave can you name one of this group you refer to?

I would like to learn how they have build their project organisation. If
they have such structures they might be close to what AOO needs.

Also I will check out the mailing list. Maybe I can get an insight on how
community build within Apache Foundation is done. I think I have the wrong
picture here.

And while I am at it, is there a picture how our community currently works?

Thanks for all your time. I appreciate you efforts!

All the best
Peter

Dennis E. Hamilton  schrieb am Sa., 21. Jan. 2017, 02:20:

> Dave Fisher has posted a valuable comment while I was writing this.  I
> completely support his views on this topic.
>
> In addition, it seems to me that you propose a change in how the ASF
> itself works.
>
> This is not the place to do that.
>
> I suggest you take such discussion to the d...@community.apache.org
> mailing list.
>
> In addition, even though there is a complaint about it such thing, this
> proposal is also a case of wanting someone [else] to do something.  That
> will never get anywhere here.
>
> Any collection of funds for targeted purposes and then commitments to
> delivering on those targets is *not* going to happen here.  That is a
> business activity, whether or not there is profit.  Members of the ASF
> board have already stated while that will not be done.
>
> More in-line.
>
> Again, I do not speak for the ASF or the AOO PMC.  I do notice that,
> although members of the PMC have also participated in this list discussion,
> I see no consideration on the part of the PMC itself.
>
>  - Dennis
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Peter Kovacs [mailto:legi...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 16:16
> > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Community building: give our User a chance to contribute!
> >
> > Hmm, the discussion moves in a wrong direction, with wrong assumptions.
> > I am against a status quo solution. For me status quo directly transfers
> > to nothing happens.
> >
> > I am not talking of creating one Investor that provides Money. I aim at
> > mobilizing as much as possible Open Office users has as Investors.
> >
> > What I propose is a open crowd infrastructure. I do not believe Apache
> > is capable of this, today. I do believe this is a near future, game
> > changing model in general.
> >
> >
> > For me the model should respect:
> >
> > # Fundraising itself is neutral (i.e. funds are not raised for
> > developers but for tasks / actions)
> >
> > # nonprofit (Funds are not ment to provide any profit to the
> > organisation itself and are bound by activity. investor decided on.)
> [orcmid]
>
> The ASF is not *just* a non-profit organization.  It is a *charity*.  As
> part of being a charity, there is no "investor," only contributors, and
> contributors might be able to target contributions to some area, there will
> not be delivering activities chosen by investors.  It is unimaginable.  You
> have to find a means that does not involve the ASF or any ASF project in
> such an arrangement.
>
> >
> > # Openess of the Infra (other Apache Project have acces to the same
> > infra if they whish.)
> [orcmid]
>
> Now you are proposing a different support and arrangement of Apache
> Infrastructure.  That is too ill-defined and would not be the prerogative
> of a PMC anyhow.
> >
> > # Openess in the community ( the funds on a task is open to all
> > commiters if they manage to satisfy the requirement for a payout.)
> [orcmid]
>
> Again, this is not going to happen.  It is a form of commerce and the ASF
> considers this to be completely incompatible with its charter and mission
> in everything I can find.
> >
> >
> > This is just a rough outline, so you understand the direction (vision) I
> > am thinking. Also please note that a lot question have to be answered.
> > This is maybe 1% of a business plan.
> >
> > I try to make a graph on the weekend. However I am not sure if I manage
> > this on the weekend. (Thats why I have asked Raphael to give his
> > vision).
> >
> >
> > I do not see any reason why this cannot be done by Apache itseslf. Also
> > One or more 3rd Party supplier can provide the Infra in full or in
> > parts. For me this question is an issue we need to deal with at a later
> > stage. And I stress this point: It needs to happen in sync with Apache.
> > A crowd funding community is a dragon. And as Dragons are, they can be
> > difficult in times. You do well to be prepared.
> >
> > I hope all are at least courious and support this with their hopes and
> > fears. It would be so powerfull if we can make this work.
> [orcmid]
>
> The *only* way to embark on this is to see how to create an external
> entity that