Re: Google+ going away on April 2, 2019
Hi Kay, Am 26.02.19 um 22:25 schrieb Kay Schenk: > > On 2/24/19 12:59 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote: >> Hi Kay, Hi Keith, >> >> Am 05.02.19 um 00:58 schrieb Kay Schenk: >>> On 2/2/19 11:07 AM, Keith N. McKenna wrote: On 2/2/2019 1:00 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: > I'm assuming most of you know that Google+ is going away April 2. > 2019. > I am one of the moderators for the AOO group. Here is information I > just > received. I know MANY are disappointed by this decision, and we > need to > discuss what to do with the current AOO information. I just found this: https://techaeris.com/2019/02/15/the-mewe-social-network-made-a-tool-to-import-your-google-data-to-their-platform/ Regards Matthias > Hi Kay; Yes we should definitely make an archive of Google+ pages, just not sure where the best place for them to be stored would be. Regards Keith >>> I'm looking into HOW to get the data from G+. It might be nice >>> (somehow) to import the G+ postings into FB, but the participant info >>> wouldn't sync that's for sure. I'll do a dump from G+ soon and see >>> what the feeds/post look like. >> You may already have found the way to archive Google+ content: >> https://takeout.google.com/ >> >> It took Google about one week to provide my zip file. >> >> I am also wondering about our YouTube channel. It is linked to the >> Google+ brand account, so I have administrative rights. But since I am >> not the owner I can not add another administrator/moderator. >> >> Regards, >> >> Matthias > > A short update. I just "downloaded" the set from Apache OpenOffice G+. > It didn't take very long. I actually used the instructions from: > > https://support.google.com/plus/answer/1045788 > > All the posts are there but...the urls generated reference > "plus.google.com" which is useless since that's the service going > away. So, I will look around to see what else I can find. Oy! Maybe we > can find the G+ stylesheets somewhere. > > > "Less is more." > > MzK > > >> >>> -- >>> MzK >>> >>> >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >>> >>> > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Time for our first 4.2.0 beta?
firing macOS up as we speak... > On Mar 14, 2019, at 10:34 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Am 13.03.19 um 14:35 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> Let me know when you're done and I can fire up the "official" developer's >> builds :) > I just added the "Developer Snapshot" graphics for the Start Center. [1] > My Windows test builds look good so far. > > BUT: > Only recently I found out that on Windows file associations are not set > for a Developer Build (works for a Beta). > That means that you cannot open a .odt or .doc file by double clicking. > I am pretty sure this is Windows only (probably Windows installer) but > this must be fixed before we do anything official. > > Maybe you can do personal dev builds for Linux and macOS to see if > everything works there? > > Regards, > >Matthias > > [1] https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision=1855525 > >> >>> On Mar 11, 2019, at 10:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >>> >>> Very cool. >>> On Mar 10, 2019, at 6:15 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote: Hi Jim and all, Am 07.03.19 um 15:31 schrieb Jim Jagielski: > ++1 FYI: I just added a graphic for the about dialog which is now used when you build a Developer Snapshot: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/ooo_custom_images/dev/introabout/about.png Additionally I will try to make a special graphic for the Start Center (similar to a Beta build) Regards, Matthias >> On Feb 24, 2019, at 11:35 AM, Matthias Seidel >> wrote: >> >> Hi Jim and all, >> >> As mentioned before, I think we need some more time before doing a >> (public) beta. >> But I also want to get a wider user base for testing and something >> "official" we can base our discussions on. >> >> So here is my proposal: >> >> We could create a tag (snapshot420 or whatever) and build it as a >> developer snapshot. >> This can be done similar to a beta with the build targets: >> openofficedev, ooodevlanguagepack and sdkoodev. >> >> We also have a special splashscreen for a "Developer Snapshot": >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO42X/main/ooo_custom_images/dev/introabout/intro.png >> >> I would like to have all recent translations committed and merged before >> we create the tag. >> March would be a good time, so we could also include the updated English >> dictionary. >> >> The build should be uploaded to an official place together with all >> hashes and PGP signatures. >> It could be announced with a blog post linked on our homepage. >> >> Opinions? >> >> Regards, >> >> Matthias >> >> Am 18.02.19 um 15:42 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >>> Release, as in GA, or release as in Beta? >>> On Feb 15, 2019, at 4:55 AM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: Bug 125129 looks like a wild goose chase and requires considerable understanding of the framework layer, but I'll try continue when I have time. My own release checklist would include: 1. Library audit. 1.1 Did we lose or gain any public symbols in our libraries since the 4.1.0? Gbuild requires explicit export instead of exporting everything and then possibly controlling visibility with a .map file, so it's very possible. 1.2 Did ELF symbol versions on *nix platforms change? The older gbuild modules probably did, as I didn't understand the meaning of .map files back then. 1.3 Are the same libraries with the same names available in both 4.1.0 and 4.2.0? 2. Base: 2.1 Complete the Java SDBC driver framework, used by both the new SDBC-JDBC bridge and the Postgres SDBC driver. 2.2 Audit the new SDBC-JDBC bridge in Java against the old C++ one, fix any differences. 2.3 Complete the Postgres SDBC driver; still needs views, users, groups, etc. 2.4 Complete the integration of the Postgres SDBC driver into the Base UI forms (like MySQL already is). 3. Crashreporter 3.1 Get it working again. 3.2 Bug reported in UI form (instead of submitted to some now obsolete server), which can be copied/pasted or attached to Bugzilla. 4. Testing 4.1 Run all available tests (unit tests, smoketest, module integration tests, bvt, fvt, etc.) against 4.1.0 and 4.2.0, find and fix any regressions. Damjan On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 1:25 AM Matthias Seidel wrote: > Hi Jim, > > IMO, the situation hasn't changed so much. > > We should at least fix issue
Re: Time for our first 4.2.0 beta?
Hi Jim, Am 13.03.19 um 14:35 schrieb Jim Jagielski: > Let me know when you're done and I can fire up the "official" developer's > builds :) I just added the "Developer Snapshot" graphics for the Start Center. [1] My Windows test builds look good so far. BUT: Only recently I found out that on Windows file associations are not set for a Developer Build (works for a Beta). That means that you cannot open a .odt or .doc file by double clicking. I am pretty sure this is Windows only (probably Windows installer) but this must be fixed before we do anything official. Maybe you can do personal dev builds for Linux and macOS to see if everything works there? Regards, Matthias [1] https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision=1855525 > >> On Mar 11, 2019, at 10:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> Very cool. >> >>> On Mar 10, 2019, at 6:15 AM, Matthias Seidel >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Jim and all, >>> >>> Am 07.03.19 um 15:31 schrieb Jim Jagielski: ++1 >>> FYI: >>> >>> I just added a graphic for the about dialog which is now used when you >>> build a Developer Snapshot: >>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/ooo_custom_images/dev/introabout/about.png >>> >>> Additionally I will try to make a special graphic for the Start Center >>> (similar to a Beta build) >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Matthias >>> > On Feb 24, 2019, at 11:35 AM, Matthias Seidel > wrote: > > Hi Jim and all, > > As mentioned before, I think we need some more time before doing a > (public) beta. > But I also want to get a wider user base for testing and something > "official" we can base our discussions on. > > So here is my proposal: > > We could create a tag (snapshot420 or whatever) and build it as a > developer snapshot. > This can be done similar to a beta with the build targets: > openofficedev, ooodevlanguagepack and sdkoodev. > > We also have a special splashscreen for a "Developer Snapshot": > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO42X/main/ooo_custom_images/dev/introabout/intro.png > > I would like to have all recent translations committed and merged before > we create the tag. > March would be a good time, so we could also include the updated English > dictionary. > > The build should be uploaded to an official place together with all > hashes and PGP signatures. > It could be announced with a blog post linked on our homepage. > > Opinions? > > Regards, > > Matthias > > Am 18.02.19 um 15:42 schrieb Jim Jagielski: >> Release, as in GA, or release as in Beta? >> >>> On Feb 15, 2019, at 4:55 AM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: >>> >>> Bug 125129 looks like a wild goose chase and requires considerable >>> understanding of the framework layer, but I'll try continue when I have >>> time. >>> >>> My own release checklist would include: >>> 1. Library audit. >>> 1.1 Did we lose or gain any public symbols in our libraries since the >>> 4.1.0? Gbuild requires explicit export instead of exporting everything >>> and >>> then possibly controlling visibility with a .map file, so it's very >>> possible. >>> 1.2 Did ELF symbol versions on *nix platforms change? The older gbuild >>> modules probably did, as I didn't understand the meaning of .map files >>> back >>> then. >>> 1.3 Are the same libraries with the same names available in both 4.1.0 >>> and >>> 4.2.0? >>> 2. Base: >>> 2.1 Complete the Java SDBC driver framework, used by both the new >>> SDBC-JDBC >>> bridge and the Postgres SDBC driver. >>> 2.2 Audit the new SDBC-JDBC bridge in Java against the old C++ one, fix >>> any >>> differences. >>> 2.3 Complete the Postgres SDBC driver; still needs views, users, groups, >>> etc. >>> 2.4 Complete the integration of the Postgres SDBC driver into the Base >>> UI >>> forms (like MySQL already is). >>> 3. Crashreporter >>> 3.1 Get it working again. >>> 3.2 Bug reported in UI form (instead of submitted to some now obsolete >>> server), which can be copied/pasted or attached to Bugzilla. >>> 4. Testing >>> 4.1 Run all available tests (unit tests, smoketest, module integration >>> tests, bvt, fvt, etc.) against 4.1.0 and 4.2.0, find and fix any >>> regressions. >>> >>> Damjan >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 1:25 AM Matthias Seidel >>> >>> wrote: >>> Hi Jim, IMO, the situation hasn't changed so much. We should at least fix issue 125129 [1] before we release a (public) beta. I have seen that Damjan is investigating... Then we need time to inform translators on l10n@ before we can export the latest translations from Pootle. At the moment most of them are at 98% for the UI but the SDF
