Re: Compatibility of new releases with older operating systems

2021-10-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
For Linux it's hard, because it depends on so many factors, such as kernel
version, libc versions, etc... Also, you can build a stripped down version
on older platforms that lack new libraries, or build against a new OS and
include all the bells and whistles.

The best we've been able to come up with is a minimum OS for the
community builds, and use that as a gauge for oldest supported system.

For the 4.1.x builds this has been CentOS5 for the Linux32/64 systems
and OSX 10.7 for the mac.

For the 4.2.x versions, this has been bumped to CentOS7 and OS X 10.9

> On Oct 5, 2021, at 4:00 PM, Arrigo Marchiori  wrote:
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> do we have a list of the operating systems' releases that we want to
> support for each AOO release?
> 
> For example: what is the oldest Windows version that AOO 4.1.X must
> support? And 4.2?
> And what about macOS versions?
> 
> I think I remember a thread from some months ago discussing compilers,
> but I could not find it from the archives.
> 
> If a comprehensive page does not exist, I suggest we make it into our
> (c)wiki. I would be interested to use it as a compilers' and build
> tools compatibility matrix.
> 
> Thank you in advance to whoever will give me any pointers,
> -- 
> Arrigo
> 
> -
> 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



[CLOSED] Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.11-RC1 as GA

2021-10-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
The vote on releasing AOO 4.1.11-RC1 as GA is CLOSED.

The vote has PASSED.

> On Oct 4, 2021, at 12:01 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Am 04.10.21 um 13:09 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> Agreed!
> 
> Marcus already casted his vote.
> 
> Maybe it is time to close the vote and move on?
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
>> 
>>> On Oct 1, 2021, at 2:45 PM, Marcus  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Jim, is it possible to extent the vote for 12 hours (which will be Midnight 
>>> European time)?
>>> 
>>> Then I've a much better chance with testing *and* to take part of this vote.
>>> 
>>> Thanks
>>> 
>>> Marcus
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Am 30.09.21 um 12:37 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
>>>> builds of
>>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.11-RC1 as GA.
>>>> [...]
>>>> This vote will be open for the normal 72hrs.
>>> 
>>> -
>>> 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
>> 
> 


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



Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.11-RC1 as GA

2021-10-04 Thread Jim Jagielski



> On Sep 30, 2021, at 6:37 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
> builds of
> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.11-RC1 as GA.
> 
> These artifacts can be found at:
> 
>https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.11-RC1/
> 
> Please cast your vote:
> 
> The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:
> 
> [X] yes / +1
> 
> [ ] no / -1
> 
> My vote is based on
> 
> [X] binding (member of PMC)
> 
> [X ] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [macOS, CentOS5, 
> 6 ]
> 
> [X] I have tested the binary RC on platform [macOS ]
> 
> This vote will be open for the normal 72hrs.
> -
> 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: [DISCUSS][VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.11-RC1 as GA

2021-10-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
Agreed!

> On Oct 1, 2021, at 2:45 PM, Marcus  wrote:
> 
> Jim, is it possible to extent the vote for 12 hours (which will be Midnight 
> European time)?
> 
> Then I've a much better chance with testing *and* to take part of this vote.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Marcus
> 
> 
> 
> Am 30.09.21 um 12:37 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
>> builds of
>> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.11-RC1 as GA.
>> [...]
>> This vote will be open for the normal 72hrs.
> 
> 
> -
> 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: Future - Digital Signatures

2021-09-30 Thread Jim Jagielski


> On Sep 29, 2021, at 4:25 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sep 29, 2021, at 1:05 PM, Arrigo Marchiori  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello Dave, All,
>> 
>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 03:35:30PM -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Pedro,
>>> 
>>> I think that AOO42X and Trunk need to improve in three ways.
>>> 
>>> (1) We need to make sure that we hook to the systems native key store 
>>> and/or a Mozilla keystone.
>>> Setup may need to be improved.
>>> (2) We need to allow a PGP and EU card key to be selected and converted to 
>>> X509 internally while signing.
>>> It looks like ODF 1.3 spec makes no changes to ODF 1.2 in terms of 
>>> digital signatures.
>>> (3) We need to properly display whatever signatures are on the document.
>>> 
>>> What happens when you inspect the digital signatures of a file signed in LO 
>>> with PGP and EU card in AOO 4.1.11 RC?
>> 
>> Please let us bear in mind that we have an open pull request [1] about
>> upgrading the nss library. It is currently waiting for review, and it
>> is stuck on macOS.
> 
> We need to know from Jim how a build goes with the PR incorporated in AOO42X.
> 
>> 
>> Before we begin editing our code, I suggest we merge that pull request
>> first.
>> 
>> 1: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/100 
>> 
> 
> Maybe merge there and see how the next dev build goes?


+1.

[VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.11-RC1 as GA

2021-09-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community builds 
of
Apache OpenOffice 4.1.11-RC1 as GA.

These artifacts can be found at:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.11-RC1/

Please cast your vote:

The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:

[ ] yes / +1

[ ] no / -1

My vote is based on

[ ] binding (member of PMC)

[ ] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [ ]

[ ] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ ]

This vote will be open for the normal 72hrs.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: AOO41X: Time for RC1?

2021-09-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
Is this a regression?

> On Sep 28, 2021, at 1:36 PM, Rony G. Flatscher  
> wrote:
> 
> Tested the MacOS version and ran into a problem: AOO does not consult 
> "/usr/local/lib" on MacOS when
> loading a native library.  Also, on "java.library.path" there seems to be a 
> wrong directory
> ("/Applications/OpenOffice.app/Contents").
> 
> The setting of "java.library.path" in effect:
> 
>
> java.library.path=[/Applications/OpenOffice.app/Contents:/Users/rony/Library/Java/Extensions:/Library/Java/Extensions:/Network/Library/Java/Extensions:/System/Library/Java/Extensions:/usr/lib/java:.]
> 
>java.runtime.version=[9.0.4+11]
> 
> Placing a symbolic link into "/Applications/OpenOffice.app/Contents" allows 
> the library
> "libBSF4ooRexx.dylib" to be found in this version (and everything then works 
> as expected), however
> that directory should probably not be defined as it is does not contain any 
> native libraries (rather
> its subdirectory MacOS does).
> 
> So, this version does not consult "/usr/local/lib" to find and load 
> "libBSF4ooRexx.dylib".
> 
> ---rony
> 
> P.S.: Here the relevant stack trace (when attempting to load the scripting 
> engine for ooRexx to run
> an AOO macro via the Tools -> Macros menu):
> 
>Caused by: java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: no BSF4ooRexx in 
> java.library.path
>   at java.base/java.lang.ClassLoader.loadLibrary(ClassLoader.java:2541)
>   at java.base/java.lang.Runtime.loadLibrary0(Runtime.java:873)
>   at java.base/java.lang.System.loadLibrary(System.java:1857)
>   at 
> org.rexxla.bsf.engines.rexx.RexxAndJava.(RexxAndJava.java:880)
>   at 
> org.rexxla.bsf.engines.rexx.RexxEngine.initialize(RexxEngine.java:291)
>   at org.apache.bsf.BSFManager$8.run(BSFManager.java:854)
>   at java.base/java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
>   at org.apache.bsf.BSFManager.loadScriptingEngine(BSFManager.java:852)
>   ... 40 more
> 
> 
> On 27.09.2021 21:21, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> The macOS, Linux64 and Linux32 builds are also there!
>> 
>>> On Sep 23, 2021, at 9:48 AM, Matthias Seidel  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> I have uploaded all Windows binaries to:
>>> 
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.11-RC1/binaries/
>>> 
>>> Although we have not yet announced AOO 4.1.11-RC1 officially please feel
>>> free to download and test them!
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>>   Matthias
>>> 
>>> P.S.: Linux/macOS builds will be uploaded next week
>>> 
>>> Am 22.09.21 um 17:33 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> I would be ready to upload the Windows binaries if we want to announce RC1?
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> 
>>>>   Matthias
>>>> 
>>>> Am 21.09.21 um 23:15 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Am 21.09.21 um 22:42 schrieb Pedro Lino:
>>>>>> Hi Dave, all
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 09/21/2021 9:07 PM Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>>>>>> windows - thanks Matthias
>>>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/912galt8kr7wiem/Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.11_Win_x86_install_en-US.exe?dl=0
>>>>>> Installed and tested signing a document. Works as expected
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> linux
>>>>>>> We are waiting for someone to do a build.
>>>>>> Can sign on Ubuntu 18.04 x64 using my PGP certificate
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Unless there is a problem on Mac, seems like ready to go?
>>>>> It looks good for me!
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> 
>>>>>   Matthias
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Pedro
> 


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



Re: AOO41X: Time for RC1?

2021-09-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
The macOS, Linux64 and Linux32 builds are also there!

> On Sep 23, 2021, at 9:48 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I have uploaded all Windows binaries to:
> 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.11-RC1/binaries/
> 
> Although we have not yet announced AOO 4.1.11-RC1 officially please feel
> free to download and test them!
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
> P.S.: Linux/macOS builds will be uploaded next week
> 
> Am 22.09.21 um 17:33 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> I would be ready to upload the Windows binaries if we want to announce RC1?
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>>Matthias
>> 
>> Am 21.09.21 um 23:15 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> Am 21.09.21 um 22:42 schrieb Pedro Lino:
 Hi Dave, all
 
 
> On 09/21/2021 9:07 PM Dave Fisher  wrote:
> windows - thanks Matthias
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/912galt8kr7wiem/Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.11_Win_x86_install_en-US.exe?dl=0
 Installed and tested signing a document. Works as expected
 
> linux
> We are waiting for someone to do a build.
 Can sign on Ubuntu 18.04 x64 using my PGP certificate
 
 Unless there is a problem on Mac, seems like ready to go?
>>> It looks good for me!
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>>Matthias
>>> 
 Regards,
 Pedro
 
 -
 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: AOO41X: Time for RC1?

2021-09-17 Thread Jim Jagielski
If HEAD of the branch is ready, then I'm all for an RC1. Once I hear 
definitively, I'll start the Linux and macOS builds

> On Sep 17, 2021, at 5:27 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
> Yes
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Sep 17, 2021, at 2:09 AM, Pedro Lino  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Matthias
>> 
 On 09/16/2021 10:35 PM Matthias Seidel  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Apparently we needed another fix...
>>> 
>>> I am doing a Test Build for Windows right now and will upload it to my
>>> Apache home directory tomorrow.
>> 
>> If I compile now from branch AOO41X will it include all these fixes?
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Pedro
>> 
>> -
>> 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
> 


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



Re: macOS Digital Signature Setup for AOO

2021-09-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
The issue is that for AOO 4.1.x we must use an out-of-date version of Xcode. 
With 4.2.0 and beyond, we use later versions of Xcode (and the SDK) that fully 
support the Apple requirements.

> On Sep 10, 2021, at 4:07 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
> Hi -
> 
> I think our setup for macOS digital signatures is hopelessly out of date.
> 
> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Certificate_Detection 
> 
> 
> Has anyone configured AOO 4.1.10 on macOS? How did you do it?
> 
> Regards,
> Dave


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



Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
I believe the fix, which is universal, is already folded into the repos

> On Aug 25, 2021, at 5:43 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Am 06.08.21 um 12:26 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori:
>> Hello Jim, All,
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 01:41:23PM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> 
>>> Never mind that one: This one is the one: THX!
>> it still does not work, unfortunately. Quoting the rest for
>> completeness.
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> A fix would be great for OS/2.
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
>> 
>>> diff --git a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx 
>>> b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
>>> index dc67c5dc58..fc75fa9cb9 100644
>>> --- a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
>>> +++ b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
>>> @@ -131,9 +131,10 @@ inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL extractInterface(
>>> inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL any2bool( const ::com::sun::star::uno::Any & rAny )
>>> throw( ::com::sun::star::lang::IllegalArgumentException )
>>> {
>>> -   if (rAny.getValueTypeClass() == 
>>> ::com::sun::star::uno::TypeClass_BOOLEAN)
>>> +   sal_Bool sValue;
>>> +   if ( rAny >>= sValue)
>>> {
>>> -   return *(sal_Bool *)rAny.getValue();
>>> +   return sValue;
>>> }
>>> else
>>> {
>>> diff --git a/main/cppu/inc/com/sun/star/uno/Any.hxx 
>>> b/main/cppu/inc/com/sun/star/uno/Any.hxx
>>> index e1d125be82..2a38598efa 100644
>>> --- a/main/cppu/inc/com/sun/star/uno/Any.hxx
>>> +++ b/main/cppu/inc/com/sun/star/uno/Any.hxx
>>> @@ -251,9 +251,9 @@ inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL operator >>= ( Any const & 
>>> rAny, bool & value )
>>> {
>>> value = *reinterpret_cast< sal_Bool const * >(
>>>  ) != sal_False;
>>> -   return true;
>>> +   return sal_True;
>>> }
>>> -   return false;
>>> +   return sal_False;
>>> }
>>> 
>>> //__
>>> diff --git a/main/starmath/source/mathmlexport.cxx 
>>> b/main/starmath/source/mathmlexport.cxx
>>> index 3f36ff152d..00b301d0eb 100644
>>> --- a/main/starmath/source/mathmlexport.cxx
>>> +++ b/main/starmath/source/mathmlexport.cxx
>>> @@ -169,9 +169,7 @@ sal_Bool SmXMLExportWrapper::Export(SfxMedium )
>>> SvtSaveOptions aSaveOpt;
>>> OUString 
>>> sUsePrettyPrinting(RTL_CONSTASCII_USTRINGPARAM("UsePrettyPrinting"));
>>> sal_Bool bUsePrettyPrinting( bFlat || aSaveOpt.IsPrettyPrinting() );
>>> -Any aAny;
>>> -aAny.setValue( , ::getBooleanCppuType() );
>>> -xInfoSet->setPropertyValue( sUsePrettyPrinting, aAny );
>>> +xInfoSet->setPropertyValue( sUsePrettyPrinting, 
>>> uno::makeAny(bUsePrettyPrinting));
>>> 
>>> // Set base URI
>>> OUString sPropName( RTL_CONSTASCII_USTRINGPARAM("BaseURI") );
>>> diff --git a/main/sw/source/filter/xml/wrtxml.cxx 
>>> b/main/sw/source/filter/xml/wrtxml.cxx
>>> index e288bfc006..7677f86ff1 100644
>>> --- a/main/sw/source/filter/xml/wrtxml.cxx
>>> +++ b/main/sw/source/filter/xml/wrtxml.cxx
>>> @@ -207,8 +207,7 @@ pGraphicHelper = SvXMLGraphicHelper::Create( xStg,
>>> SvtSaveOptions aSaveOpt;
>>> OUString 
>>> sUsePrettyPrinting(RTL_CONSTASCII_USTRINGPARAM("UsePrettyPrinting"));
>>> sal_Bool bUsePrettyPrinting( aSaveOpt.IsPrettyPrinting() );
>>> -   aAny.setValue( , ::getBooleanCppuType() );
>>> -   xInfoSet->setPropertyValue( sUsePrettyPrinting, aAny );
>>> +   xInfoSet->setPropertyValue( sUsePrettyPrinting, 
>>> uno::makeAny(bUsePrettyPrinting));
>>> 
>>> // save show redline mode ...
>>> OUString sShowChanges(RTL_CONSTASCII_USTRINGPARAM("ShowChanges"));
>> Best regards,
> 


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



Re: Test builds AOO 4.1.11

2021-08-23 Thread Jim Jagielski
And the macOS, Linux64 and Linux32 bit builds can be found at:

https://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/AOO-4.1.11-test/

Cheers!

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



Re: Test builds AOO 4.1.11

2021-08-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
HEAD on origin/AOO41X?

> On Aug 19, 2021, at 10:08 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Am 19.08.21 um 15:56 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> Should I do macOS and Linux ones as well?
> 
> I think that would be great!
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 19, 2021, at 7:06 AM, Matthias Seidel  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> I just uploaded new AOO4111 Test Builds for Windows:
>>> 
>>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-4111-Test/
>>> 
>>> Feedback is welcome!
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>>   Matthias
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org 
>> <mailto:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org 
>> <mailto:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org>


Re: Test builds AOO 4.1.11

2021-08-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
Should I do macOS and Linux ones as well?

> On Aug 19, 2021, at 7:06 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I just uploaded new AOO4111 Test Builds for Windows:
> 
> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-4111-Test/
> 
> Feedback is welcome!
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
> 


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



Re: devtools

2021-08-12 Thread Jim Jagielski
Any other opinions or comments?

> On Aug 6, 2021, at 12:52 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> To me, it being within OpenOffice.git makes the most sense... but I'm fine 
> either way ;)
> 
>> On Aug 6, 2021, at 12:49 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>> 
>> Within /Apache/OpenOffice.git repository? Or a new 
>> /Apache/OpenOffice-devtools.git?
>> 
>> +1, especially if history is preserved.
>> 
>> Of course there would be wiki and webpages to update.
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Aug 6, 2021, at 9:31 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Our devtools repo is till under svn; should we switch it to git. It would 
>>> be nice, I think, to use on version control implementation for all our code 
>>> related repos.
>>> -
>>> 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
>> 
> 
> 
> -
> 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



Availability of Apache OpenOffice 4.2.0-Dev3(m3) developer test builds

2021-08-09 Thread Jim Jagielski
Available immediately are complimentary community binary builds
of Apache OpenOffice 4.2.0. The specific version is 4.2.0-Dev3-m3.

Please note that these are not official, GA releases of AOO 4.2.0.
Heck, they aren't even *Beta* releases. Instead, they are developer
preview test releases, to allow for more wide-spread testing of
the current state of the AOO 4.2.0 branch.

We encourage all users, or potential users, of AOO to download these
builds and try them out. Put them through real world and automated
testing and let us know how they do. YOUR FEEDBACK IS CRITICAL.

These builds can be found at:

o https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/

Thank you!

--
Jim Jagielski, on behalf of the AOO PMC

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



Re: AOO420-Dev3-m3 (Was: Re: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?)

2021-08-08 Thread Jim Jagielski
These are developer previews and not actual Releases so I don't think so. Easy 
to add though.

> On Aug 7, 2021, at 7:28 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Don't expect Windows binaries before tomorrow... ;-)
> 
> BTW: Aren't we required to give signatures and hashes on the Apache server?
> 
> Matthias
> 
> Am 06.08.21 um 16:49 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> 
>>> On Aug 6, 2021, at 10:12 AM, Matthias Seidel  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> That's c9282f5c5c ?
>> Yep. That's right!
>>> Building for Windows now. Might take some time, since I can do only
>>> single threaded build with Cygwin 3.2.0.
>>> 
>> Yikes!
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> 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: OpenOffice 4.1.10 crashes when loading .odm file

2021-08-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
The Crash Report indicates that it is the Check For Updates function that 
causes the problem. Some weirdness with serf and SSL certs.

libnss3 -> libsmime -> libnssutil3 -> libplds4

> On Aug 6, 2021, at 6:04 PM, Bouschen, Michael 
>  wrote:
> 
> 


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



Re: OpenOffice 4.1.10 crashes when loading .odm file

2021-08-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
Can you try this version:


https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/de/Apache_OpenOffice_Dev_4.2.0_MacOS_x86-64_install_de.dmg

> On Aug 6, 2021, at 4:37 PM, Michael Bouschen  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I just updated my system to macOS 11.5.1 and reinstalled OpenOffice
> 4.1.10: it still crashes.
> 
> Regards Michael
>> I'm not getting that crash, even after scrolling thru the doc, resizing the 
>> window, etc...
>> 
>>> On Aug 6, 2021, at 12:38 PM, Michael Bouschen  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Jim, 
>>> 
>>> thanks for trying.
>>> 
>>> I also see this window, but after a few more seconds OpenOffice crashes. 
>>> I figured out OpenOffice up to version 4.1.3 works, but using a version 
>>> 4.1.4 or higher produces the crash.
>>> 
>>> The only difference I see is I'm using macOS 11.5, where you have updated 
>>> to the latest macOS 11.5.1. And I'm using a german macOS (although I doubt 
>>> that this makes a difference).
>>> 
>>> Regards Michael
>>> 
>>> 
 Just tried this on my system running macOS 11.5.1 and AOO 4.1.10.
 What I did was git clone https://github.com/apache/db-jdo.git 
  and then
 opened JDO_master.odm and clicked Yes. After maybe 1-2 seconds I got this 
 window:
 
 
 
> On Aug 6, 2021, at 4:09 AM, Michael Bouschen  > wrote:
> 
> Hi
> 
> resending my message to dev@openoffice.apache.org 
>  (as proposed by Martin
> Groenescheij).
> 
> Regards Michael
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> the Apache JDO project (https://db.apache.org/jdo/ 
>> ) is using OpenOffice
>> for its specification document. We have a OpenDocument Master Document
>> JDO_master.odm and several .odt files for the chapters of the 
>> specification.
>> 
>> OpenOffice crashes after a few seconds after opening the JDO_master.odm
>> document and clicking yes on "Update all links".
>> 
>> I'm using OpenOffice 4.1.10
>> (Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.10_MacOS_x86-64_install_en-US.dmg) on a Mac with
>> BigSur version 11.5.You find the mac crash report
>> (OpenOfficeCrashReport.txt) attached below with some more details about
>> the system and the crash. The document JDO_master.odm and the other .odt
>> files may be found here:
>> https://github.com/apache/db-jdo/tree/0349ede94788be58f3ff2a439bf740a56833dee2/specification/OOO
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> I tried other OpenOffice versions: 4.1.10, 4.1.8 and 4.1.5 do crash, but
>> versions 4.1.2 and 4.1.0 work fine. 
>> 
>> I hope to get some help. For the time being i will will continue using
>> OpenOffice 4.1.2.
>> 
>> Regards Michael
> 
> 
> -
> 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


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



Re: svn commit: r49231 - /dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/en-US/

2021-08-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
I am uploading both the regular and the ./Dev/ builds... just in case there is 
something in the Dev builds themselves which causes issues

> On Aug 6, 2021, at 3:44 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Sorry, these are NOT Dev builds, compare to Dev2:
> 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev2/binaries/en-US/
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
> Am 06.08.21 um 21:36 schrieb j...@apache.org:
>> Author: jim
>> Date: Fri Aug  6 19:36:48 2021
>> New Revision: 49231
>> 
>> Log:
>> AOO 4.2.0-Dev3 builds for lang en-US
>> 
>> Added:
>>
>> dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.2.0_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz
>>(with props)
>>
>> dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.2.0_Linux_x86-64_install-rpm_en-US.tar.gz
>>(with props)
>>
>> dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.2.0_Linux_x86_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz
>>(with props)
>>
>> dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.2.0_Linux_x86_install-rpm_en-US.tar.gz
>>(with props)
>>
>> dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.2.0_MacOS_x86-64_install_en-US.dmg
>>(with props)
>> 
>> Added: 
>> dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.2.0_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz
>> ==
>> Binary file - no diff available.
>> 
>> Propchange: 
>> dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.2.0_Linux_x86-64_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz
>> --
>>svn:mime-type = application/gzip
>> 
>> Added: 
>> dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.2.0_Linux_x86-64_install-rpm_en-US.tar.gz
>> ==
>> Binary file - no diff available.
>> 
>> Propchange: 
>> dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.2.0_Linux_x86-64_install-rpm_en-US.tar.gz
>> --
>>svn:mime-type = application/gzip
>> 
>> Added: 
>> dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.2.0_Linux_x86_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz
>> ==
>> Binary file - no diff available.
>> 
>> Propchange: 
>> dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.2.0_Linux_x86_install-deb_en-US.tar.gz
>> --
>>svn:mime-type = application/gzip
>> 
>> Added: 
>> dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.2.0_Linux_x86_install-rpm_en-US.tar.gz
>> ==
>> Binary file - no diff available.
>> 
>> Propchange: 
>> dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.2.0_Linux_x86_install-rpm_en-US.tar.gz
>> --
>>svn:mime-type = application/gzip
>> 
>> Added: 
>> dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.2.0_MacOS_x86-64_install_en-US.dmg
>> ==
>> Binary file - no diff available.
>> 
>> Propchange: 
>> dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/binaries/en-US/Apache_OpenOffice_4.2.0_MacOS_x86-64_install_en-US.dmg
>> --
>>svn:mime-type = application/zlib
>> 
>> 
> 


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



Re: devtools

2021-08-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
To me, it being within OpenOffice.git makes the most sense... but I'm fine 
either way ;)

> On Aug 6, 2021, at 12:49 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
> Within /Apache/OpenOffice.git repository? Or a new 
> /Apache/OpenOffice-devtools.git?
> 
> +1, especially if history is preserved.
> 
> Of course there would be wiki and webpages to update.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Aug 6, 2021, at 9:31 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>> 
>> Our devtools repo is till under svn; should we switch it to git. It would 
>> be nice, I think, to use on version control implementation for all our code 
>> related repos.
>> -
>> 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
> 


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



Re: OpenOffice 4.1.10 crashes when loading .odm file

2021-08-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
I'm not getting that crash, even after scrolling thru the doc, resizing the 
window, etc...

> On Aug 6, 2021, at 12:38 PM, Michael Bouschen  wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim, 
> 
> thanks for trying.
> 
> I also see this window, but after a few more seconds OpenOffice crashes. 
> I figured out OpenOffice up to version 4.1.3 works, but using a version 4.1.4 
> or higher produces the crash.
> 
> The only difference I see is I'm using macOS 11.5, where you have updated to 
> the latest macOS 11.5.1. And I'm using a german macOS (although I doubt that 
> this makes a difference).
> 
> Regards Michael
> 
> 
>> Just tried this on my system running macOS 11.5.1 and AOO 4.1.10.
>> What I did was git clone https://github.com/apache/db-jdo.git 
>>  and then
>> opened JDO_master.odm and clicked Yes. After maybe 1-2 seconds I got this 
>> window:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 6, 2021, at 4:09 AM, Michael Bouschen >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi
>>> 
>>> resending my message to dev@openoffice.apache.org 
>>>  (as proposed by Martin
>>> Groenescheij).
>>> 
>>> Regards Michael
>>> 
 Hi,
 
 the Apache JDO project (https://db.apache.org/jdo/ 
 ) is using OpenOffice
 for its specification document. We have a OpenDocument Master Document
 JDO_master.odm and several .odt files for the chapters of the 
 specification.
 
 OpenOffice crashes after a few seconds after opening the JDO_master.odm
 document and clicking yes on "Update all links".
 
 I'm using OpenOffice 4.1.10
 (Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.10_MacOS_x86-64_install_en-US.dmg) on a Mac with
 BigSur version 11.5.You find the mac crash report
 (OpenOfficeCrashReport.txt) attached below with some more details about
 the system and the crash. The document JDO_master.odm and the other .odt
 files may be found here:
 https://github.com/apache/db-jdo/tree/0349ede94788be58f3ff2a439bf740a56833dee2/specification/OOO
  
 
 
 I tried other OpenOffice versions: 4.1.10, 4.1.8 and 4.1.5 do crash, but
 versions 4.1.2 and 4.1.0 work fine. 
 
 I hope to get some help. For the time being i will will continue using
 OpenOffice 4.1.2.
 
 Regards Michael
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org 
>>> 
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org 
>>> 
> 



devtools

2021-08-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
Our devtools repo is till under svn; should we switch it to git. It would be 
nice, I think, to use on version control implementation for all our code 
related repos.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: AOO420-Dev3-m3 (Was: Re: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?)

2021-08-06 Thread Jim Jagielski



> On Aug 6, 2021, at 10:12 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> That's c9282f5c5c ?

Yep. That's right!
> 
> Building for Windows now. Might take some time, since I can do only
> single threaded build with Cygwin 3.2.0.
> 

Yikes!


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



AOO420-Dev3-m3 (Was: Re: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?)

2021-08-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
I have tagged AOO420-Dev3-m3 and am working on the builds.

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



Re: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?

2021-08-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
I think I will tag tomorrow morning and start some builds :-)

> On Aug 3, 2021, at 12:48 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Ready, when you are! ;-)
> 
> Am 03.08.21 um 18:44 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> I'd like to spend some time on the ODS bug on macOS:
>> 
>> Executive Summary (TL;DR ;-)
>> 
>> A boolean setting is not recognized as a boolean. An exception is
>> thrown when accessing it. The exception is swallowed and the XML
>> files' contents are not written.
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 3, 2021, at 5:13 AM, Matthias Seidel  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I would be able to upload the Windows binaries now...
>>> 
>>> @Jim: Can you create a tag on GitHub and provide macOS and Linux builds?
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>>   Matthias
>>> 
>>> Am 01.08.21 um 23:30 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> Just FYI: I just build a AOO420-Dev3 for Windows (as a test) based on
>>>> Git hash 494e99f846.
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> 
>>>>   Matthias
>>>> 
>>>> Am 31.07.21 um 17:26 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Next weekend? Any idea?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Matthias
>>>>> 
>>>>> Am 29.07.21 um 15:21 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Am 27.07.21 um 19:11 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori:
>>>>>>> Hello All,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 06:56:25PM +0200, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Am 27.07.21 um 17:44 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>>>> Snapshot works for me
>>>>>>>> Great! What do others think?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Commits are low at the moment, so we could start any time...
>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>> I would have time this weekend...
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>   Matthias
>>>>>> 
>> 
> 


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



Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
Never mind that one: This one is the one: THX!

diff --git a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx 
b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
index dc67c5dc58..fc75fa9cb9 100644
--- a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
+++ b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
@@ -131,9 +131,10 @@ inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL extractInterface(
 inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL any2bool( const ::com::sun::star::uno::Any & rAny )
throw( ::com::sun::star::lang::IllegalArgumentException )
 {
-   if (rAny.getValueTypeClass() == 
::com::sun::star::uno::TypeClass_BOOLEAN)
+   sal_Bool sValue;
+   if ( rAny >>= sValue)
{
-   return *(sal_Bool *)rAny.getValue();
+   return sValue;
}
else
{
diff --git a/main/cppu/inc/com/sun/star/uno/Any.hxx 
b/main/cppu/inc/com/sun/star/uno/Any.hxx
index e1d125be82..2a38598efa 100644
--- a/main/cppu/inc/com/sun/star/uno/Any.hxx
+++ b/main/cppu/inc/com/sun/star/uno/Any.hxx
@@ -251,9 +251,9 @@ inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL operator >>= ( Any const & rAny, 
bool & value )
{
value = *reinterpret_cast< sal_Bool const * >(
  ) != sal_False;
-   return true;
+   return sal_True;
}
-   return false;
+   return sal_False;
 }
 
 
//__
diff --git a/main/starmath/source/mathmlexport.cxx 
b/main/starmath/source/mathmlexport.cxx
index 3f36ff152d..00b301d0eb 100644
--- a/main/starmath/source/mathmlexport.cxx
+++ b/main/starmath/source/mathmlexport.cxx
@@ -169,9 +169,7 @@ sal_Bool SmXMLExportWrapper::Export(SfxMedium )
 SvtSaveOptions aSaveOpt;
 OUString 
sUsePrettyPrinting(RTL_CONSTASCII_USTRINGPARAM("UsePrettyPrinting"));
 sal_Bool bUsePrettyPrinting( bFlat || aSaveOpt.IsPrettyPrinting() );
-Any aAny;
-aAny.setValue( , ::getBooleanCppuType() );
-xInfoSet->setPropertyValue( sUsePrettyPrinting, aAny );
+xInfoSet->setPropertyValue( sUsePrettyPrinting, 
uno::makeAny(bUsePrettyPrinting));
 
 // Set base URI
 OUString sPropName( RTL_CONSTASCII_USTRINGPARAM("BaseURI") );
diff --git a/main/sw/source/filter/xml/wrtxml.cxx 
b/main/sw/source/filter/xml/wrtxml.cxx
index e288bfc006..7677f86ff1 100644
--- a/main/sw/source/filter/xml/wrtxml.cxx
+++ b/main/sw/source/filter/xml/wrtxml.cxx
@@ -207,8 +207,7 @@ pGraphicHelper = SvXMLGraphicHelper::Create( xStg,
SvtSaveOptions aSaveOpt;
OUString 
sUsePrettyPrinting(RTL_CONSTASCII_USTRINGPARAM("UsePrettyPrinting"));
sal_Bool bUsePrettyPrinting( aSaveOpt.IsPrettyPrinting() );
-   aAny.setValue( , ::getBooleanCppuType() );
-   xInfoSet->setPropertyValue( sUsePrettyPrinting, aAny );
+   xInfoSet->setPropertyValue( sUsePrettyPrinting, 
uno::makeAny(bUsePrettyPrinting));
 
 // save show redline mode ...
OUString sShowChanges(RTL_CONSTASCII_USTRINGPARAM("ShowChanges"));



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



Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
Can you try this:

diff --git a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx 
b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
index dc67c5dc58..fc75fa9cb9 100644
--- a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
+++ b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
@@ -131,9 +131,10 @@ inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL extractInterface(
 inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL any2bool( const ::com::sun::star::uno::Any & rAny )
throw( ::com::sun::star::lang::IllegalArgumentException )
 {
-   if (rAny.getValueTypeClass() == 
::com::sun::star::uno::TypeClass_BOOLEAN)
+   sal_Bool sValue;
+   if ( rAny >>= sValue)
{
-   return *(sal_Bool *)rAny.getValue();
+   return sValue;
}
else
{
diff --git a/main/cppu/inc/com/sun/star/uno/Any.hxx 
b/main/cppu/inc/com/sun/star/uno/Any.hxx
index e1d125be82..2a38598efa 100644
--- a/main/cppu/inc/com/sun/star/uno/Any.hxx
+++ b/main/cppu/inc/com/sun/star/uno/Any.hxx
@@ -251,9 +251,9 @@ inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL operator >>= ( Any const & rAny, 
bool & value )
{
value = *reinterpret_cast< sal_Bool const * >(
  ) != sal_False;
-   return true;
+   return sal_True;
}
-   return false;
+   return sal_False;
 }
 
 
//__
diff --git a/main/xmloff/source/core/xmlexp.cxx 
b/main/xmloff/source/core/xmlexp.cxx
index 4a867ca64c..2b63c0f991 100644
--- a/main/xmloff/source/core/xmlexp.cxx
+++ b/main/xmloff/source/core/xmlexp.cxx
@@ -699,7 +699,7 @@ void SAL_CALL SvXMLExport::setSourceDocument( const 
uno::Reference< lang::XCompo
OUString 
sUsePrettyPrinting(RTL_CONSTASCII_USTRINGPARAM(XML_USEPRETTYPRINTING));
if 
(xPropertySetInfo->hasPropertyByName(sUsePrettyPrinting))
{
-   uno::Any aAny = 
mxExportInfo->getPropertyValue(sUsePrettyPrinting);
+   uno::Any aAny = 
mxExportInfo->getPropertyValue(bUsePrettyPrinting);
if (::cppu::any2bool(aAny))
mnExportFlags |= EXPORT_PRETTY;
else


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



Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
diff --git a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx 
b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
index dc67c5dc58..8ea41ec95f 100644
--- a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
+++ b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
@@ -131,16 +131,22 @@ inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL extractInterface(
 inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL any2bool( const ::com::sun::star::uno::Any & rAny )
throw( ::com::sun::star::lang::IllegalArgumentException )
 {
-   if (rAny.getValueTypeClass() == 
::com::sun::star::uno::TypeClass_BOOLEAN)
+   bool bValue;
+   sal_Bool sBValue;
+   if ( rAny >>= bValue )
{
-   return *(sal_Bool *)rAny.getValue();
+   return (sal_Bool)bValue;
+   }
+   else if ( rAny >>= sBValue )
+   {
+   return sBValue;
}
else
{
sal_Int32 nValue = 0;
if (! (rAny >>= nValue))
throw 
::com::sun::star::lang::IllegalArgumentException();
-   return nValue != 0;
+   return (sal_Bool)(nValue != 0);
}
 }
 


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



Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-04 Thread Jim Jagielski


> On Aug 4, 2021, at 9:23 AM, Arrigo Marchiori  wrote:
> 
> Hello Jim,
> 
> On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 08:09:11AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> 
>>> On Aug 4, 2021, at 7:54 AM, Arrigo Marchiori  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello Jim,
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 07:39:14AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Can you apply the below to your catalina branch build and see how it works?
>>>> 
>>>> diff --git a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx 
>>>> b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
>>>> index dc67c5dc58..97c4d080f4 100644
>>>> --- a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
>>>> +++ b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
>>>> @@ -131,16 +131,22 @@ inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL extractInterface(
>>>> inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL any2bool( const ::com::sun::star::uno::Any & rAny 
>>>> )
>>>>throw( ::com::sun::star::lang::IllegalArgumentException )
>>>> {
>>>> -  if (rAny.getValueTypeClass() == 
>>>> ::com::sun::star::uno::TypeClass_BOOLEAN)
>>>> +  bool bValue;
>>>> +  sal_Bool sBValue;
>>>> +  if ( rAny >>= bValue )
>>>>{
>>>> -  return *(sal_Bool *)rAny.getValue();
>>>> +  return *(sal_Bool *)bValue; // Why not just 
>>>> (sal_Bool)bValue ?
>>> 
>>> Are you sure about returning "*(sal_Bool *)bValue"? Are we not
>>> treating bValue as a pointer here, while it is a bool?
>>> To me it looks like returning either *0 or *1...
>>> 
>> 
>> Well, 2 things:
>> 
>>  1. As you can see, the format is the exact that we've had all along
>>  2. We cast as a pointer to a sal_Bool and then get the contents of the 
>> pointer (ie: re return the deref of the pointer, not the pointer
> 
> Yes, but in your patch we are substituting a call to rAny.getValue(),
> that returns `const void *` with `bValue` that is `bool`.
> http://opengrok.openoffice.org/xref/aoo41x/main/cppu/inc/com/sun/star/uno/Any.h?r=24f6443d#163
>  
> <http://opengrok.openoffice.org/xref/aoo41x/main/cppu/inc/com/sun/star/uno/Any.h?r=24f6443d#163>
> 
> For this reason IMHO the cast makes sense the first time and not the
> second...
> 
> I'd rather do:
> 
>  return *(sal_Bool *)
>  ^
>> Why we do that (cast as a pointer and then deref) is curious, hence the 
>> comment
> 
> I totally agree on this. It looks like type punning.
> 

IMO, we should just return (sal_Bool) bValue



Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-04 Thread Jim Jagielski


> On Aug 4, 2021, at 7:54 AM, Arrigo Marchiori  wrote:
> 
> Hello Jim,
> 
> On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 07:39:14AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> 
>> Can you apply the below to your catalina branch build and see how it works?
>> 
>> diff --git a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx 
>> b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
>> index dc67c5dc58..97c4d080f4 100644
>> --- a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
>> +++ b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
>> @@ -131,16 +131,22 @@ inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL extractInterface(
>> inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL any2bool( const ::com::sun::star::uno::Any & rAny )
>>  throw( ::com::sun::star::lang::IllegalArgumentException )
>> {
>> -if (rAny.getValueTypeClass() == 
>> ::com::sun::star::uno::TypeClass_BOOLEAN)
>> +bool bValue;
>> +sal_Bool sBValue;
>> +if ( rAny >>= bValue )
>>  {
>> -return *(sal_Bool *)rAny.getValue();
>> +return *(sal_Bool *)bValue; // Why not just 
>> (sal_Bool)bValue ?
> 
> Are you sure about returning "*(sal_Bool *)bValue"? Are we not
> treating bValue as a pointer here, while it is a bool?
> To me it looks like returning either *0 or *1...
> 

Well, 2 things:

  1. As you can see, the format is the exact that we've had all along
  2. We cast as a pointer to a sal_Bool and then get the contents of the 
pointer (ie: re return the deref of the pointer, not the pointer

Why we do that (cast as a pointer and then deref) is curious, hence the comment

> Thank you in advance and best regards,
> -- 
> Arrigo
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org 
> <mailto:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org 
> <mailto:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org>


Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-04 Thread Jim Jagielski
Can you apply the below to your catalina branch build and see how it works?

diff --git a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx 
b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
index dc67c5dc58..97c4d080f4 100644
--- a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
+++ b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
@@ -131,16 +131,22 @@ inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL extractInterface(
 inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL any2bool( const ::com::sun::star::uno::Any & rAny )
throw( ::com::sun::star::lang::IllegalArgumentException )
 {
-   if (rAny.getValueTypeClass() == 
::com::sun::star::uno::TypeClass_BOOLEAN)
+   bool bValue;
+   sal_Bool sBValue;
+   if ( rAny >>= bValue )
{
-   return *(sal_Bool *)rAny.getValue();
+   return *(sal_Bool *)bValue; // Why not just 
(sal_Bool)bValue ?
+   }
+   else if ( rAny >>= sBValue )
+   {
+   return sBValue;
}
else
{
sal_Int32 nValue = 0;
if (! (rAny >>= nValue))
throw 
::com::sun::star::lang::IllegalArgumentException();
-   return nValue != 0;
+   return (sal_Bool)(nValue != 0);
}
 }
 


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



Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
It does... 

> On Aug 3, 2021, at 1:25 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Am 03.08.21 um 19:21 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> Thanks... but that seems based on some older version of AOO41X... or am I 
>> missing something?
> 
> Yes, we had this problem with AOO41X. I don't know if it also occurs in
> AOO42X.
> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 3, 2021, at 1:06 PM, Matthias Seidel  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Jim,
>>> 
>>> Am 03.08.21 um 18:42 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>> Wow. This is weird, but also kind of makes sense since it seems so very, 
>>>> very platform and SDK sensitive.
>>>> 
>>>> Someone remind me what the catalina branch is and how it relates to trunk 
>>>> and AOO42X, please :-)
>>> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/tree/catalina 
>>> <https://github.com/apache/openoffice/tree/catalina>
>>>> 
>>>>> On Jul 27, 2021, at 4:21 PM, Arrigo Marchiori  
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hello All,
>>>>> 
>>>>> resurrecting an old thread.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 02:19:44PM -, Yuri Dario wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> i can build AOO 4.2.x without problems with gcc 6.3 which is in Debian 9
>>>>>>> I had problems to build it at Debian 10 with gcc 8.3.
>>>>>> here I have a 4.2 build done under Manjaro with gcc 9.2: saving a 
>>>>>> diagram 
>>>>>> in ods format works fine, so it doesn't seems to be a compiler issue;
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> How is XML writing done with ODS files?
>>>>> It's... complicated ;-)
>>>>> 
>>>>> I tried to dig deeper into this problem, as I could reproduce it with
>>>>> the "catalina" branch on our Mac Mini.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Executive Summary (TL;DR ;-)
>>>>> 
>>>>> A boolean setting is not recognized as a boolean. An exception is
>>>>> thrown when accessing it. The exception is swallowed and the XML
>>>>> files' contents are not written.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Details
>>>>> ===
>>>>> Method XMLFilter::impl_Export() in file
>>>>> main/chart2/source/model/filter/XMLFilter.cxx:599 [1] has the
>>>>> responsibility to output the XML files that describe the chart. It
>>>>> sets some common options (beans::XPropertySet xInfoSet), and appends
>>>>> them to uno::Sequence aFilterProperties. This sequence, together with
>>>>> other pieces of information, is passed to the three invocations of
>>>>> method XMLFilter::impl_ExportStream(), that starts at line 754.
>>>>> Each invocation should give the contents of one XML file.
>>>>> But in fact they do nothing.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Each invocation of method XMLFilter::impl_ExportStream() gets up to
>>>>> line:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 810:  xExporter->setSourceDocument( m_xSourceDoc );
>>>>> 
>>>>> This method raises an exception, that is caught below at line 820. The
>>>>> return code "nWarning" is never set to anything but zero, therefore
>>>>> the method returns (line 824) having failed its task, but reporting
>>>>> success.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The question is: why does the above method setSourceDocument() throw
>>>>> an exception? Let's look into it. I am not sure it is called directly
>>>>> due to inheritance and virtual methods, but in the end it is [2]
>>>>> SvXMLExport::setSourceDocument() in file
>>>>> xmloff/source/core/xmlexp.cxx:676
>>>>> 
>>>>> The exception is thrown at a seemingly harmless line:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 703:  if (::cppu::any2bool(aAny))
>>>>> 
>>>>> because for some reason, that "aAny" value, returned by method
>>>>> beans::XPropertySetInfo::getPropertyValue(), is not a bool, and
>>>>> function any2bool() throws because it cannot decode it.
>>>>> 
>>>>> But that property _was_ set as a bool by method
>>>>> XMLFilter::impl_Export(), in file
>>>>> main/chart2/source/model/filter/XMLFilter.cxx, at the beginning of
>>>>

Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
Thanks... but that seems based on some older version of AOO41X... or am I 
missing something?

> On Aug 3, 2021, at 1:06 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Am 03.08.21 um 18:42 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> Wow. This is weird, but also kind of makes sense since it seems so very, 
>> very platform and SDK sensitive.
>> 
>> Someone remind me what the catalina branch is and how it relates to trunk 
>> and AOO42X, please :-)
> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/tree/catalina 
> <https://github.com/apache/openoffice/tree/catalina>
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jul 27, 2021, at 4:21 PM, Arrigo Marchiori  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello All,
>>> 
>>> resurrecting an old thread.
>>> 
>>> On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 02:19:44PM -, Yuri Dario wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>>> i can build AOO 4.2.x without problems with gcc 6.3 which is in Debian 9
>>>>> I had problems to build it at Debian 10 with gcc 8.3.
>>>> here I have a 4.2 build done under Manjaro with gcc 9.2: saving a diagram 
>>>> in ods format works fine, so it doesn't seems to be a compiler issue;
>>>> 
>>>> How is XML writing done with ODS files?
>>> It's... complicated ;-)
>>> 
>>> I tried to dig deeper into this problem, as I could reproduce it with
>>> the "catalina" branch on our Mac Mini.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Executive Summary (TL;DR ;-)
>>> 
>>> A boolean setting is not recognized as a boolean. An exception is
>>> thrown when accessing it. The exception is swallowed and the XML
>>> files' contents are not written.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Details
>>> ===
>>> Method XMLFilter::impl_Export() in file
>>> main/chart2/source/model/filter/XMLFilter.cxx:599 [1] has the
>>> responsibility to output the XML files that describe the chart. It
>>> sets some common options (beans::XPropertySet xInfoSet), and appends
>>> them to uno::Sequence aFilterProperties. This sequence, together with
>>> other pieces of information, is passed to the three invocations of
>>> method XMLFilter::impl_ExportStream(), that starts at line 754.
>>> Each invocation should give the contents of one XML file.
>>> But in fact they do nothing.
>>> 
>>> Each invocation of method XMLFilter::impl_ExportStream() gets up to
>>> line:
>>> 
>>> 810:  xExporter->setSourceDocument( m_xSourceDoc );
>>> 
>>> This method raises an exception, that is caught below at line 820. The
>>> return code "nWarning" is never set to anything but zero, therefore
>>> the method returns (line 824) having failed its task, but reporting
>>> success.
>>> 
>>> The question is: why does the above method setSourceDocument() throw
>>> an exception? Let's look into it. I am not sure it is called directly
>>> due to inheritance and virtual methods, but in the end it is [2]
>>> SvXMLExport::setSourceDocument() in file
>>> xmloff/source/core/xmlexp.cxx:676
>>> 
>>> The exception is thrown at a seemingly harmless line:
>>> 
>>> 703:  if (::cppu::any2bool(aAny))
>>> 
>>> because for some reason, that "aAny" value, returned by method
>>> beans::XPropertySetInfo::getPropertyValue(), is not a bool, and
>>> function any2bool() throws because it cannot decode it.
>>> 
>>> But that property _was_ set as a bool by method
>>> XMLFilter::impl_Export(), in file
>>> main/chart2/source/model/filter/XMLFilter.cxx, at the beginning of
>>> this explanation:
>>> 
>>> 691:  xInfoSet->setPropertyValue( sUsePrettyPrinting, uno::makeAny( 
>>> bUsePrettyPrinting ) );
>>> 
>>> References:
>>> 
>>> 1: 
>>> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/blob/f1593045b154fade3a67d5f1771054eccc807e3f/main/chart2/source/model/filter/XMLFilter.cxx#L599
>>> 
>>> 2: 
>>> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/blob/f1593045b154fade3a67d5f1771054eccc807e3f/main/xmloff/source/core/xmlexp.cxx#L676
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Questions and comments
>>> ==
>>> Why does ::cppu::any2bool(aAny) not recognize a value constructed as
>>> uno::makeAny( bUsePrettyPrinting ) ?
>>> 
>>> Or is the beans::XPropertySet the culprit?
>>> 
>>> Both CXX files pointed above have not been touched for at least 8
>>> years. Why are

Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
Hmmm... this seems to indicate that it is something in the UNO code itself 
which may be the issue, and specifically about exception handling... possibly 
some weirdness in the assembly part.

That narrows things down... great work Arrigo!
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?

2021-08-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
I'd like to spend some time on the ODS bug on macOS:

Executive Summary (TL;DR ;-)

A boolean setting is not recognized as a boolean. An exception is
thrown when accessing it. The exception is swallowed and the XML
files' contents are not written.


> On Aug 3, 2021, at 5:13 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> I would be able to upload the Windows binaries now...
> 
> @Jim: Can you create a tag on GitHub and provide macOS and Linux builds?
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
> Am 01.08.21 um 23:30 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Just FYI: I just build a AOO420-Dev3 for Windows (as a test) based on
>> Git hash 494e99f846.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>>Matthias
>> 
>> Am 31.07.21 um 17:26 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> Next weekend? Any idea?
>>> 
>>> Matthias
>>> 
>>> Am 29.07.21 um 15:21 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> Am 27.07.21 um 19:11 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori:
>>>>> Hello All,
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 06:56:25PM +0200, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Am 27.07.21 um 17:44 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>> Snapshot works for me
>>>>>> Great! What do others think?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Commits are low at the moment, so we could start any time...
>>>>> +1
>>>> I would have time this weekend...
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> 
>>>>Matthias
>>>> 
> 



Re: [OS/2 and macOS] saving ODS with chart

2021-08-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
Wow. This is weird, but also kind of makes sense since it seems so very, very 
platform and SDK sensitive.

Someone remind me what the catalina branch is and how it relates to trunk and 
AOO42X, please :-)


> On Jul 27, 2021, at 4:21 PM, Arrigo Marchiori  wrote:
> 
> Hello All,
> 
> resurrecting an old thread.
> 
> On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 02:19:44PM -, Yuri Dario wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>>> i can build AOO 4.2.x without problems with gcc 6.3 which is in Debian 9
>>> I had problems to build it at Debian 10 with gcc 8.3.
>> 
>> here I have a 4.2 build done under Manjaro with gcc 9.2: saving a diagram 
>> in ods format works fine, so it doesn't seems to be a compiler issue;
>> 
>> How is XML writing done with ODS files?
> 
> It's... complicated ;-)
> 
> I tried to dig deeper into this problem, as I could reproduce it with
> the "catalina" branch on our Mac Mini.
> 
> 
> Executive Summary (TL;DR ;-)
> 
> A boolean setting is not recognized as a boolean. An exception is
> thrown when accessing it. The exception is swallowed and the XML
> files' contents are not written.
> 
> 
> Details
> ===
> Method XMLFilter::impl_Export() in file
> main/chart2/source/model/filter/XMLFilter.cxx:599 [1] has the
> responsibility to output the XML files that describe the chart. It
> sets some common options (beans::XPropertySet xInfoSet), and appends
> them to uno::Sequence aFilterProperties. This sequence, together with
> other pieces of information, is passed to the three invocations of
> method XMLFilter::impl_ExportStream(), that starts at line 754.
> Each invocation should give the contents of one XML file.
> But in fact they do nothing.
> 
> Each invocation of method XMLFilter::impl_ExportStream() gets up to
> line:
> 
> 810:  xExporter->setSourceDocument( m_xSourceDoc );
> 
> This method raises an exception, that is caught below at line 820. The
> return code "nWarning" is never set to anything but zero, therefore
> the method returns (line 824) having failed its task, but reporting
> success.
> 
> The question is: why does the above method setSourceDocument() throw
> an exception? Let's look into it. I am not sure it is called directly
> due to inheritance and virtual methods, but in the end it is [2]
> SvXMLExport::setSourceDocument() in file
> xmloff/source/core/xmlexp.cxx:676
> 
> The exception is thrown at a seemingly harmless line:
> 
> 703:  if (::cppu::any2bool(aAny))
> 
> because for some reason, that "aAny" value, returned by method
> beans::XPropertySetInfo::getPropertyValue(), is not a bool, and
> function any2bool() throws because it cannot decode it.
> 
> But that property _was_ set as a bool by method
> XMLFilter::impl_Export(), in file
> main/chart2/source/model/filter/XMLFilter.cxx, at the beginning of
> this explanation:
> 
> 691:  xInfoSet->setPropertyValue( sUsePrettyPrinting, uno::makeAny( 
> bUsePrettyPrinting ) );
> 
> References:
> 
> 1: 
> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/blob/f1593045b154fade3a67d5f1771054eccc807e3f/main/chart2/source/model/filter/XMLFilter.cxx#L599
> 
> 2: 
> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/blob/f1593045b154fade3a67d5f1771054eccc807e3f/main/xmloff/source/core/xmlexp.cxx#L676
> 
> 
> Questions and comments
> ==
> Why does ::cppu::any2bool(aAny) not recognize a value constructed as
> uno::makeAny( bUsePrettyPrinting ) ?
> 
> Or is the beans::XPropertySet the culprit?
> 
> Both CXX files pointed above have not been touched for at least 8
> years. Why are they failing now? And why are they failing on a
> seemingly trivial issue like a boolean property?
> 
> Maybe AOO42X introduced some changes in the overall management of
> properties, "Any" objects and the like, that could have more or less
> inadvertently solved this issue? Has anyone reproduced the problem
> with AOO42X or trunk?
> 
> I would tend to blame the overall system because of the loads of
> warnings that are emitted by clang 12 when it compiles AOO41X.
> 
> I don't know if it's worth the effort to further look into this, or
> instead, just leave AOO41X working with older compilers and move
> forward with AOO42X.
> 
> Comments, questions, criticism are welcome!
> 
> Best regards,
> -- 
> Arrigo
> 
> -
> 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: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?

2021-07-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
Snapshot works for me

> On Jul 23, 2021, at 10:43 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Am 16.07.21 um 13:39 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> I'm ready for a dev3...
> 
> That's great!
> 
> Are there any patches in the pipeline or do we want to do a "snapshot",
> maybe with the latest translations?
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
>> 
>>> On Jun 29, 2021, at 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Keith,
>>> 
>>> Am 30.06.21 um 01:17 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>> On Tue, 29 Jun 2021 11:54:13 +0200, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Keith,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Am 26.06.21 um 19:01 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>>>> On Sat, 26 Jun 2021 16:55:52 +0200, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 3 month later, I assume there is no interest in releasing a Dev3?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>   Matthias
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Mathias;
>>>>>> Given the changes in Bugzilla I believe that it is time for a dev 3
>>>>>> build.
>>>>> Dev3 would be a "snapshot" of what is in our code. We could release it
>>>>> at any time. Maybe we want to do a bit of cleanup before and update the
>>>>> translations.
>>>>>> We really also need to either start working on the Release Blockers or
>>>>>> seriously look at pushing some of them off to a later release or we
>>>>>> will never get a 4.2 Release.
>>>>> Definitely!
>>>>> 
>>>>> But I think the remaining release blockers are all valid for this
>>>>> release. So we should now concentrate on them.
>>>>> 
>>>> What really has me concerned at this point is that we have 253 issues that 
>>>> are tagged for 4.2.0. This is an unwieldy number of issues to deal with 
>>>> given the resources that we have for QA.
>>> Most of them are from the time when trunk=4.2.0
>>> 
>>>> I am just not sure where we would want to set the bar as far as reducing 
>>>> that 253 to a reasonable number.
>>> Feel free to adjust them to trunk/4.5.0
>>> 
>>> We should concentrate on the Release Blocker. That is work enough.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>>   Matthias
>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Keith
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> We need 4.2.0 as a basis for refreshed code and translations.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Matthias
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Keith
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Am 23.03.21 um 16:54 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I would suggest we build the same language set as in Dev 2.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> That means 41+5 languages:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/devtools/build-scripts/
>>>> 4.2.0-
>>>>>> Dev2/wntmsci/Pack-dev.lst
>>>>>>>> @Mechtilde: What about new Pootle templates? We had a lot of string
>>>>>>>> changes...
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>   Matthias
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Am 23.03.21 um 16:03 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>>>> In an effort to save some time and resources, can we confirm on
>>>>>>>>> whether or not we are building the full language set?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 20, 2021, at 2:04 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I have created the directory structure for Dev3:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>  Matthias
>>>>>>>>&g

Re: catalina branch waiting for reviews [Was: [Mini] Setup of development environment]

2021-07-20 Thread Jim Jagielski



> On Jul 19, 2021, at 10:26 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> People need macOS builds more frequently to test.
> 

Agreed. But every time I seem to encourage a test macOS build, it seems that 
people want to hold off...
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: catalina branch waiting for reviews

2021-07-20 Thread Jim Jagielski
I thought that more recent systems were what the 4.2.x... branch was for.

> On Jul 19, 2021, at 10:46 AM, Arrigo Marchiori  
> wrote:
> 
> Hello Jim,
> 
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 10:14:03AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> 
>> What is wrong w/ using the build stuff that we have used for years?
> 
> The oldest system I have on my hands now is our shared Mini with
> Catalina. I tried to install Xcode 7 there, but it did not seem to
> work.
> 
> I thought that allowing more recent systems to build AOO41X could help
> the overall development of AOO. Given the fact that no edits to the
> code were necessary, I am proposing this set of changes.
> 
> The fact that Calc charts disappear from this build is IMHO
> encouraging, because it gives more people (including myself) the
> possibility to look into this problem.
> 
> The goal of these changes must be to allow newer systems to build
> AOO41X, but without breaking things in any way for the _current_
> accepted configuration. Unfortunately, I cannot test that, so I must
> rely on someone else's tests.
> 
> _If_ we are interested, of course! If not... I just learned something
> about macOS. :-) Same as my previous attempt at updating the Visual
> Studio version, that ended up with just me learning some Windows
> development.
> 
> I hope I could explain myself clearly. Any comments/criticism
> are welcome!
> 
>>> On Jul 18, 2021, at 9:00 AM, Arrigo Marchiori  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dear All,
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 03:27:54PM +0200, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Dear All,
>>>> 
>>>> I just committed the "catalina" branch:
>>>> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/tree/catalina
> 
> [...]
> 
> -- 
> Arrigo
> 
> -
> 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: catalina branch waiting for reviews [Was: [Mini] Setup of development environment]

2021-07-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
What is wrong w/ using the build stuff that we have used for years?

> On Jul 18, 2021, at 9:00 AM, Arrigo Marchiori  wrote:
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 03:27:54PM +0200, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
> 
>> Dear All,
>> 
>> I just committed the "catalina" branch:
>> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/tree/catalina
>> 
>> The required environment variables on our Mac Mini are the following:
>> 
>> export LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8
>> export LANG=en_US.UTF-8
>> export 
>> PATH=${HOME}/bin:/opt/local/bin:/opt/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin:$PATH
>> export LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/local/lib
>> export C_INCLUDE_PATH=/usr/local/include
>> export CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH=/usr/local/include
>> export MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET=10.7 
>> export 
>> SDKROOT=/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Platforms/MacOSX.platform/Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.11.sdk
>> export CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -mmacosx-version-min=10.7 -isysroot $SDKROOT" 
>> export CXXFLAGS="$CXXFLAGS -mmacosx-version-min=10.7 -isysroot $SDKROOT"
>> export LDFLAGS="$LDFLAGS -mmacosx-version-min=10.7 -isysroot $SDKROOT"
>> export PKG_CONFIG_PATH=/usr/local/lib/pkgconfig
>> 
>> I am testing the branch under Linux, and next Windows if I will find
>> time, to make sure I did not break anything.
> 
> I could build the branch successfully under Linux and Windows.
> 
>> Reviews are very welcome.
> 
> Anyone with a Mac is invited to kindly test this build:
> http://home.apache.org/~ardovm/openoffice/catalina/2021-07-18/
> 
> I opened a PR on GitHub:
> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/135
> that gives a clear overview of all the edits.
> 
> The following note remains valid:
> 
>>> I met a problem with the writerfilter module. It was given by the
>>> proposed libxml and libxslt pair by the build script [1].
>>> The problem was reported here: [2].
>>> 
>>> Solution: use libxslt 1.34 instead of 1.33.
>>> Let's not forget to update the build script [1].
>>> 
>>> References:
>>> 
>>>  1: 
>>> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/devtools/build-scripts/4.1.10/unxmacos/build_aoo64bit_on_macos.sh?view=markup
>>> 
>>>  2: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libxml2/-/issues/66
> 
> Best regards,
> -- 
> Arrigo
> 
> -
> 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: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?

2021-07-16 Thread Jim Jagielski
I'm ready for a dev3...

> On Jun 29, 2021, at 7:37 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Keith,
> 
> Am 30.06.21 um 01:17 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>> On Tue, 29 Jun 2021 11:54:13 +0200, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Keith,
>>> 
>>> Am 26.06.21 um 19:01 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>> On Sat, 26 Jun 2021 16:55:52 +0200, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 3 month later, I assume there is no interest in releasing a Dev3?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> 
>>>>>Matthias
>>>>> 
>>>> Mathias;
>>>> Given the changes in Bugzilla I believe that it is time for a dev 3
>>>> build.
>>> Dev3 would be a "snapshot" of what is in our code. We could release it
>>> at any time. Maybe we want to do a bit of cleanup before and update the
>>> translations.
>>>> We really also need to either start working on the Release Blockers or
>>>> seriously look at pushing some of them off to a later release or we
>>>> will never get a 4.2 Release.
>>> Definitely!
>>> 
>>> But I think the remaining release blockers are all valid for this
>>> release. So we should now concentrate on them.
>>> 
>> What really has me concerned at this point is that we have 253 issues that 
>> are tagged for 4.2.0. This is an unwieldy number of issues to deal with 
>> given the resources that we have for QA.
> 
> Most of them are from the time when trunk=4.2.0
> 
>> I am just not sure where we would want to set the bar as far as reducing 
>> that 253 to a reasonable number.
> Feel free to adjust them to trunk/4.5.0
> 
> We should concentrate on the Release Blocker. That is work enough.
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Keith
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> We need 4.2.0 as a basis for refreshed code and translations.
>>> 
>>> Matthias
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Keith
>>>> 
>>>>> Am 23.03.21 um 16:54 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I would suggest we build the same language set as in Dev 2.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> That means 41+5 languages:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/devtools/build-scripts/
>> 4.2.0-
>>>> Dev2/wntmsci/Pack-dev.lst
>>>>>> @Mechtilde: What about new Pootle templates? We had a lot of string
>>>>>> changes...
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>Matthias
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Am 23.03.21 um 16:03 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>>> In an effort to save some time and resources, can we confirm on
>>>>>>> whether or not we are building the full language set?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Mar 20, 2021, at 2:04 PM, Matthias Seidel
>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I have created the directory structure for Dev3:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>   Matthias
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Am 17.03.21 um 18:00 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Arrigo,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Am 16.03.21 um 21:53 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori:
>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 04:26:53PM +0100, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> The subject says it all... ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> No exact time frame, but we could include a full set of updated
>>>>>>>>>>> translations from Pootle here.
>>>>>>>>>> I would also like to have some pull requests merged, if possible!
>>>>>>>>> Definitely!
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The next step would be to solve the Release Blocker for 4.2.0 and
>>>>>>>>> release it! ;-)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>   Matthias
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> And I am still tackling bug #126869. Man, UNO is... big!
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>> 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
>>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



What to focus on next

2021-05-27 Thread Jim Jagielski



> On May 21, 2021, at 5:02 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Am 14.05.21 um 18:56 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> On May 14, 2021, at 1:27 AM, Arrigo Marchiori  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I agree, but how many 4.1.X versions do we want to publish before 4.2.0?
>>> Now that we support two digits, please let us not point to 4.1.99 ! ;-)
>>> 
>> FWIW, I tend to agree. We fixed the bug. Maybe its not the best solution, 
>> but I don't see why we should continue to "focus" on 4.1.X at the expense of 
>> 4.2.X.
> 
> We already made some progress on the Release Blockers for 4.2.0.
> But the remaining ones are untouched for long time.
> 
> What about a 4.2.0-Dev3? We already planned it when 4.1.10 got urgent...
> 
> Regards,
> 

So should the push be 4.1.11 or 4.2.0-Dev3?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [OS/2] saving ODS with chart

2021-05-27 Thread Jim Jagielski



> On May 27, 2021, at 5:11 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Yuri,
> 
> Am 27.05.21 um 10:54 schrieb Yuri Dario:
>> Hi Matthias,
>> 
 Ideas on where to look?
>>> Maybe Jim knows, since we had such an issue in the mac build 4.1.9(?)
>> a rebuild fixed the issue for MacOS (issue 128426), does not work for
>> os2. And I'm using gcc 9.2 since 4.1.7 builds.
> 
> That's what I suspected, a compiler change...
> Maybe we need to set some switches now? But that is way beyond my knowledge.
> 
> Hopefully others will read and can give a more helpful answer.
> 
> Matthias

Yeah... I didn't dig in deeper since I was able to "fix" the problem by 
downgrading to the older clang. But it seems like it's time to figure out what 
the real solution should be.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: Hyperlink Warning Message

2021-05-14 Thread Jim Jagielski



> On May 14, 2021, at 1:27 AM, Arrigo Marchiori  wrote:
> 
> 
> I agree, but how many 4.1.X versions do we want to publish before 4.2.0?
> Now that we support two digits, please let us not point to 4.1.99 ! ;-)
> 

FWIW, I tend to agree. We fixed the bug. Maybe its not the best solution, but I 
don't see why we should continue to "focus" on 4.1.X at the expense of 4.2.X.


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



Re: Start working on AOO 4.1.11? (was: Re: Hyperlink Warning Message)

2021-05-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
Done

> On May 11, 2021, at 1:53 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> Will do... 
> 
>> On May 10, 2021, at 2:49 PM, Marcus  wrote:
>> 
>> Am 06.05.21 um 15:50 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Am 06.05.21 um 15:08 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>> Once we tag HEAD of AOO41X to AOO4110
>>> Can't wait! ;-)
>>> I have dozens of commits to be backported to AOO41X...
>> 
>> @Jim:
>> Can you please create the release tag from the 41X branch? Then we can close 
>> the relase schedule for 4.1.10.
>> 
>> Thanksa
>> 
>> Marcus
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>>> On May 6, 2021, at 8:28 AM, Matthias Seidel  
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Just a pragmatic question:
>>>>> 
>>>>> When do we want to start working on AOO 4.1.11?
>>>>> 
>>>>> The sooner we branch it, the sooner we can do Test builds and let people
>>>>> see if their problem is fixed...
>>>>> 
>>>>> Matthias
>>>>> 
>>>>> Am 05.05.21 um 23:31 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>> On 05.05.21 22:11, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
>>>>>>> Hello Peter, all,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 05:44:17PM +, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 05.05.21 14:37, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 07:08:11AM +, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> The best approach I believe is to add a whitelist feature as for
>>>>>>>>>> macro
>>>>>>>>>> files.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Users can add then the links they wish to approve.
>>>>>>>>> Do you mean file-based whitelists instead of target-based?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I will try to explain myself better: the current filter on AOO 4.1.10
>>>>>>>>> is target-based, because it is the target of the link that triggers
>>>>>>>>> the warning. Are you suggesting to add a whitelist based on files, for
>>>>>>>>> example "allow any links in documents from this directory"?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> If so, would you use the same whitelist as for macros, or would you
>>>>>>>>> introduce another one?
>>>>>>>> I do not think that it makes sense to allow
>>>>>>>> https://my.payload.crime/AOO_diskscrambler.ods to be seen as save
>>>>>>>> target for
>>>>>>>> opening and macro execution at the same time.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Better is to have both separated. And the simple practicable
>>>>>>>> solution is to
>>>>>>>> just add an own list which allows targets to be listed.
>>>>>>> I see.  But please let us distinguish targets and sources.
>>>>>> Well, yea this is a nice abstraction I did not make. Good one.
>>>>>>> The macros' whitelist contains _directories_ (I don't really like
>>>>>>> calling them folders, I hope you don't mind) whose files are trusted,
>>>>>>> with respect to macro execution.
>>>>>> sure. Names are sound and smoke ;) - sorry can not resist this german
>>>>>> IT idiom.
>>>>>>> In your reply above you seem to discuss a whitelist of _link targets_?
>>>>>>> Not documents, containing links that shall always be followed?
>>>>>> Yes, I thought on the target of the link. For me was this the
>>>>>> important trait.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> However if I think in which document I grant the security level. Hmm,
>>>>>> I think this makes the whole concept a lot easier.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Plus we would then one list. So we extend an existing feature.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> If we would want to have a vision, where we should develop to, this
>>>>>>>> would be
>>>>>>>> mine:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> We have One list and 2 properties

Re: Start working on AOO 4.1.11? (was: Re: Hyperlink Warning Message)

2021-05-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
Will do... 

> On May 10, 2021, at 2:49 PM, Marcus  wrote:
> 
> Am 06.05.21 um 15:50 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Am 06.05.21 um 15:08 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> Once we tag HEAD of AOO41X to AOO4110
>> Can't wait! ;-)
>> I have dozens of commits to be backported to AOO41X...
> 
> @Jim:
> Can you please create the release tag from the 41X branch? Then we can close 
> the relase schedule for 4.1.10.
> 
> Thanksa
> 
> Marcus
> 
> 
> 
>>>> On May 6, 2021, at 8:28 AM, Matthias Seidel  
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> Just a pragmatic question:
>>>> 
>>>> When do we want to start working on AOO 4.1.11?
>>>> 
>>>> The sooner we branch it, the sooner we can do Test builds and let people
>>>> see if their problem is fixed...
>>>> 
>>>> Matthias
>>>> 
>>>> Am 05.05.21 um 23:31 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>> On 05.05.21 22:11, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
>>>>>> Hello Peter, all,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 05:44:17PM +, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 05.05.21 14:37, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 07:08:11AM +, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The best approach I believe is to add a whitelist feature as for
>>>>>>>>> macro
>>>>>>>>> files.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Users can add then the links they wish to approve.
>>>>>>>> Do you mean file-based whitelists instead of target-based?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I will try to explain myself better: the current filter on AOO 4.1.10
>>>>>>>> is target-based, because it is the target of the link that triggers
>>>>>>>> the warning. Are you suggesting to add a whitelist based on files, for
>>>>>>>> example "allow any links in documents from this directory"?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> If so, would you use the same whitelist as for macros, or would you
>>>>>>>> introduce another one?
>>>>>>> I do not think that it makes sense to allow
>>>>>>> https://my.payload.crime/AOO_diskscrambler.ods to be seen as save
>>>>>>> target for
>>>>>>> opening and macro execution at the same time.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Better is to have both separated. And the simple practicable
>>>>>>> solution is to
>>>>>>> just add an own list which allows targets to be listed.
>>>>>> I see.  But please let us distinguish targets and sources.
>>>>> Well, yea this is a nice abstraction I did not make. Good one.
>>>>>> The macros' whitelist contains _directories_ (I don't really like
>>>>>> calling them folders, I hope you don't mind) whose files are trusted,
>>>>>> with respect to macro execution.
>>>>> sure. Names are sound and smoke ;) - sorry can not resist this german
>>>>> IT idiom.
>>>>>> In your reply above you seem to discuss a whitelist of _link targets_?
>>>>>> Not documents, containing links that shall always be followed?
>>>>> Yes, I thought on the target of the link. For me was this the
>>>>> important trait.
>>>>> 
>>>>> However if I think in which document I grant the security level. Hmm,
>>>>> I think this makes the whole concept a lot easier.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Plus we would then one list. So we extend an existing feature.
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> If we would want to have a vision, where we should develop to, this
>>>>>>> would be
>>>>>>> mine:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> We have One list and 2 properties. 1 property for hyperlink
>>>>>>> whitelisting,
>>>>>>> the other one for (macro) execution. I like our 4 security stages.
>>>>>> The four security levels currently available for macros, if I
>>>>>> understand correctly, are based on a combination of:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>   - digital signatures of the mac

Re: Start working on AOO 4.1.11? (was: Re: Hyperlink Warning Message)

2021-05-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
Once we tag HEAD of AOO41X to AOO4110

> On May 6, 2021, at 8:28 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Just a pragmatic question:
> 
> When do we want to start working on AOO 4.1.11?
> 
> The sooner we branch it, the sooner we can do Test builds and let people
> see if their problem is fixed...
> 
> Matthias
> 
> Am 05.05.21 um 23:31 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> 
>> On 05.05.21 22:11, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
>>> Hello Peter, all,
>>> 
>>> On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 05:44:17PM +, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>> 
 On 05.05.21 14:37, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 07:08:11AM +, Peter Kovacs wrote:
> 
>> The best approach I believe is to add a whitelist feature as for
>> macro
>> files.
>> 
>> Users can add then the links they wish to approve.
> Do you mean file-based whitelists instead of target-based?
> 
> I will try to explain myself better: the current filter on AOO 4.1.10
> is target-based, because it is the target of the link that triggers
> the warning. Are you suggesting to add a whitelist based on files, for
> example "allow any links in documents from this directory"?
> 
> If so, would you use the same whitelist as for macros, or would you
> introduce another one?
 I do not think that it makes sense to allow
 https://my.payload.crime/AOO_diskscrambler.ods to be seen as save
 target for
 opening and macro execution at the same time.
 
 Better is to have both separated. And the simple practicable
 solution is to
 just add an own list which allows targets to be listed.
>>> I see.  But please let us distinguish targets and sources.
>> Well, yea this is a nice abstraction I did not make. Good one.
>>> The macros' whitelist contains _directories_ (I don't really like
>>> calling them folders, I hope you don't mind) whose files are trusted,
>>> with respect to macro execution.
>> sure. Names are sound and smoke ;) - sorry can not resist this german
>> IT idiom.
>>> In your reply above you seem to discuss a whitelist of _link targets_?
>>> Not documents, containing links that shall always be followed?
>> 
>> Yes, I thought on the target of the link. For me was this the
>> important trait.
>> 
>> However if I think in which document I grant the security level. Hmm,
>> I think this makes the whole concept a lot easier.
>> 
>> Plus we would then one list. So we extend an existing feature.
>> 
 If we would want to have a vision, where we should develop to, this
 would be
 mine:
 
 We have One list and 2 properties. 1 property for hyperlink
 whitelisting,
 the other one for (macro) execution. I like our 4 security stages.
>>> The four security levels currently available for macros, if I
>>> understand correctly, are based on a combination of:
>>> 
>>>   - digital signatures of the macros (signed or not),
>>>   - trust of certain digital signatures (certificate trusted or not),
>>>   - position of the document (directory whitelisted or not).
>>> 
>>> This is... quite complex IMHO.
>> That why I have written it is maybe a vision. And maybe it is to much.
>>> Did you refer exactly to this model?
>> yes kind of. I thought that a hyperlink has some sort of certiicate
>> and an macro can have some certification and that is kind of the same
>> thing...
>>> Or
>>> shall we rather adopt a simpler one for links, for example only
>>> considering the directories whitelist?
>> 
>> Now that I think on your approach I think we should only look at the
>> directory that the document has been opened from. But still I would
>> still rather configure it per directory, then in a general and work
>> with exclusions.
>> 
>> However this is maybe not so smart to implement now, since our profile
>> is not robust enough. It will break eventually, and then all nice
>> settings are lost. And that is not something I would like to have.
>> 
>>> 
>>> And to understand better: does AOO allow to sign individual macros? Or
>>> just the document containing them? I don't think that it allows to
>>> sign individual links within a document.
>> 
>> No it would not sign individual links on the document.- But don't we
>> have document signing?
>> 
>> For links we could check if the document is signed.
>> 
>> 
>> So summing up:
>> 
>> # Instead of checking where the hyperlink is refering to, only check
>> where the document has been stored. (Treat hyperlinks as macros so to
>> say.)
>> 
>> # As an enhancement we could add a model that checks for the nearest
>> applicable path to the document, and applies that rule.
>> 
>>> 
 Example for a customized setup on a POSIX filesystem (security level
 3 =
 very high and 0 = low; first value is hyperlink, second value is macro
 execution of this origin):
 
 /tmp  (3,3) => Everything in the temp folder does not open links or
 execute
 macros
 
 ~/ (2,2) => something that is within the home path, but not a 

Re: [Bugzilla] Increase Linux baseline to CentOS 6

2021-05-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
As noted elsewhere, I use CentOS7 for our 4.2.X/trunk Linux 64 bit builds.

> On May 1, 2021, at 5:35 AM, Peter Kovacs  wrote:
> 
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127513
> 
> Should this Issue not be adjusted?
> 
> 
> All the best
> 
> Peter
> 
> -- 
> This is the Way! http://www.apache.org/theapacheway/index.html
> 
> -
> 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: [CLOSED] [PASSED] Was: Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
All AOO 4.1.10 artifacts have been uploaded to both the ASF's release repo as 
well as SF.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [CLOSED] [PASSED] Was: Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
on-route...

> On Apr 29, 2021, at 2:44 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Am 29.04.21 um 20:38 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> Still waiting on 4.1.10 to show up on 
>> https://archive.apache.org/dist/openoffice/
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> 
> That can take time, it's a cron job.
> 
> We can of course upload to SourceForge.
> 
>> 
>> 
> 


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



Re: [CLOSED] [PASSED] Was: Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
Still waiting on 4.1.10 to show up on 
https://archive.apache.org/dist/openoffice/
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [CLOSED] [PASSED] Was: Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
Thx!


> On Apr 29, 2021, at 11:43 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Everything is uploaded now!
> 
> FYI: I already created a staged dir at SourceForge.
> 
> Matthias
> 
> Am 29.04.21 um 17:36 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> Thanks! Once done I'll svn mv everything over to the release dist ASF repo.
>> 
>>> On Apr 29, 2021, at 11:03 AM, Matthias Seidel  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Jim, all,
>>> 
>>> I have signed the Windows binaries and will begin to re-upload them to
>>> /dist/dev.
>>> 
>>> Matthias
>>> 
>>> Am 29.04.21 um 14:47 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>> The VOTE on the release of AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA has CLOSED.
>>>> 
>>>> The VOTE has PASSED: AOO 4.1.10-RC2 (git hash b1cdbd2c1b) will be released 
>>>> as AOO 4.1.10 GA
>>>> 
>>>>> On Apr 25, 2021, at 4:15 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
>>>>> builds of
>>>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.10-RC2 as GA.
>>>>> 
>>>>> These artifacts can be found at:
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.10-RC2/
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please cast your vote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:
>>>>> 
>>>>> [ ] yes / +1
>>>>> 
>>>>> [ ] no / -1
>>>>> 
>>>>> My vote is based on
>>>>> 
>>>>> [ ] binding (member of PMC)
>>>>> 
>>>>> [ ] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [ ]
>>>>> 
>>>>> [ ] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ ]
>>>>> 
>>>>> This vote will be open for the normal 72hrs.
>>>>> -
>>>>> 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
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> -
>> 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: [CLOSED] [PASSED] Was: Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
Thanks! Once done I'll svn mv everything over to the release dist ASF repo.

> On Apr 29, 2021, at 11:03 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim, all,
> 
> I have signed the Windows binaries and will begin to re-upload them to
> /dist/dev.
> 
> Matthias
> 
> Am 29.04.21 um 14:47 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> The VOTE on the release of AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA has CLOSED.
>> 
>> The VOTE has PASSED: AOO 4.1.10-RC2 (git hash b1cdbd2c1b) will be released 
>> as AOO 4.1.10 GA
>> 
>>> On Apr 25, 2021, at 4:15 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
>>> builds of
>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.10-RC2 as GA.
>>> 
>>> These artifacts can be found at:
>>> 
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.10-RC2/
>>> 
>>> Please cast your vote:
>>> 
>>> The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:
>>> 
>>> [ ] yes / +1
>>> 
>>> [ ] no / -1
>>> 
>>> My vote is based on
>>> 
>>> [ ] binding (member of PMC)
>>> 
>>> [ ] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [ ]
>>> 
>>> [ ] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ ]
>>> 
>>> This vote will be open for the normal 72hrs.
>>> -
>>> 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
>> 
>> 
> 


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



[CLOSED] [PASSED] Was: Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
The VOTE on the release of AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA has CLOSED.

The VOTE has PASSED: AOO 4.1.10-RC2 (git hash b1cdbd2c1b) will be released as 
AOO 4.1.10 GA

> On Apr 25, 2021, at 4:15 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
> builds of
> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.10-RC2 as GA.
> 
> These artifacts can be found at:
> 
>  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.10-RC2/
> 
> Please cast your vote:
> 
> The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:
> 
> [ ] yes / +1
> 
> [ ] no / -1
> 
> My vote is based on
> 
> [ ] binding (member of PMC)
> 
> [ ] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [ ]
> 
> [ ] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ ]
> 
> This vote will be open for the normal 72hrs.
> -
> 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: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
Well... it takes *time* to do the release, since there are uploads, and sync, 
etc...

> On Apr 28, 2021, at 1:12 PM, Marcus  wrote:
> 
> Am 28.04.21 um 13:47 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> The VOTE is scheduled to close today... anyone opposed if I keep it open for 
>> another 24-48 hours?
> 
> then we will do the release on the weekend. Just to keep in mind ...
> 
> Marcus
> 
> 
> 
>>> On Apr 25, 2021, at 4:15 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
>>> builds of
>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.10-RC2 as GA.
>>> 
>>> These artifacts can be found at:
>>> 
>>>  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.10-RC2/
>>> 
>>> Please cast your vote:
>>> 
>>> The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:
>>> 
>>> [ ] yes / +1
>>> 
>>> [ ] no / -1
>>> 
>>> My vote is based on
>>> 
>>> [ ] binding (member of PMC)
>>> 
>>> [ ] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [ ]
>>> 
>>> [ ] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ ]
>>> 
>>> This vote will be open for the normal 72hrs.
> 
> 
> -
> 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: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
The VOTE is scheduled to close today... anyone opposed if I keep it open for 
another 24-48 hours?

> On Apr 25, 2021, at 4:15 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
> builds of
> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.10-RC2 as GA.
> 
> These artifacts can be found at:
> 
>  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.10-RC2/
> 
> Please cast your vote:
> 
> The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:
> 
> [ ] yes / +1
> 
> [ ] no / -1
> 
> My vote is based on
> 
> [ ] binding (member of PMC)
> 
> [ ] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [ ]
> 
> [ ] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ ]
> 
> This vote will be open for the normal 72hrs.
> -
> 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: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-26 Thread Jim Jagielski


> On Apr 25, 2021, at 4:15 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
> builds of
> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.10-RC2 as GA.
> 
> These artifacts can be found at:
> 
>  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.10-RC2/
> 
> Please cast your vote:
> 
> The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:
> 
> [X] yes / +1
> 
> My vote is based on
> 
> [X] binding (member of PMC)
> 
> [X] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [ ]
> 
> [X] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ ]
> 

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



[VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.10-RC2 as GA

2021-04-25 Thread Jim Jagielski
I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community builds 
of
Apache OpenOffice 4.1.10-RC2 as GA.

These artifacts can be found at:

  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.10-RC2/

Please cast your vote:

The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:

[ ] yes / +1

[ ] no / -1

My vote is based on

[ ] binding (member of PMC)

[ ] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [ ]

[ ] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ ]

This vote will be open for the normal 72hrs.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Apache OpenOffice 4.1.10-RC2

2021-04-20 Thread Jim Jagielski
Before we call a vote, I'd like to ask as many people as possible to give the 
2nd release candidate of AOO 4.1.10 a good, solid test.

The source files and complimentary community builds for this RC can be found at:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.10-RC2/

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



Re: AOO 4.1.10-RC1

2021-04-20 Thread Jim Jagielski
The issue, FTR, is that I build the sources on macOS as well, which means that 
the old ./solenv/inc/reporevision.lst needs to be deleted before I build the 
binaries. I've adjusted the built script to do that.

> On Apr 20, 2021, at 12:31 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Am 20.04.21 um 18:28 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> Yeah... I'm fixing as we speak.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Linux (x64) builds are OK.
> 
>> 
>>> On Apr 20, 2021, at 11:27 AM, Matthias Seidel  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Jim,
>>> 
>>> I just tested you mac build and although it shows AOO4110m2(build:9807)
>>> the git hash is still "aa358bfc89"?
>>> 
>>> Have not tested the Linux builds yet...
>>> 
>>> Matthias
>>> 
>>> Am 20.04.21 um 17:01 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>> 
>>>> Windows binaries are also uploaded now, I think we are complete!
>>>> 
>>>> Matthias
>>>> 
>>>> Am 19.04.21 um 19:26 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>> git hash: b1cdbd2c1b0c99b9e8c2ff5f17cc0127551a8f62
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Apr 19, 2021, at 1:16 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Since we did kinda do a RC1, at least it was up on the dev dist site, I 
>>>>>> think we should call this RC2. I'll make the updates and then start the 
>>>>>> macOS and Linux builds 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Apr 18, 2021, at 12:05 PM, Matthias Seidel 
>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I think we have all Patches in now? Time to branch off AOO4110 and make
>>>>>>> a Release Candidate!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Then we can bump up AOO41X, so we can merge Carl's Test fixes.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Am 14.04.21 um 01:42 schrieb Carl Marcum:
>>>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> This time to the list :)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 4/13/21 5:27 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I deem it is time for us to push through with a 4.1.10 release of
>>>>>>>>> AOO. I am proposing a AOO 4.1.10-RC1 release sometime over the next
>>>>>>>>> week. I am currently building macOS and Linux 64/32 tests (RC1s) for
>>>>>>>>> HEAD of AOO41X
>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> That's great Thanks!
>>>>>>>> Carl
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>> 
>>>>> -
>>>>> 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
>> 
>> 
> 


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



Re: AOO 4.1.10-RC1

2021-04-20 Thread Jim Jagielski
Yeah... I'm fixing as we speak.

> On Apr 20, 2021, at 11:27 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> I just tested you mac build and although it shows AOO4110m2(build:9807)
> the git hash is still "aa358bfc89"?
> 
> Have not tested the Linux builds yet...
> 
> Matthias
> 
> Am 20.04.21 um 17:01 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Hi Jim,
>> 
>> Windows binaries are also uploaded now, I think we are complete!
>> 
>> Matthias
>> 
>> Am 19.04.21 um 19:26 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> git hash: b1cdbd2c1b0c99b9e8c2ff5f17cc0127551a8f62
>>> 
>>>> On Apr 19, 2021, at 1:16 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Since we did kinda do a RC1, at least it was up on the dev dist site, I 
>>>> think we should call this RC2. I'll make the updates and then start the 
>>>> macOS and Linux builds 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Apr 18, 2021, at 12:05 PM, Matthias Seidel 
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I think we have all Patches in now? Time to branch off AOO4110 and make
>>>>> a Release Candidate!
>>>>> 
>>>>> Then we can bump up AOO41X, so we can merge Carl's Test fixes.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> 
>>>>>  Matthias
>>>>> 
>>>>> Am 14.04.21 um 01:42 schrieb Carl Marcum:
>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> This time to the list :)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 4/13/21 5:27 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>>>>> I deem it is time for us to push through with a 4.1.10 release of
>>>>>>> AOO. I am proposing a AOO 4.1.10-RC1 release sometime over the next
>>>>>>> week. I am currently building macOS and Linux 64/32 tests (RC1s) for
>>>>>>> HEAD of AOO41X
>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> That's great Thanks!
>>>>>> Carl
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> 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
>>>> 
>>> -
>>> 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: AOO 4.1.10-RC1

2021-04-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
git hash: b1cdbd2c1b0c99b9e8c2ff5f17cc0127551a8f62

> On Apr 19, 2021, at 1:16 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> Since we did kinda do a RC1, at least it was up on the dev dist site, I think 
> we should call this RC2. I'll make the updates and then start the macOS and 
> Linux builds 
> 
>> On Apr 18, 2021, at 12:05 PM, Matthias Seidel  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> I think we have all Patches in now? Time to branch off AOO4110 and make
>> a Release Candidate!
>> 
>> Then we can bump up AOO41X, so we can merge Carl's Test fixes.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>>   Matthias
>> 
>> Am 14.04.21 um 01:42 schrieb Carl Marcum:
>>> Hi Jim,
>>> 
>>> This time to the list :)
>>> 
>>> On 4/13/21 5:27 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>> I deem it is time for us to push through with a 4.1.10 release of
>>>> AOO. I am proposing a AOO 4.1.10-RC1 release sometime over the next
>>>> week. I am currently building macOS and Linux 64/32 tests (RC1s) for
>>>> HEAD of AOO41X
>>>> -
>>>> 
>>> That's great Thanks!
>>> Carl
>>> 
>>> -
>>> 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
> 


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



Re: AOO 4.1.10-RC1

2021-04-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
Since we did kinda do a RC1, at least it was up on the dev dist site, I think 
we should call this RC2. I'll make the updates and then start the macOS and 
Linux builds 

> On Apr 18, 2021, at 12:05 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I think we have all Patches in now? Time to branch off AOO4110 and make
> a Release Candidate!
> 
> Then we can bump up AOO41X, so we can merge Carl's Test fixes.
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
> Am 14.04.21 um 01:42 schrieb Carl Marcum:
>> Hi Jim,
>> 
>> This time to the list :)
>> 
>> On 4/13/21 5:27 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> I deem it is time for us to push through with a 4.1.10 release of
>>> AOO. I am proposing a AOO 4.1.10-RC1 release sometime over the next
>>> week. I am currently building macOS and Linux 64/32 tests (RC1s) for
>>> HEAD of AOO41X
>>> -
>>> 
>> That's great Thanks!
>> Carl
>> 
>> -
>> 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: Request for reviewers: PR 126

2021-04-16 Thread Jim Jagielski
Approved and merged... sorry for the delay

> On Apr 16, 2021, at 1:38 PM, Carl Marcum  wrote:
> 
> Hi Arrigo,
> 
> On 4/16/21 12:36 PM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
>> Dear All,
>> 
>> PR 126 [1] is about the "About" dialog (sorry for the word play :-).
>> 
>> It fixes an invalid display of the build number for 4.4.10 that... we
>> need for the first time, because we hve never reached a two-digit
>> version until today.
>> 
>> Matthias and I gave our approval but a ``third opinion'' would
>> greatly be appreciated.
>> 
>> Jim was requested for reviewing but he seems to be quite busy at the
>> moment. Could anyone else help us, please?
>> 
>> Thank you in advance!
>> 
>> 1: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/126
> I'll review it soon.
> 
> Best regards,
> Carl
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org 
> 
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org 
> 


Re: Code execution in Apache OpenOffice via non-http(s) schemes in Hyperlinks

2021-04-16 Thread Jim Jagielski
In prep for 4.1.10 (and our 1st release candidate), we're using

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.10

for tracking. 

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



AOO 4.1.10-RC1

2021-04-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
I deem it is time for us to push through with a 4.1.10 release of AOO. I am 
proposing a AOO 4.1.10-RC1 release sometime over the next week. I am currently 
building macOS and Linux 64/32 tests (RC1s) for HEAD of AOO41X
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [openoffice] branch AOO41X created (now 5610821)

2021-03-30 Thread Jim Jagielski



> On Mar 29, 2021, at 3:53 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Is this the new 4.1.x development branch?
> 
> Should I commit to it and we branch off 4.1.10 later?

+1

> 
> Matthias
> 
> Am 29.03.21 um 17:40 schrieb j...@apache.org:
>> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
>> 
>> jim pushed a change to branch AOO41X
>> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice.git.
>> 
>> 
>>  at 5610821  Merge pull request #116 from ardovm/bug127952
>> 
>> No new revisions were added by this update.
>> 
> 


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



Re: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?

2021-03-23 Thread Jim Jagielski
In an effort to save some time and resources, can we confirm on whether or not 
we are building the full language set?

> On Mar 20, 2021, at 2:04 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I have created the directory structure for Dev3:
> 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.2.0-Dev3/
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
> Am 17.03.21 um 18:00 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Hi Arrigo,
>> 
>> Am 16.03.21 um 21:53 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori:
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 04:26:53PM +0100, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>> 
 Hi all,
 
 The subject says it all... ;-)
 
 No exact time frame, but we could include a full set of updated
 translations from Pootle here.
>>> I would also like to have some pull requests merged, if possible!
>> Definitely!
>> 
>> The next step would be to solve the Release Blocker for 4.2.0 and
>> release it! ;-)
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>>Matthias
>> 
>>> And I am still tackling bug #126869. Man, UNO is... big!
>>> 
>>> Regards,
> 


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



Re: [DISCUSS] Platform hint text for macOS

2021-03-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
Maybe on the download page have something like "Universal binary: Intel and 
Silicon/M1"

> On Mar 13, 2021, at 1:38 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Marcus, all,
> 
> These are the mails I am talking of... ;-)
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
>  Weitergeleitete Nachricht 
> 
> Betreff:  Mac Mini M1 Chip
> Datum:Sat, 13 Mar 2021 13:25:30 -0500
> Von:  David Stuhr  
> <mailto:david.st...@verizon.net.INVALID>
> Antwort an:   us...@openoffice.apache.org <mailto:us...@openoffice.apache.org>
> An:   us...@openoffice.apache.org <mailto:us...@openoffice.apache.org>
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Does Open Office 4.1.9 for the Mac work with the new Mac Mini M1 Chip?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> Am 13.03.21 um 01:24 schrieb Marcus:
>> Am 09.03.21 um 01:52 schrieb Marcus: 
>>> Am 08.03.21 um 23:00 schrieb Dean.Webber: 
>>>> I agree with "Maybe we need something more obvious than a tool tip." 
>>>> 
>>>> Have been clicking on 'Important hint: RPM vs. DEB = What to choose?' for 
>>>> some time, without any result. It is usually not obvious to hover on 
>>>> something for a tool tip, and probably should not be used to contain 
>>>> important information. 
>>> 
>>> OK, then I suggest to first agree on a text and then decide on how to 
>>> display it to the users. 
>> 
>> really no suggestions? I remeber that we had some discussions about what to 
>> tell the users in past threads. 
>> 
>> Marcus 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>>  
>>>> From: Dave Fisher  <mailto:w...@apache.org> 
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, 9 March 2021 9:51 AM 
>>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org <mailto:dev@openoffice.apache.org> 
>>>>  <mailto:dev@openoffice.apache.org> 
>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Platform hint text for macOS 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Mar 8, 2021, at 12:38 PM, Matthias Seidel  
>>>>> <mailto:matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> wrote: 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Marcus, 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Am 08.03.21 um 19:29 schrieb Marcus: 
>>>>>> Am 08.03.21 um 15:56 schrieb Matthias Seidel: 
>>>>>>> Am 08.03.21 um 15:49 schrieb Jim Jagielski: 
>>>>>>>> I don't understand the question. We just have 1 offering for Mac 
>>>>>>>> users... so what kind of hint text would we need? 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> the same for Windows. But we also a suitable text for Mac users. 
>>>>>> So, what is important for these users? 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Maybe someone who monitors the forum can answer best? 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I have the impression that users are hesitating to download/install AOO 
>>>>> on macOS (esp. Big Sur) because they don't know if it will work. Of 
>>>>> course, you and me would just try out, but we are no "ordinary" users. 
>>>> 
>>>> They also hesitate after download due to the gatekeeper issue. 
>>>> 
>>>> Maybe we need something more obvious than a tool tip. 
>>>> 
>>>> Note for Windows the Important Hint could be prefixed with "Use 32 bit for 
>>>> 64 bit windows”. 
>>>> 
>>>> For macOS the important button could be: “Works on BigSur and M1 chips. 
>>>> Bypass the Gatekeeper - See Q05” with a link to 
>>>> https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum.openoffice.org%2Fen%2Fforum%2Fviewtopic.php%3Ft%3D89283data=04%7C01%7C2018001901%40student.sit.ac.nz%7C5d83114959874206d81908d8e27402fa%7Cc46ab213d1794a719ff7b9d9fe3f3b48%7C0%7C0%7C637508335204756913%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000sdata=hIMQNVAg8fJVlK0TESupcUaIvkS840CzkgUice7b6j8%3Dreserved=0
>>>>  
>>>> <https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum.openoffice.org%2Fen%2Fforum%2Fviewtopic.php%3Ft%3D89283data=04%7C01%7C2018001901%40student.sit.ac.nz%7C5d83114959874206d81908d8e27402fa%7Cc46ab213d1794a719ff7b9d9fe3f3b48%7C0%7C0%7C637508335204756913%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000sdata=hIMQNVAg8fJVlK0TESupcUaIvkS840CzkgUice7b6j8%3Dreserved=0>
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> Regards, 
>>>> Dave 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards, 
>>>>>

Re: [DISCUSS] Platform hint text for macOS

2021-03-08 Thread Jim Jagielski
I don't understand the question. We just have 1 offering for Mac users... so 
what kind of hint text would we need?

> On Mar 8, 2021, at 9:28 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Really no mac user interested?!
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
> Am 05.03.21 um 20:58 schrieb Marcus:
>> Am 10.01.21 um 19:12 schrieb Marcus:
>>> https://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html
>>> 
>>> We have now a hint text for Linux "RPM vs. DEB = What to choose?" and
>>> Windows "32-bit, 64-bit and Java - What to choose?".
>>> 
>>> (Yes, not that beautiful. But this is work in progress and a topic in
>>> a different thread. :-) )
>>> 
>>> Now it's the question what do we want to tell our Mac users when they
>>> want to download their favorit AOO version.
>>> 
>>> We need a nice title and more details in mouse-over text.
>> 
>> after the release of 4.1.9 is now done, I would like to take the
>> chance for asking if there are any suggestions.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Marcus
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> 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



Bugz: 128426

2021-02-17 Thread Jim Jagielski
The above issue (https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=128426)
is closed for 4.1.x but it seems to crop back up with the various
4.2.x builds on macOS. Of particular interest is that what "fixed"
the bug back when we were handling 4.1.9 RCs was that the bug occurred
when built using a later clang++ version (10.x) but did NOT happen
when compiled with Xcode7 and clang++ 7.3.0. In both cases, the macOS
10.11 SDK was used.

So there is something in the default behavior of clang++ in Xcode that
changed after Xcode7 that causes this bug to pop up.

Does anyone know offhand what code and logic paths are involved in
the "generate a graph from spreadsheet data" action. I'd like to narrow
down what modules to focus on. Not sure if its a UNO bug and something
with maybe the assembly of some of the ASM chunks.

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



Re: Java 8 and Ant 1.10

2021-02-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
Carl, on what platform? TIA.

> On Feb 11, 2021, at 6:26 AM, Carl Marcum  wrote:
> 
> On 2/9/21 6:39 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
>> On 2/8/21 8:54 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
>>> On 2/8/21 7:15 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>> 
>>>> On 2/8/21 12:51 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>>> Anyone tried building HEAD of AOO42X w/ Java8 (or later) and
>>>>> Apache Ant 1.10?
>>>>> 
>>>>> -
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Normally I build 4.1 and trunk on the same VM's and use JDK 8 and Ant 1.9.
>>>> 
>>>> I've kicked off a build of trunk with Ant 1.10.15 and JDK 15.0.2.
>>>> My trunk is not completely up to date but it's withing a few weeks.
>>>> configure complained about JAVA_HOME even though I have it set so I added 
>>>> the --with-jdk-home flag.
>>>> 
>>>> I'll let you know how it goes.
>>>> 
>>>> If trunk won't answer your question I can try and up to date 4.2 tomorrow.
>>>> 
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Carl
>>> 
>>> No luck,
>>> 
>>> 7 module(s):
>>> beanshell
>>> hsqldb
>>> apache-commons
>>> rhino
>>> saxon
>>> lucene
>>> javaunohelper
>>> need(s) to be rebuilt
>>> 
>>> I'll try with an updated 4.2 branch tomorrow.
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> Carl
>>> 
>> Building with an up to date AOO42X branch and
>> Ant 1.10.15 and JDK 15.0.2. turned out with similar results.
>> 
>> 9 module(s):
>> beanshell
>> hsqldb
>> apache-commons
>> rhino
>> saxon
>> lucene
>> qadevOOo
>> bean
>> odk
>> need(s) to be rebuilt
>> 
>> I'll test backing down Ant next.
>> 
>> regards,
>> Carl
>> 
> So far I've been able to build 4.2 with Ant 1.10.8 and JDK 8 but not 11 or 15.
> 
> Best regards,
> Carl
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org 
> <mailto:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org 
> <mailto:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org>


Re: Java 8 and Ant 1.10

2021-02-10 Thread Jim Jagielski
For me, the issue seemed to be this code chunk in scripting/java/build.xml

  

  
  
  
   

  

  

Previously, the java.version was 1.7 which made trying to build break when 
using Java8 on the mac. Since the above edit, all proceeds fine. No doubt, 
there is a more elegant way of solving this against future breakage...
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Java 8 and Ant 1.10

2021-02-08 Thread Jim Jagielski
Anyone tried building HEAD of AOO42X w/ Java8 (or later) and
Apache Ant 1.10?

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



Re: How to cope with duplicate attributes in XML tags

2021-02-03 Thread Jim Jagielski
Funny that you bring this up... I'm been tracking down some bugs and they
all seem to be XML related... fastsax->libwriterfilter with occasional cores
due to __cxa_call_unexpected.

I feel that making AOO more fragile by trying to work around cases where
invalid and/or non-compliant XML is encountered is just wrong. We should
either ignore the error (catch it) or raise an exception. Invalid data shouldn't
be tolerated. Additionally, trying to be "lenient" is an easy vector for
vulnerabilities.

My 2c

> On Feb 3, 2021, at 1:38 PM, Arrigo Marchiori  wrote:
> 
> Dear List,
> 
> bug 128356 [1] is mostly about an XML tag that carries an attribute
> _twice_. This is not allowed; the SAX parser raises an exception when
> it finds it while loading the file, and the user gets upset because
> they cannot open their file any more.
> 
> While I am looking for the actual cause of this bug, I think it may be
> useful to stop this XML error from happening anywhere. Our API should
> complain heavily when requested to do such an illegal action.
> 
> I am going to add a ``safety-check'' into the methods of class
> SvXMLAttributeList to avoid ``adding'' an attribute that is already in
> the list. But what shall these methods do instead, apart from
> complaining?
> 
> 1- just ignore the request, leaving the current value for the
>attribute;
> 
> 2- set the new value, overwriting the current one;
> 
> 3- raise an exception because it is just not acceptable.
> 
> I personally like option 3-, but someone may have a different opinion?
> 
> In addition to this, when finished with the bug, I will try to make
> the SAX parser accept these duplicated attributes, and try to carry on
> loading the file. This should help our angry users recover their data,
> even if some information may be lost.
> 
> Please share your opinion.
> 
> References:
> 1: https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=128356
> 
> Best regards,
> -- 
> Arrigo
> 
> http://rigo.altervista.org
> 
> -
> 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



[CLOSED] Re: [VOTE] Release macOS community builds AOO 4.1.9-RC1 as GA

2021-02-02 Thread Jim Jagielski
It looks like there are more than the required 3 +1 binding votes. This vote 
PASSES.

I will start the required uploading

> On Jan 28, 2021, at 2:47 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the complimentary community builds of
> macOS Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9-RC1 as GA.
> 
> These artifacts can be found at:
> 
>  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/binaries/
> 
> This vote overrides the previous vote due to some regressions noted
> in the original macOS builds. This vote does not affect the Windows
> or Linux builds or the source files. There are no source code changes
> reflected in this revision: this is 100% a build replacement. As such,
> the About OpenOffice window should show:
> 
>   AOO419m1(Build:9805)  -  Rev. 561082130a
>   2021-01-28 11:51:18 (Thu, 28 Jan 2021) - Darwin x86_64
> 
> Note the revised build date.
> 
> Please cast your vote:
> 
> The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:
> 
> [ ] yes / +1
> 
> [ ] no / -1
> 
> 
> -
> 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: [VOTE] Release macOS community builds AOO 4.1.9-RC1 as GA

2021-01-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
FTR: +1 from me.

> On Jan 28, 2021, at 2:47 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the complimentary community builds of
> macOS Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9-RC1 as GA.
> 
> These artifacts can be found at:
> 
>  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/binaries/
> 
> This vote overrides the previous vote due to some regressions noted
> in the original macOS builds. This vote does not affect the Windows
> or Linux builds or the source files. There are no source code changes
> reflected in this revision: this is 100% a build replacement. As such,
> the About OpenOffice window should show:
> 
>   AOO419m1(Build:9805)  -  Rev. 561082130a
>   2021-01-28 11:51:18 (Thu, 28 Jan 2021) - Darwin x86_64
> 
> Note the revised build date.
> 
> Please cast your vote:
> 
> The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:
> 
> [ ] yes / +1
> 
> [ ] no / -1
> 
> 
> -
> 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: [DISCUSS] [VOTE] Release macOS community builds AOO 4.1.9-RC1 as GA

2021-01-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=128415 as well, maybe...

> On Jan 28, 2021, at 4:14 PM, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
> 
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the complimentary community builds of
>> macOS Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9-RC1 as GA.
> 
> I won't be able to test on a Mac but, in case I ask others to check, they 
> should make sure the following bug is fixed, right?
> 
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=128426
> 
> Anything else to be checked in this rebuild?
> 
> (and by the way... thanks a lot Jim for being a Release Manager once again!)
> 
> Regards,
>  Andrea.
> 
> -
> 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



[VOTE] Release macOS community builds AOO 4.1.9-RC1 as GA

2021-01-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
I am calling a VOTE on releasing the complimentary community builds of
macOS Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9-RC1 as GA.

These artifacts can be found at:

  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/binaries/

This vote overrides the previous vote due to some regressions noted
in the original macOS builds. This vote does not affect the Windows
or Linux builds or the source files. There are no source code changes
reflected in this revision: this is 100% a build replacement. As such,
the About OpenOffice window should show:

AOO419m1(Build:9805)  -  Rev. 561082130a
2021-01-28 11:51:18 (Thu, 28 Jan 2021) - Darwin x86_64

Note the revised build date.

Please cast your vote:

The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:

[ ] yes / +1

[ ] no / -1


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



Re: ext_libraries/apr-util module

2021-01-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
There are issues w/ older versions of APR and newer versions of Xcode (well,
really, clang) where during the ./configure process, some ignored errors in
previous versions of clang are now fatal, causing the configure scripts to
fail.

> On Jan 28, 2021, at 12:44 PM, Dylan Pham  wrote:
> 
> I'm using Xcode 12.3
> 
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 4:24 AM Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
>> Which version of Xcode?
>> 
>>> On Jan 27, 2021, at 5:48 PM, Dylan Pham  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>> I'm building trunk/450 on macos big sur and got an error below:
>>> 
>>> Makefile:50: /Users/devops1/aoodev/openoffice/ext_libraries/apr-util/
>>> unxmaccx.pro/misc/build/apr-util-1.6.1/build/rules.mk: No such file or
>>> directory
>>> make: *** No rule to make target
>>> `/Users/devops1/aoodev/openoffice/ext_libraries/apr-util/
>>> unxmaccx.pro/misc/build/apr-util-1.6.1/build/rules.mk'.  Stop.
>>> dmake:  Error code 2, while making './
>>> unxmaccx.pro/misc/build/so_built_aprutil'
>>> 
>>> Questions:
>>> 1. the apr module version is 1.6.5, does apr-util version need to match
>> it?
>>> 2. I checked the apr module and there is no rules.mk file there and it
>>> built successfully. Not sure why it's required for apr-util, as specified
>>> in the makefile.in as below:
>>> 
>>> # bring in rules.mk for standard functionality
>>> @INCLUDE_RULES@
>>> @INCLUDE_OUTPUTS@
>>> 
>>> 3. If I need to have a rules.mk what do I need to do? Is there a
>> template?
>>> 
>>> Thank you,
>>> Dylan
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> 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: ext_libraries/apr-util module

2021-01-28 Thread Jim Jagielski
Which version of Xcode?

> On Jan 27, 2021, at 5:48 PM, Dylan Pham  wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I'm building trunk/450 on macos big sur and got an error below:
> 
> Makefile:50: /Users/devops1/aoodev/openoffice/ext_libraries/apr-util/
> unxmaccx.pro/misc/build/apr-util-1.6.1/build/rules.mk: No such file or
> directory
>  make: *** No rule to make target
> `/Users/devops1/aoodev/openoffice/ext_libraries/apr-util/
> unxmaccx.pro/misc/build/apr-util-1.6.1/build/rules.mk'.  Stop.
>  dmake:  Error code 2, while making './
> unxmaccx.pro/misc/build/so_built_aprutil'
> 
> Questions:
> 1. the apr module version is 1.6.5, does apr-util version need to match it?
> 2. I checked the apr module and there is no rules.mk file there and it
> built successfully. Not sure why it's required for apr-util, as specified
> in the makefile.in as below:
> 
> # bring in rules.mk for standard functionality
> @INCLUDE_RULES@
> @INCLUDE_OUTPUTS@
> 
> 3. If I need to have a rules.mk what do I need to do? Is there a template?
> 
> Thank you,
> Dylan


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



Re: Test fix for M1 Big Sur

2021-01-22 Thread Jim Jagielski
The upcoming 4.1.9 release fixes it and we will likely be releasing a
4.2.0-Dev3 in a few weeks.

> On Jan 22, 2021, at 10:28 AM, Scott B  wrote:
> 
> I would be interested in testing the 4.2 version that fixes the crash in Big 
> Sur.
> 
> Thanks,
> Scott Bergren
> -
> 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



[CLOSED] Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.9-RC1 as GA

2021-01-22 Thread Jim Jagielski
After 96hrs, I've closed this vote, which PASSES with plenty of (binding) +1 
votes.

Thanks to all!

I will start the actual release process asap.

> On Jan 18, 2021, at 8:47 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
> builds of
> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9-RC1 as GA.
> 
> These artifacts can be found at:
> 
>   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/
> 
> Please cast your vote:
> 
> The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:
> 
> [ ] yes / +1
> 
> [ ] no / -1
> 
> My vote is based on
> 
> [ ] binding (member of PMC)
> 
> [ ] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [ ]
> 
> [ ] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ ]
> 
> This vote will be open for 96hrs instead of the normal 72hrs to
> accommodate the US Holiday.
> -
> 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: macOS Big Sur configure issue: clang errors

2021-01-21 Thread Jim Jagielski
My guess is that you do not have SDKROOT defined in your environment.

Before running configure make sure you do:

export SDKROOT=$(xcrun --sdk macosx --show-sdk-path)

> On Jan 20, 2021, at 6:09 PM, Dylan Pham  wrote:
> 
> So I ran below:
> 
> ./configure   \
>--enable-verbose \
>--with-openldap \
>--enable-category-b \
>--enable-bundled-dictionaries \
>--enable-wiki-publisher \
>--without-junit \
>--with-jdk-home="$JAVA_HOME" \
>--with-ant-home="$ANT_HOME" \
>--with-epm=/usr/local/bin/epm \
>--with-dmake-path=/usr/local/bin/dmake \
>--without-stlport \
>--with-package-format="dmg" \
>--disable-systray \
>--with-alloc=internal \
>--with-lang="${LANGS}"
> 
> and I got errors below in terminal (truncated):
> 
> checking gcc home... /usr
> checking for gcc... /Library/Developer/CommandLineTools/usr/bin/clang -arch 
> x86_64
> checking whether the C compiler works... no
> configure: error: in `/Users/devops1/aoodev/openoffice/main':
> configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables
> See `config.log' for more details
> 
> Below is a snippet from config.log, full file has been attached:
> ---configure:6790:
>  $? = 0
> configure:6779: /Library/Developer/CommandLineTools/usr/bin/clang -arch 
> x86_64 -V >&5
> clang: error: argument to '-V' is missing (expected 1 value)
> clang: error: no input files
> configure:6790: $? = 1
> configure:6779: /Library/Developer/CommandLineTools/usr/bin/clang -arch 
> x86_64 -qversion >&5
> clang: error: unknown argument '-qversion'; did you mean '--version'?
> clang: error: no input files
> configure:6790: $? = 1
> configure:6810: checking whether the C compiler works
> configure:6832: /Library/Developer/CommandLineTools/usr/bin/clang -arch 
> x86_64conftest.c  >&5
> ld: library not found for -lSystem
> clang: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see 
> invocation)
> .
> .
> configure: exit 77
> ---
> Upon checking xcode-select -v shows version 2384 (Xcode 12.3) 
> 
> Should I replace in configure file -qversion with --version as the error 
> output seems to suggest? 
> clang: error: unknown argument '-qversion'; did you mean '--version'?
> 
> How do I find out what line in configure file this error below is referring 
> to?
> clang: error: argument to '-V' is missing (expected 1 value)
> 
> What does the number  refers to in configure:: in the config.log (e.g 
> configure:6779:) ? 
> 
> Any idea what I can try to resolve these configure errors? Or is it ok to 
> ignore these errors and proceed with the rest of instructions to build? 
> Thanks.
> 
> Dylan
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.9-RC1 as GA

2021-01-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
My VOTE:

[X] yes / +1

[X] binding (member of PMC)

[X] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [ macOS 10.15, 
CentOS5 ]

[X] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ macOS 10.15, macOS 11.1, CentOS5, 
Ubuntu 18.04 ]

> On Jan 18, 2021, at 8:47 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
> builds of
> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9-RC1 as GA.
> 
> These artifacts can be found at:
> 
>   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/
> 
> Please cast your vote:
> 
> The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:
> 
> [ ] yes / +1
> 
> [ ] no / -1
> 
> My vote is based on
> 
> [ ] binding (member of PMC)
> 
> [ ] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [ ]
> 
> [ ] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ ]
> 
> This vote will be open for 96hrs instead of the normal 72hrs to
> accommodate the US Holiday.
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> 



[VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.9-RC1 as GA

2021-01-18 Thread Jim Jagielski
I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community builds 
of
Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9-RC1 as GA.

These artifacts can be found at:

   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/

Please cast your vote:

The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:

 [ ] yes / +1

 [ ] no / -1

My vote is based on

 [ ] binding (member of PMC)

 [ ] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [ ]

 [ ] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ ]

This vote will be open for 96hrs instead of the normal 72hrs to
accommodate the US Holiday.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [discussion] rename the recruitment list

2021-01-13 Thread Jim Jagielski


> On Jan 13, 2021, at 1:05 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
> 
> I like volunteer@ - it is a call to action. It is the proper verb

+1

Re: pi 4 port update

2021-01-12 Thread Jim Jagielski
This is weird. You say you are trying to build 4.1.9 but the solver version is 
4.5.0 (trunk).
Are you *SURE* you're on the AOO419 branch?


> On Jan 12, 2021, at 12:12 PM, marcia wilbur  wrote:
> 
> So, 
> Here's the error...
> make: *** No rule to make target 
> '/home/aicra/419/openoffice/main/solver/450/unxlngx6.pro/workdir/CxxObject/cosv/source/service/comdline.o',
>  needed by 
> '/home/aicra/419/openoffice/main/solver/450/unxlngx6.pro/workdir/LinkTarget/StaticLibrary/libcosv.a'.
>   Stop.
> dmake:  Error code 2, while making 'all'
> 
> 1 module(s): 
>   cosv
> need(s) to be rebuilt
> 
> Reason(s):
> 
> ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making 
> /home/aicra/419/openoffice/main/cosv/prj
> 
> I tried to force a build in cosv.
> Didn't work. Had an error 
> compilation terminated.
> Starting fresh again. 
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "marcia wilbur" 
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2021 9:38:02 AM
> Subject: Re: pi 4 port update
> 
> Tried 4.1.9 - again. stopped at cosv
> 
> What am I doing wrong...
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "marcia wilbur" 
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 5:43:34 PM
> Subject: Re: pi 4 port update
> 
> Hi Peter, 
> 
> Currently cosv on pi. 
> 
> I think I will start fresh - install what depends I can prior. or... if i can 
> fix cosv and start from there... 
> Will try again tonight.
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Peter Kovacs" 
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Sent: Sunday, November 8, 2020 3:43:06 AM
> Subject: Re: pi 4 port update
> 
> Hi Marcia,
> 
> I am curious.
> 
> what kind of dependency error do you have?
> 
> 
> All the best
> 
> Peter
> 
> Am 08.11.20 um 08:53 schrieb marcia wilbur:
>> Hi - so many dependency errors on pi4 buster.
>> Did i see a post where someone got debian 4.1.8 working?
>> Maybe I should try this...?
>> 
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "Matthias Seidel" 
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 9:21:2i9 AM
>> Subject: Re: pi 4 port update
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Am 03.11.20 um 17:08 schrieb Bidouille:
>>> Hello,
>>> 
 Any news on the ARM port?
>>> Eric Bachard has submitted a patch here:
>>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127040
>>> 
>>> I don't know if this will help :-/
>> Maybe Marcia is able to merge it?
>> 
>> It seems to be for ARM32, but that would be a start!
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>>Matthias
>> 
>>> -
>>> 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
>> 
> 
> -
> 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
> 
> -
> 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: [ANNOUNCE] Release of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9 RC1

2021-01-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
The macOS and Linux community builds have been re-verified and uploaded.

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



Re: [ANNOUNCE] Release of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9 RC1

2021-01-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
It is possible that the Github commit hash #, on the About Page, may be 
incorrect.
100% cosmetic.

> On Jan 11, 2021, at 9:22 AM, Pedro Lino  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim
> 
> I downloaded and installed the Linux x64 builds on Ubuntu 18.04.5 x64 
> yesterday and didn't find any problems...
> What problems should have been detected?
> 
> Regards,
> Pedro
> 
>> On 01/11/2021 1:50 PM Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> I have discovered an issue w/ the Linux and macOS builds. It is NOT
>> a problem w/ the code. As a result, I am removing these builds and 
>> will rebuild them.
>> 
>>> On Jan 10, 2021, at 9:14 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>>> 
>>> The Apache OpenOffice PMC is happy to announce the immediate availability
>>> for testing and review of the 1st Release Candidate for Apache OpenOffice
>>> 4.1.9.
>>> 
>>> Pre-built community convenience binaries can be found at:
>>> 
>>>  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/binaries/
>>> 
>>> With source tarballs available at:
>>> 
>>>  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/source/
>>> 
>>> As noted, this is NOT the Official AOO 4.1.9 release, but these are
>>> the artifacts that will be proposed and voted on as AOO 4.1.9 GA
>>> upon successful testing.
>>> 
>>> NOTE: The macOS images are not App Store signed; they will be signed if/when
>>>approved as GA.
>>> 
>>> We encourage the AOO community to download and test AOO 4.1.9-RC1 and
>>> provide feedback to the project. Upon successful testing and feedback,
>>> a vote will be held to release as GA.
>>> 
>>> -
>>> 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
> 
> -
> 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: [ANNOUNCE] Release of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9 RC1

2021-01-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
I have discovered an issue w/ the Linux and macOS builds. It is NOT
a problem w/ the code. As a result, I am removing these builds and 
will rebuild them.

> On Jan 10, 2021, at 9:14 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> The Apache OpenOffice PMC is happy to announce the immediate availability
> for testing and review of the 1st Release Candidate for Apache OpenOffice
> 4.1.9.
> 
> Pre-built community convenience binaries can be found at:
> 
>   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/binaries/
> 
> With source tarballs available at:
> 
>   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/source/
> 
> As noted, this is NOT the Official AOO 4.1.9 release, but these are
> the artifacts that will be proposed and voted on as AOO 4.1.9 GA
> upon successful testing.
> 
> NOTE: The macOS images are not App Store signed; they will be signed if/when
> approved as GA.
> 
> We encourage the AOO community to download and test AOO 4.1.9-RC1 and
> provide feedback to the project. Upon successful testing and feedback,
> a vote will be held to release as GA.
> 
> -
> 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



[ANNOUNCE] Release of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.9 RC1

2021-01-10 Thread Jim Jagielski
The Apache OpenOffice PMC is happy to announce the immediate availability
for testing and review of the 1st Release Candidate for Apache OpenOffice
4.1.9.

Pre-built community convenience binaries can be found at:

   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/binaries/

With source tarballs available at:

   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.9-RC1/source/

As noted, this is NOT the Official AOO 4.1.9 release, but these are
the artifacts that will be proposed and voted on as AOO 4.1.9 GA
upon successful testing.

NOTE: The macOS images are not App Store signed; they will be signed if/when
 approved as GA.

We encourage the AOO community to download and test AOO 4.1.9-RC1 and
provide feedback to the project. Upon successful testing and feedback,
a vote will be held to release as GA.

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



Re: Got an Apple Developer ID, next week testsigning 4.1.6

2021-01-09 Thread Jim Jagielski
Yes, we have been signing releases since we've obtained the ID years ago

> On Jan 9, 2021, at 7:09 AM, Bidouille  wrote:
> 
> 
> Bump this thread
> This was still actuality?
> And could be apply to next 4.1.9
> A real enhancement for end users
> 
> - Mail original -
>> De: "Peter Kovacs" 
>> À: "dev" 
>> Envoyé: Vendredi 23 Novembre 2018 22:52:20
>> Objet: Got an Apple Developer ID, next week testsigning 4.1.6
>> 
>> Hello all,
>> 
>> I have successfully obtained a Developer ID from Infra. I will next
>> week
>> try to sign the Mac Version. Lets see if we can solve the gatekeeper
>> Issue. :)
>> 
>> Maybe Jim, would you also obtain a DeveloperID?
>> 
>> Checkout:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-17296?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel=16696015
>> 
>> 
>> All the best
>> 
>> Peter
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> 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
> 


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



Fwd: [openoffice] annotated tag AOO419-RC1 created (now a53baa6)

2021-01-08 Thread Jim Jagielski


> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: j...@apache.org
> Subject: [openoffice] annotated tag AOO419-RC1 created (now a53baa6)
> Date: January 8, 2021 at 2:24:06 PM EST
> To: "comm...@openoffice.apache.org" 
> Reply-To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> 
> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
> 
> jim pushed a change to annotated tag AOO419-RC1
> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice.git.
> 
> 
>  at a53baa6  (tag)
> tagging 561082130aec836ff9c7626c642cf3c44fbec11f (commit)
> replaces AOO418-GA
>  by Jim Jagielski
>  on Fri Jan 8 14:19:15 2021 -0500
> 
> - Log -
> Tag HEAD (561082130aec836ff9c7626c642cf3c44fbec11f) of AOO419 as AOO419-RC1
> ---
> 
> No new revisions were added by this update.
> 



Re: Intent to roll AOO 4.1.9-RC1 builds

2021-01-08 Thread Jim Jagielski
Yes, that is the current hash.

> On Jan 8, 2021, at 10:08 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Am 08.01.21 um 13:44 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> By COB today (Friday the 8th) I plan on tagging HEAD of AOO419 as AOO419-RC1
>> so we can start builds over the weekend from that tag.
> 
> That would be 561082130a ?
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
>> 
>>> On Jan 6, 2021, at 3:07 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Matthias and I will be starting our AOO 4.1.9-RC1 builds over
>>> the weekend for testing by the start of next week, hopefully.
>>> 
>>> -
>>> 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 
>> <mailto:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org 
>> <mailto:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org>


Re: Intent to roll AOO 4.1.9-RC1 builds

2021-01-08 Thread Jim Jagielski
By COB today (Friday the 8th) I plan on tagging HEAD of AOO419 as AOO419-RC1
so we can start builds over the weekend from that tag.

> On Jan 6, 2021, at 3:07 PM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> Matthias and I will be starting our AOO 4.1.9-RC1 builds over
> the weekend for testing by the start of next week, hopefully.
> 
> -
> 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: AOO 4.1.9 Info - bug 127952

2021-01-08 Thread Jim Jagielski
This seems like a safe and non-controversial fix to me...

> On Jan 7, 2021, at 4:31 PM, Arrigo Marchiori  wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 07:03:19AM -0800, Don Lewis wrote:
> 
>> On  6 Jan, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Jan 6, 2021, at 9:19 AM, Arrigo Marchiori  
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hello All,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> - My own build of trunk on Linux can open the file.
>>>> 
>>>> Do you think that this is worth more investigation before releasing
>>>> 4.1.9?
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> AFAICT, it is not a regression (trunk and 4.1.x are very different)... So I 
>>> don't
>>> think it should hold off 4.1.9-RC1 IMO
>> 
>> Agreed.  Who knows how long this would take to understand, fix, and
>> test.   In the meantime, there are a lot of Big Sur users waiting on
>> 4.1.9.
> 
> In the hope it can be useful, please see here:
> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/116 
> <https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/116>
> 
> Apparently, Linux crashes because certain stacks are pop()-ed without
> ever being push()-ed before.
> 
> My personal theory is that Windows's standard library may add some
> implicit checks, and for this reason Windows builds do not seem to
> crash.
> 
> The PR addresses the ``symptoms'' of a wrong parsing. The parsing
> itself should be fixed, but maybe this ``quick'' fix is ok for a
> minor release, if it avoids a blatant crash?
> 
> I hope it can be useful. It applies to trunk and AOO419 so it should
> be easily integrated ``at the last minute'' if we found it's worth it.
> 
> Best regards,
> -- 
> Arrigo
> 
> http://rigo.altervista.org <http://rigo.altervista.org/>
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org 
> <mailto:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org 
> <mailto:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org>


Intent to roll AOO 4.1.9-RC1 builds

2021-01-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
Matthias and I will be starting our AOO 4.1.9-RC1 builds over
the weekend for testing by the start of next week, hopefully.

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



Re: AOO 4.1.9 Info - bug 127952

2021-01-06 Thread Jim Jagielski


> On Jan 6, 2021, at 9:19 AM, Arrigo Marchiori  wrote:
> 
> Hello All,
> 
> 
> - My own build of trunk on Linux can open the file.
> 
> Do you think that this is worth more investigation before releasing
> 4.1.9?
> 

AFAICT, it is not a regression (trunk and 4.1.x are very different)... So I 
don't
think it should hold off 4.1.9-RC1 IMO



  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >