Support for maven

2022-12-02 Thread Jim Jagielski
There are some java apps that no longer support ant and
instead rely on maven. Last I checked, I don't think we
support that, do we?

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



Re: Time for AOO 4.2.0 Dev 4?

2022-11-08 Thread Jim Jagielski
Let me know when we are ready for a Dev4 then and I'll kick off the builds.

> On Nov 8, 2022, at 5:32 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim, all,
> 
> Am 07.11.22 um 13:11 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> That works for me. I can do the same w/ the macOS and Linux builds.
> 
> I will use these two graphics for "branding" located here:
> 
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/devtools/build-scripts/4.2.0-Dev4/wntmsci/
>  
> <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/devtools/build-scripts/4.2.0-Dev4/wntmsci/>
> 
>> Is HEAD of AOO42X in a suitable state, or are there additional fixes to be 
>> added before we build?
> 
> It is usable, but some main blockers are not fixed.
> 
> And of course the translations need to be updated.
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
>>> On Nov 6, 2022, at 4:37 AM, Matthias Seidel  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> We released our last Developer version some time ago.
>>> Maybe we can start a Dev4 now?
>>> 
>>> Regarding Windows, I would like to do a "normal" build, just branded as
>>> a "Developer Version".
>>> This way we are much closer to a production build.
>>> 
>>> Additionally, I would like to build AOO with Adoptiums OpenJDK now.
>>> 
>>> How about removing (at least) Dev2?
>>> 
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/
>>> 
>>> 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: Time for AOO 4.2.0 Dev 4?

2022-11-07 Thread Jim Jagielski
That works for me. I can do the same w/ the macOS and Linux builds.

Is HEAD of AOO42X in a suitable state, or are there additional fixes to be 
added before we build?

> On Nov 6, 2022, at 4:37 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> We released our last Developer version some time ago.
> Maybe we can start a Dev4 now?
> 
> Regarding Windows, I would like to do a "normal" build, just branded as
> a "Developer Version".
> This way we are much closer to a production build.
> 
> Additionally, I would like to build AOO with Adoptiums OpenJDK now.
> 
> How about removing (at least) Dev2?
> 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
> 


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



Re: Monteray MacOS build and Python

2022-09-12 Thread Jim Jagielski
Just because Apple doesn't ship it, doesn't mean it's not available. You can 
still download it via MacPorts or Homebrew.

> On Sep 5, 2022, at 9:07 PM, Damjan Jovanovic  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Sep 5, 2022 at 10:36 AM Bidouille  > wrote:
> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> Since MacOS 12.3, Apple don't provide Python 2.7
>> 
>> https://developer.apple.com/documentation/macos-release-notes/macos-12_3-release-notes#Python
>> 
>> So, you can not run any Python scripts anyway.
>> 
>> Annoying...
>> 
>> 
> We have had Python 3 working on Linux/FreeBSD for a while now, in (at
> least) trunk, with system-provided Python, see
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123975#c27 
> .
> 
> We just can't build and ship an internal Python 3, like we do for Python 2
> on Windows.
> 
> Shouldn't using the system-provided Python 3 be possible on MacOS too?



Re: source release with MacOSx build.log

2022-08-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
+1 (patches welcome)

> On Aug 28, 2022, at 5:31 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Andrea,
> 
> Am 28.08.22 um 23:20 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>> On 27/08/22 Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>> Am 23.08.22 um 23:53 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
 I found a note that we package the build log (which is 20 Megabytes.)
 
 It is at least since 4.1.10 Part of the source release and in 4.1.13
 it is the build log for MacOSx.
>>> 
>>> That is most likely because Jim is doing the Source builds on his mac
>>> machine.
>> 
>> See https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127544 (same problem
>> reported by me a few years ago).
>> 
>> As mentioned in the issue, we have an exclude list for not packaging
>> some files from the tree. See
>> 
>> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/trunk/main/solenv/bin/srcrelease.xml?r1=1763017=1763016=1763017
>> 
>> 
>> for an example.
> 
> Thanks for the pointer!
> 
> Time to add "build.log" and maybe some other files... ;-)
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
>> 
>> Regards,
>>   Andrea.
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org 
>> 
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org 
>> 


Re: [CLOSED] Vote Passed: (Was: Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.13-RC1 as GA)

2022-07-18 Thread Jim Jagielski
We are still following the process documented here: 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.13

We are at  Website Updates


> On Jul 18, 2022, at 1:12 AM, Peter Kovacs  wrote:
> 
> When is the release date?
> 
> Am 17.07.22 um 22:51 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> The Windows binaries were signed and re-uploaded.
>> 
>> I created the staged dir on SourceForge and rsynced all binaries.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>>Matthias
>> 
>> Am 16.07.22 um 15:11 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> The polls are closed; the VOTE PASSES.
>>> 
>>> Thx to all who voted and tested.
>>> 
>>>> On Jul 5, 2022, at 7:58 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
>>>> builds of
>>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.13-RC1 as GA.
>>>> 
>>>> These artifacts can be found at:
>>>> 
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.13-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 7 days to allow for sufficient time
>>>> for testing, review, and voting.
>>>> -
>>>> 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] Vote Passed: (Was: Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.13-RC1 as GA)

2022-07-16 Thread Jim Jagielski
The polls are closed; the VOTE PASSES.

Thx to all who voted and tested.

> On Jul 5, 2022, at 7:58 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
> builds of
> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.13-RC1 as GA.
> 
> These artifacts can be found at:
> 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.13-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 7 days to allow for sufficient time
> for testing, review, and voting.
> -
> 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 4.1.13-RC1 as GA

2022-07-13 Thread Jim Jagielski



> On Jul 5, 2022, at 7:58 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
> builds of
> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.13-RC1 as GA.
> 
> These artifacts can be found at:
> 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.13-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, Ubuntu 20, CentOS7

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

macOS, Ubuntu 20, CentOS6, CentOS7
> 
> This vote will be open for 7 days to allow for sufficient time
> for testing, review, and voting.
> -
> 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 on Release AOO 4.1.13-RC1 as GA

2022-07-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
This has been the case for years. Recall that the binary builds are community 
convenience packages.

> On Jul 10, 2022, at 4:51 PM, Carl Marcum  wrote:
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> Checking the signature on the windows binaries I get Matthias's signature and 
> not Jim's (the Release Manager).
> The policy states [1] :
> "All supplied packages MUST be cryptographically signed by the Release 
> Manager with a detached signature."
> 
> I understand the logistics and that Matthias built the Windows binaries and 
> signed them.
> Maybe we could consider Matthias Co-Release manager for this purpose ?
> 
> [1] https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-signing
> 
> Best regards,
> 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



[VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.13-RC1 as GA

2022-07-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community builds 
of
Apache OpenOffice 4.1.13-RC1 as GA.

These artifacts can be found at:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.13-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 7 days to allow for sufficient time
for testing, review, and voting.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [CLOSED] [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.12-RC1 as GA

2022-04-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
Cool. I'l copy over the rest of the build assets

> On Apr 26, 2022, at 3:00 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Signed Windows binaries are uploaded now.
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
> Am 26.04.22 um 16:01 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Hi Jim,
>> 
>> Am 26.04.22 um 15:24 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> I was hoping for more testing and feedback, but we have rec'd the necessary 
>>> number of
>>> binding votes, and so this VOTE PASSES.
>> Yes, I also hoped for more...
>> 
>> However, I will start to sign the Windows binaries and upload them later
>> to dist/dev.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>>Matthias
>> 
>>>> On Apr 13, 2022, at 9:54 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
>>>> builds of
>>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.12-RC1 as GA.
>>>> 
>>>> These artifacts can be found at:
>>>> 
>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.12-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 7 days to allow for sufficient time
>>>> for testing, review, and voting.
>>>> -
>>>> 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] Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.12-RC1 as GA

2022-04-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
I was hoping for more testing and feedback, but we have rec'd the necessary 
number of
binding votes, and so this VOTE PASSES.

> On Apr 13, 2022, at 9:54 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
> builds of
> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.12-RC1 as GA.
> 
> These artifacts can be found at:
> 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.12-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 7 days to allow for sufficient time
> for testing, review, and voting.
> -
> 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 4.1.12-RC1 as GA

2022-04-21 Thread Jim Jagielski
I'll keep this open for a few more days to allow for more testing and voting...

> On Apr 21, 2022, at 1:36 AM, Don Lewis  wrote:
> 
> On 13 Apr, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
>> builds of
>> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.12-RC1 as GA.
>> 
>> These artifacts can be found at:
>> 
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.12-RC1/
>> 
>> Please cast your vote:
>> 
> The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:
> 
> [X] yes / +1
> 
> [ ] no / -1
> 
> My vote is based on
> 
> [ ] binding (member of PMC)
> 
> [X] I have built and tested the RC from source on platform [FreeBSD]
> 
> [ ] I have tested the binary RC on platform [ ]
> 
> I tested the source tarball checksum.
> 
> Opening, editing, saving existing calc and writer docs works.
> 
> 
> -
> 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 4.1.12-RC1 as GA

2022-04-18 Thread Jim Jagielski
+1

> On Apr 13, 2022, at 9:54 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> 
> I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community 
> builds of
> Apache OpenOffice 4.1.12-RC1 as GA.
> 
> These artifacts can be found at:
> 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.12-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, 
> Ubuntu 20 ]
> 
> [X] I have tested the binary RC on platform [macOS ]
> 
> This vote will be open for 7 days to allow for sufficient time
> for testing, review, and voting.
> -
> 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: Building 4.1.12-RC1 Linux x86

2022-04-18 Thread Jim Jagielski
The source of truth on how we build the community packages are the build
script and the config.log file, which shows exactly what packages, features,
and libraries are included. Have you ensured that all the packages from
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step_Linux
 

are installed on your VM?

> On Apr 17, 2022, at 9:25 AM, Arrigo Marchiori  wrote:
> 
> Dear Jim, All,
> 
> I cannot build the current RC on my CentOS 5 VM (x86, 32 bit) using
> the build script from Subversion.
> 
> The configure script aborts because it cannot find the gio library:
> 
> 8<8<8<8<8<8<8<-
> checking whether to enable GIO support... yes
> checking for GIO... no
> configure: error: Package requirements (gio-2.0 ) were not met:
> 
> No package 'gio-2.0' found
> 8<8<8<8<8<8<8<-
> 
> Maybe we should add the parameters --enable-gnome-vfs and --disable-gio
> to the script, because of commit 16f572b ?
> 
> Please let me know if there are any better solutions.
> 
> Best regards,
> -- 
> Arrigo
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> 



[VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.12-RC1 as GA

2022-04-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
I am calling a VOTE on releasing the source and complimentary community builds 
of
Apache OpenOffice 4.1.12-RC1 as GA.

These artifacts can be found at:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.12-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 7 days to allow for sufficient time
for testing, review, and voting.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: 4.1.12-dev developer test builds...

2022-04-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
I'll start work on an RC1 this week. RC1 will be based on 
60e0a1c111c55ed3416146f0d2a848c993474018

> On Apr 7, 2022, at 5:21 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Am 05.04.22 um 14:44 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> Are we ready for a RC1?
> 
> So, basically only three person are interested in a new release... :-(
> 
> Still, we should just go ahead and build RC1.
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
>> 
>>> On Mar 27, 2022, at 9:44 AM, Matthias Seidel  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Jim,
>>> 
>>> Am 25.03.22 um 13:24 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>> ... Are available at
>>>> 
>>>>  http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/
>>> Thanks!
>>> 
>>> I tested your builds on Ubuntu 16.04 (64bit) and macOS 12. Working as
>>> expected.
>>> 
>>>> Assuming these look good, we can progress to an RC1
>>> Given that there was not so much response until now I would propose to
>>> wait some more days...
>>> 
>>> That way people get the opportunity to test the builds and we also could
>>> integrate the latest English dictionary on Tuesday(?).
>>> 
>>> My latest build for Windows can be found here:
>>> 
>>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.12_Win_x86_install_en-US_Test.exe
>>> 
>>> Looking forward to more feedback!
>>> 
>>> 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



Re: 4.1.12-dev developer test builds...

2022-04-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
Are we ready for a RC1?

> On Mar 27, 2022, at 9:44 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Am 25.03.22 um 13:24 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> ... Are available at
>> 
>>   http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> I tested your builds on Ubuntu 16.04 (64bit) and macOS 12. Working as
> expected.
> 
>> Assuming these look good, we can progress to an RC1
> Given that there was not so much response until now I would propose to
> wait some more days...
> 
> That way people get the opportunity to test the builds and we also could
> integrate the latest English dictionary on Tuesday(?).
> 
> My latest build for Windows can be found here:
> 
> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.12_Win_x86_install_en-US_Test.exe
> 
> Looking forward to more feedback!
> 
> 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



4.1.12-dev developer test builds...

2022-03-25 Thread Jim Jagielski
... Are available at

   http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/

Assuming these look good, we can progress to an RC1

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



Re: AOO 4.1.12 patches

2022-03-24 Thread Jim Jagielski
OK, i'll do a quick test build of HEAD on CentOS5 64-and-32 and we'll see if we 
are
ready to rock and roll.

> On Mar 22, 2022, at 8:09 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Am 22.03.22 um 11:33 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> Other than
>> 
>>   
>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?list_id=244111_format=advanced=FIXED=FIXED_WITHOUT_CODE_milestone=4.1.12
>> 
>> What other patches are we looking at?
> 
> That is in general the list of the closed issues.
> 
> 
> Because Pedro had problems to build on Ubuntu 20.04 I recently
> cherry-picked:
> 
> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/commit/ca91c47212927702e72149e398fae850402fa54c
> 
> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/commit/6b1c0a07ced87c91d0adf8f59096a87e364647c0
> 
> Only small fixes, but feel free to revert them if they make trouble with
> CentOS 5.
> 
> 
> For a complete list of commits since AOO4111-GA see:
> 
> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/compare/AOO4111...AOO41X
> 
> 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



AOO 4.1.12 patches

2022-03-22 Thread Jim Jagielski
Other than

   
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?list_id=244111_format=advanced=FIXED=FIXED_WITHOUT_CODE_milestone=4.1.12

What other patches are we looking at?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: AOO 4.1.12?

2022-03-16 Thread Jim Jagielski
Thanks! I volunteer to RM. Is that OK?

> On Mar 15, 2022, at 6:43 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Just FYI, I created a Release Schedule for AOO 4.1.12:
> 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.12
> 
> Feel free to update!
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
> 


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



Re: Openssl, serf and curl... and NSS

2022-02-14 Thread Jim Jagielski
The en-US version of a dev/test of AOO 4.1.12 can be found here: 
http://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: Openssl, serf and curl... and NSS

2022-02-14 Thread Jim Jagielski
If everyone is in agreement, I'll create a macOS and Linux test/dev build of 
AOO41X HEAD
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: Openssl, serf and curl... and NSS

2022-02-14 Thread Jim Jagielski



> On Feb 10, 2022, at 1:13 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Pedro,
> 
> Am 10.02.22 um 18:16 schrieb Pedro Lino:
>> Hi Matthias, all
>> 
>>> On 02/10/2022 4:29 PM Matthias Seidel  wrote:
>> 
>>> I think Jim has Java 7 available, since we always built AOO41X with it.
>> Is there any reason for not updating to Java 8 which is still maintained?
>> Maybe we can let go of Java 7?
> 
> We shouldn't switch the JAVA version within AOO41X without decent testing.

Agreed.

> 
> Of course it builds, but I remember some problems with JavaDoc?
> 
> 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: Openssl, serf and curl... and NSS

2022-02-09 Thread Jim Jagielski
That's right... I'll wait to even try compiling until things settle down and we 
have some slowly moving target I can compile and build against.


> On Feb 8, 2022, at 6:06 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Arrigo,
> 
> No need to apologize. ;-)
> 
> But I think, before we begin to think about upgrading serf we need to
> make sure that AOO41X is able to build successfully on all platforms.
> 
> Windows and Linux are OK, I think. macOS is still pending?
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
> Am 07.02.22 um 08:14 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori:
>> Hello Pedro,
>> 
>> On Sun, Feb 06, 2022 at 09:39:19PM +, Pedro Lino wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Arrigo
>>> 
 On 02/06/2022 9:24 PM Arrigo Marchiori  wrote:
 If anyone can reproduce the problem, i.e. has -- or can set up -- a
 WebDAV server with https access, I can provide a build for testing.
>>> What problem? I use AOO to edit files on webdav.
>> Isn't this bug about WebDAV?
>> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126312
>> 
>> 
>>> I have just used build
>>> AOO4112m1(Build:9809)  -  Rev. 1986472fd5
>>> 2022-02-03_12:29:43 - Rev. 1986472fd5882e9c172fd1e6628697ec0c37d322
>>> 
>>> to edit a file in
>>> https://dav.mailbox.org/servlet/webdav.infostore/Userstore/Pedro%20Lino/Documents/
>>> 
>>> without any problems.
>> According to your and Matthias' results, then it has to be something
>> tied to NTML _and_ WebDAV. I apologize for being inaccurate.
>> 
>> Best regards,
> 


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



Re: unfortunately I have to say goodbye to the AOO project

2022-01-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
++1!

> On Dec 30, 2021, at 5:23 PM, Keith N. McKenna  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 06:13:50 +0100, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
> 
>> Hello everyone,
>> 
>> unfortunately I have to say goodbye to the AOO project, the reasons are
>> family related.
>> 
>> I would like to thank everyone involved in AOO and OOo for the last 16
>> years.
>> 
>> 
>> I wish you all and the AOO project all the best.
>> 
>> 
>> greetings Jörg
>> 
>> (committer-ID: "joesch")
> 
> Wishing you and your family all the best, Jorg and thank you for all of 
> your work over the lasy 16 years
> 
> Regards
> Keith
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org 
> 
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org 
> 


Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
I wonder if maybe we should also consider dropping OpenSSL for LibreSSL

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



Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-19 Thread Jim Jagielski


> On Nov 17, 2021, at 7:36 PM, Carl Marcum  wrote:
> 
> Hi Arrigo,
> 
> On 11/17/21 2:16 AM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
>> Dear All,
>> 
>> I pushed a new branch "serf", that contains the OpenSSL upgrade
>> commits (I reverted the reverts ;-) plus a tentative upgrade of the
>> serf library to 1.3.9.
>> 
>> A small patch is included to allow building with Python3-based SCons.
>> 
>> The oox module also needed minor patching because it uses some OpenSSL
>> functions that were refactored since OpenSSL 1.1.0.
>> 
>> I tested it under Linux with Peter's Docker image (adding SCons). It
>> builds and runs, but I am not sure how to verify if the SSL related
>> problems are solved.
>> 
>> I could not yet test if it builds under Windows and Mac. Any help
>> would be appreciated. Please note that the "serf" branch derives from
>> trunk.
>> 
>> Best regards,
>  I tried to build the serf branch but it broke on serf module.  I think I 
> need Scons.
> Are there instructions to add it?
> 

Yeah, SCons is a problem, esp if we intend to this for AOO4.1.x



Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-15 Thread Jim Jagielski
I'm gonna look into the serf->(lib)curl option... Since we don't use any of the 
fancy features of serf, I'm thinking that the easy option might be best
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-11 Thread Jim Jagielski


> On Nov 11, 2021, at 10:51 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> I still think we should work on 2. somehow.

For AOO42X and above, I agree. It's a lot of work for AOO41X simply because of 
the additional requirements for the old build systems.

Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
Wild question: Why do we even need TLS? I know, I know, that there is this push 
for SSL everywhere, but really, despite what the powers behind the "new 
internet" think, not all comms require TLS.

But Ok, with that off my chest :)

So we think/know that OpenSSL1.1 would NOT have that problem because it works 
around the LetsEncrypt issue. Which means we have 2 options:

  1. Stay w/ OpenSSL 1.0.2 and use the LE hack mentioned in this thread
  2. Upgrade all to OpenSSL 1.1

My assumption is that dropping Serf for Curl wouldn't make a difference since 
both use OpenSSL

> On Nov 11, 2021, at 8:46 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Am 11.11.21 um 14:16 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> According to the serf mailing list, there are issues, at least with the test 
>> suite.
>> 
>> Can someone confirm that AOO42X/trunk do NOT have the problem? It would be a 
>> lot easier to back port the openssl and apr/serf stuff from those branches 
>> to AOO41X than upgrade all to openssl1.1/serf1.3.9
> 
> I just started my xubuntu VM with AOO 4.2.0 and it has the same problem.
> No connection to our Update Feed/Extension site.
> 
>> 
>>> On Nov 11, 2021, at 7:35 AM, Arrigo Marchiori  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello Jim, All,
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 01:19:16PM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> 
>>>> To be honest, I think we are *stuck* with OpenSSL 1.0.2 until Serf
>>>> is upgraded to support 1.1
>>> Sorry... do you mean _our_ serf?
>>> 
>>> Because serf 1.3.9 seems to build and run fine standalone with openssl
>>> 1.1.1.
>>> 
>>> Thank you in advance for making this clear.
>>> 
>>> 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 
>> <mailto:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org 
>> <mailto:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org>


Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-11 Thread Jim Jagielski
According to the serf mailing list, there are issues, at least with the test 
suite.

Can someone confirm that AOO42X/trunk do NOT have the problem? It would be a 
lot easier to back port the openssl and apr/serf stuff from those branches to 
AOO41X than upgrade all to openssl1.1/serf1.3.9

> On Nov 11, 2021, at 7:35 AM, Arrigo Marchiori  wrote:
> 
> Hello Jim, All,
> 
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 01:19:16PM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> 
>> To be honest, I think we are *stuck* with OpenSSL 1.0.2 until Serf
>> is upgraded to support 1.1
> 
> Sorry... do you mean _our_ serf?
> 
> Because serf 1.3.9 seems to build and run fine standalone with openssl
> 1.1.1.
> 
> Thank you in advance for making this clear.
> 
> 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: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-11 Thread Jim Jagielski



> On Nov 10, 2021, at 1:33 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Am 10.11.21 um 19:30 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> We could, but they are worse at releases than we are :-P
> 
> A problem that needs to be fixed... ;-)
> 
> BTW: I think you reverted one of my commits?

Yikes! I must have picked the wrong hash.

> 
>> 
>>> On Nov 10, 2021, at 1:24 PM, Matthias Seidel  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Am 10.11.21 um 19:19 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>> To be honest, I think we are *stuck* with OpenSSL 1.0.2 until Serf is 
>>>> upgraded to support 1.1
>>> Serf is an Apache project isn't it?
>>> 
>>> Should we ask for collaboration?
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Nov 10, 2021, at 12:22 PM, Matthias Seidel 
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Am 10.11.21 um 18:05 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>> Ugg ugg and double ugg
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> We seem to be stuck in a chicken-and-egg situation.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Do we *really* need OpenSSL 1.1? Because even the latest release of serf 
>>>>>> doesn't really support that.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> What is the issue w/ using OpenSSL 1.0.2 that is driving us to OpenSSL 
>>>>>> 1.1?
>>>>> The main problem is that Let's Encrypt root certificates expired at the
>>>>> end of October and OpenSSL 1.0.2 has problems with the new ones:
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://www.openssl.org/blog/blog/2021/09/13/LetsEncryptRootCertExpire/
>>>>> 
>>>>> For whatever reason it still works on Windows, but AOO on Linux and
>>>>> macOS cannot connect to our Update Feed and the extensions site anymore.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Workaround 3 (mentioned in the article) would be a possibility to fix
>>>>> that on the server side.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> PS: OpenSSL is universally, IMO, becoming a major PITA. I'm all for 
>>>>>> upgrades and keeping things fresh, but it seems like it is moving way 
>>>>>> too fast for its consumers.
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> 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>
> 


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



Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-10 Thread Jim Jagielski
We could, but they are worse at releases than we are :-P

> On Nov 10, 2021, at 1:24 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Am 10.11.21 um 19:19 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> To be honest, I think we are *stuck* with OpenSSL 1.0.2 until Serf is 
>> upgraded to support 1.1
> 
> Serf is an Apache project isn't it?
> 
> Should we ask for collaboration?
> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Nov 10, 2021, at 12:22 PM, Matthias Seidel  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Am 10.11.21 um 18:05 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>> Ugg ugg and double ugg
>>>> 
>>>> We seem to be stuck in a chicken-and-egg situation.
>>>> 
>>>> Do we *really* need OpenSSL 1.1? Because even the latest release of serf 
>>>> doesn't really support that.
>>>> 
>>>> What is the issue w/ using OpenSSL 1.0.2 that is driving us to OpenSSL 1.1?
>>> The main problem is that Let's Encrypt root certificates expired at the
>>> end of October and OpenSSL 1.0.2 has problems with the new ones:
>>> 
>>> https://www.openssl.org/blog/blog/2021/09/13/LetsEncryptRootCertExpire/
>>> 
>>> For whatever reason it still works on Windows, but AOO on Linux and
>>> macOS cannot connect to our Update Feed and the extensions site anymore.
>>> 
>>> Workaround 3 (mentioned in the article) would be a possibility to fix
>>> that on the server side.
>>> 
>>>> PS: OpenSSL is universally, IMO, becoming a major PITA. I'm all for 
>>>> upgrades and keeping things fresh, but it seems like it is moving way too 
>>>> fast for its consumers.
>>>> -
>>>> 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: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-10 Thread Jim Jagielski
To be honest, I think we are *stuck* with OpenSSL 1.0.2 until Serf is upgraded 
to support 1.1


> On Nov 10, 2021, at 12:22 PM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Am 10.11.21 um 18:05 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> Ugg ugg and double ugg
>> 
>> We seem to be stuck in a chicken-and-egg situation.
>> 
>> Do we *really* need OpenSSL 1.1? Because even the latest release of serf 
>> doesn't really support that.
>> 
>> What is the issue w/ using OpenSSL 1.0.2 that is driving us to OpenSSL 1.1?
> 
> The main problem is that Let's Encrypt root certificates expired at the
> end of October and OpenSSL 1.0.2 has problems with the new ones:
> 
> https://www.openssl.org/blog/blog/2021/09/13/LetsEncryptRootCertExpire/
> 
> For whatever reason it still works on Windows, but AOO on Linux and
> macOS cannot connect to our Update Feed and the extensions site anymore.
> 
> Workaround 3 (mentioned in the article) would be a possibility to fix
> that on the server side.
> 
>> 
>> PS: OpenSSL is universally, IMO, becoming a major PITA. I'm all for upgrades 
>> and keeping things fresh, but it seems like it is moving way too fast for 
>> its consumers.
>> -
>> 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: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-10 Thread Jim Jagielski
Ugg ugg and double ugg

We seem to be stuck in a chicken-and-egg situation.

Do we *really* need OpenSSL 1.1? Because even the latest release of serf 
doesn't really support that.

What is the issue w/ using OpenSSL 1.0.2 that is driving us to OpenSSL 1.1?

PS: OpenSSL is universally, IMO, becoming a major PITA. I'm all for upgrades 
and keeping things fresh, but it seems like it is moving way too fast for its 
consumers.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-10 Thread Jim Jagielski
Yeah... I'm not sure which is the bigger effort: All the required 
serf/apr/scons upgrade or the Curl one.

For 4.1.X it's much more a big deal, because we support such ancient OSs. For 
4.2.x and trunk, not so much.

> On Nov 10, 2021, at 10:42 AM, Matthias Seidel  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Am 09.11.21 um 21:50 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> I've recently folded in openssl-1.1 to trunk and all branches, but this gets 
>> us in a corner.
>> 
>> To support this version of openssl, we need to upgrade Serf. This means that 
>> we need to also update apr and apr-util as well as include a requirement 
>> that the build server also as SCons installed. This could be problematic, 
>> esp for those older, legacy systems that we want to continue to support.
>> 
>> One alternative is to simply drop Serf completely; we already require curl, 
>> and we could start using curl for the WebDav functionality instead of it 
>> being the (sole, afaict) reason for Serf.
>> 
>> The focus would be on ./main/ucb/source/ucp/webdav and migrating it from 
>> Serf to curl... 
> 
> Looking at that code it may be a bigger rewrite?
> 
> If it takes longer, can we do that in a separate branch?
> 
> Regards,
> 
>Matthias
> 
>> 
>> Comments? Suggestions? Alternatives?
>> -
>> 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



Openssl, serf and curl

2021-11-09 Thread Jim Jagielski
I've recently folded in openssl-1.1 to trunk and all branches, but this gets us 
in a corner.

To support this version of openssl, we need to upgrade Serf. This means that we 
need to also update apr and apr-util as well as include a requirement that the 
build server also as SCons installed. This could be problematic, esp for those 
older, legacy systems that we want to continue to support.

One alternative is to simply drop Serf completely; we already require curl, and 
we could start using curl for the WebDav functionality instead of it being the 
(sole, afaict) reason for Serf.

The focus would be on ./main/ucb/source/ucp/webdav and migrating it from Serf 
to curl... 

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



Re: macOS Monterey

2021-10-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
Agreed 

> On Oct 26, 2021, at 9:38 AM, Pedro Lino  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Matthias
> 
> People who bought the M1 are those who want to have "the latest" so if they 
> are about to upgrade, AOO should be ahead.
> My opinion is yes.
> In any case people with an M1 Apple are probably 0,0001% of AOO users, if any 
> of them would use an old school Office suite...
> 
> Regards,
> Pedro
> 
>> On 10/26/2021 2:12 PM Matthias Seidel  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> Our Apple M1 (MacStadium) offers an upgrade to macOS 12 (Monterey).
>> 
>> Do we want to test it?
>> 
>> 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



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



  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >