Re: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?

2021-06-29 Thread 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.

I am just not sure where we would want to set the bar as far as reducing 
that 253 to a reasonable number.

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



Re: Time for a 4.2.0-dev3?

2021-06-26 Thread 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. 
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.

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



Re: rework the automated tests to not require an office build first

2021-06-12 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2021-06-12 09:13, Carl Marcum wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> cc'd qa@
> 
> I think it would be good to rework the test framework to not require
> having just built the office.
> 
> Currently, to compile and run the tests, there are dependencies on
> environment settings created and files built into main/solver/.
> Mostly things like idlc, regmerge, and javamaker etc. and the UNO jar
> files.
> All these file dependencies are also available in either the office that
> would be under test or the SDK.
> 
> I think it would be a benefit for QA and open the use and development of
> automated tests to testers and developers that don't also have a AOO
> build environment.
> For instance I can run the test suite against Linux where I have a build
> env but not on Windows where I don't.
> 
> The one big thing about this would be it would require a tester to have
> the SDK installed in the office under test.
> I think this is a much lower bar than building the office to get them.
> 
> Does anyone have an opinion one way or the other?
> 
> Thanks,
> Carl

Carl;

I believe that would be a wonderful addition to our QA tools. Currently
I am using windows 10, but do not have the disk capacity for a build
environment. If you can get this working it would enable me to
contribute much more to  our QA efforts.

I am more than willing to run any tests needed for Windows 10 Professional.

Regards,
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Hyperlink Warning Message

2021-06-11 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2021-06-10 09:53, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> Could you provide a test document?
> 
> Or (if you use Windows) make a test with this build:
> 
> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-420-Test/Full%20Installation/Apache_OpenOffice_4.2.0_Win_x86_install_en-US_56e2535bb8.exe
> 
> Regards,
> 
>    Matthias
> 
> Am 04.05.21 um 16:05 schrieb k...@kshelton.plus.com:
>> For some years I've had a Reload button in my Calc document to avoid having 
>> to use the File menu. Just updated to 4.1.10 and now I get a message when 
>> pressing Reload button: 
>>
>> This hyperlink is going to open “.uno:Reload”. Do you want to proceed?
>>
>> Is there a way of switching off this message please?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith Shelton
>>
>>
> 
Hi Matthias;

Unfortunately I cannot as Windows 10 is playing stupid as usual. I
cannot unpack it to my test folder, as 4.2.0 Dev Build 2 is on the
system and AOO rejects the Test build as the Dev-build is considered a
higher revision.

With some of the latest updates I can no longer unpack it to my NAS
drive. I am Leaving Sunday for a week at Conception Abbey in Missouri
and will not be back until a week from Saturday when I will have time to
threaten the system with bodily harm and get at least one one method to
work.

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: sharing "installed" builds for Linux testing

2021-06-11 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2021-06-11 13:49, Carl Marcum wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> On 6/11/21 11:09 AM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>> On 2021-06-08 10:08, Carl Marcum wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> Would sharing the "installed" type builds work for Linux testing of
>>> small changes as long as the architecture was the same?
>>> That way Linux testers wouldn't need to integrate with the system
>>> similar to Windows users having the option of an administrative install.
>>>
>>> I've tested sharing a build from CentOS 7  to Ubuntu 18 and CentOS 8
>>> without any noticeable issues.
>>> It seems the user profile is kept in a sub-directory so I like that
>>> also.
>>>
>>> I didn't know if this had been tried before or if there is a downside.
>>>
>>> After a build I copy the office out to a new directory and then copy the
>>> SDK into it.
>>>
>>> $ mkdir /AOO450
>>> $ cp -r
>>> /openoffice/main/instsetoo_native/unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/installed/install/en-US/openoffice4
>>>
>>> /AOO450/
>>> $ cp -r
>>> /openoffice/main/instsetoo_native/unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice_SDK/installed/install/en-US/openoffice4/sdk
>>>
>>> /AOO450/openoffice4/
>>>
>>> Then the openoffice4 dir gets archived from there.
>>> Users could unpack and test then delete.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Carl
>> Carl, ET AL;
>>
>> There is this mwiki page for doing just what you are asking:
>> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Run_OOo_versions_parallel#Installing_3..2A_versions_.28three_layer_OpenOffice.org.29.
>>
>> It is marked as outdated and may need some updating. As I do not use
>> Linux I have never tried it myself.
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
>>
> Thanks for the link. I haven't ran across this before.
> 
> Actually when you build with config option --with-package-format
> "installed" instead of "rpm deb" you get the directory layout and
> embedded user profile without all that work.
> That's what I suggest building and sharing for quick testing.
> 
> Thanks again.
> Carl

Hi Carl;

I mention the link as I prefer to run builds other than the GA Release
without linking it to my release profile. That way if there is a
problem, I can just delete the test or dev build folder and gone.

Regards
Keith


Regards



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: sharing "installed" builds for Linux testing

2021-06-11 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2021-06-08 10:08, Carl Marcum wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> Would sharing the "installed" type builds work for Linux testing of
> small changes as long as the architecture was the same?
> That way Linux testers wouldn't need to integrate with the system
> similar to Windows users having the option of an administrative install.
> 
> I've tested sharing a build from CentOS 7  to Ubuntu 18 and CentOS 8
> without any noticeable issues.
> It seems the user profile is kept in a sub-directory so I like that also.
> 
> I didn't know if this had been tried before or if there is a downside.
> 
> After a build I copy the office out to a new directory and then copy the
> SDK into it.
> 
> $ mkdir /AOO450
> $ cp -r
> /openoffice/main/instsetoo_native/unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice/installed/install/en-US/openoffice4
> /AOO450/
> $ cp -r
> /openoffice/main/instsetoo_native/unxlngx6.pro/Apache_OpenOffice_SDK/installed/install/en-US/openoffice4/sdk
> /AOO450/openoffice4/
> 
> Then the openoffice4 dir gets archived from there.
> Users could unpack and test then delete.
> 
> Thanks,
> Carl
Carl, ET AL;

There is this mwiki page for doing just what you are asking:
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Run_OOo_versions_parallel#Installing_3..2A_versions_.28three_layer_OpenOffice.org.29.
It is marked as outdated and may need some updating. As I do not use
Linux I have never tried it myself.

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Draft of new Templatew for Release Notes

2021-05-16 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2021-05-16 13:48, Marcus wrote:
> Am 15.05.21 um 18:49 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>> Here is a link to a PDF of a draft of the Release Notes Template on
>> Confluence. The original intent of the template was to create a
>> consistent and professional look and feel to the documentation we
>> present to the public.
>>
>> A number of changes have been made and I welcome all comments and
>> suggestions on format, wording, and grammar. The PDF can be found at the
>> Following link: https://1drv.ms/f/s!AsMYmStvrJNJgQRZMOphRisXB35X
> 
> please delete the link to the .../download/other.html webpage as it is
> no longer existing. It's now only a redirect to the main download page.
> 
> Furthermore the info text at the top "it's not released yet ..." can be
> changed to a colored box which is more visible (insert the macro
> "warning").
> 
> I've done the changes already for the AOO 4.1.11 page but not for the
> template.
> 
> Marcus

Marcus and Digro, thank you both for your input I will start putting
those changes in.

Marcus, I will have to check deeper into the templating system to see if
that macro can be called in the template. I suspect that it can be.

Regards,
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Release Notes for AOO 4.1.11

2021-05-15 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2021-05-15 12:49, Marcus wrote:
> Am 15.05.21 um 18:29 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>> On 2021-05-14 10:04, Marcus wrote:
>>> Keith, thanks for creating new notes.
>>>
>>> I've added a missing space to the headline.
>>> Also moved it to the previously created release schedule, sorry haven't
>>> told about it yet.
>>>
>>> I remember that you wanted to create a new template structure for the
>>> release notes. Is this already done? Or is it coming later?
>>>
>> This reflects the new template structure. I will also be sending a link
>> to a PDF file for all to comment on under its own thread.
> 
> Confluence is a Wiki system where everybody can do changes. And you can
> add comments - for the whole page or just select some specific text, and
> click the comment icon on the mouse tip.
> 
> Do you see a further advantage with a PDF that the above doesn't fulfill
> yet? Please note that attachments to mailing lists are mostly not possible.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Marcus
Marcus, yes I do see a need as you must be a space administrator to edit
the template. Changes must be made there or the idea of a template is a
waste of time. I also have in the works a short user guide for the template.

Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Draft of new Templatew for Release Notes

2021-05-15 Thread Keith N. McKenna
Here is a link to a PDF of a draft of the Release Notes Template on
Confluence. The original intent of the template was to create a
consistent and professional look and feel to the documentation we
present to the public.

A number of changes have been made and I welcome all comments and
suggestions on format, wording, and grammar. The PDF can be found at the
Following link: https://1drv.ms/f/s!AsMYmStvrJNJgQRZMOphRisXB35X

Regards,
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Release Notes for AOO 4.1.11

2021-05-15 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2021-05-14 10:04, Marcus wrote:
> Keith, thanks for creating new notes.
> 
> I've added a missing space to the headline.
> Also moved it to the previously created release schedule, sorry haven't
> told about it yet.
> 
> I remember that you wanted to create a new template structure for the
> release notes. Is this already done? Or is it coming later?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Marcus
Marcus;

This reflects the new template structure. I will also be sending a link
to a PDF file for all to comment on under its own thread.

Regards,
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Hyperlink Warning Message

2021-05-06 Thread Keith N. McKenna
Greetings all;
Apologies for the encrypted version that went to the lists.here it is
unencrypted.
thoughts on the subject in line knmc, the other Keith in the room. ;)
On 2021-05-05 08:37, 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.
From a strictly process standpoint. I see a major problem with a "white
list" that depends on a user manually entering data or picking from a
drop-down list or multiple check boxes. The "average user" who may well
not know what ftps or .uno:is and does is likely to go for the "all of
the above" option. Given that aim of what were a re discussing is a fix
to a security vulnerability, that would be the last thing we would want
anyone to choose.

> 
> 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?
> 
> Other ideas that come to my mind at the moment, just for the sake of
> this discussion:
> 
>  1- whitelist individual targets such as ".uno:Reload" and any other
>  ``complaints'' we will received between one release and the next;

This could be a reasonable solution though I do see potential drawbacks.
1) Is dependent on
> 
>  2- whitelist all ".uno:" targets (but would this open possible
>  malicious exploits?)
> 
>  3- add a generic box "don't ask any more" on the warning window, that
>  disables _any_ future warnings;
> 
>  4- add a generic box "don't ask any more" on the warning window, that
>  disables future warnings for the _protocol of the current link_ (for
>  example all http:// or ftp:// or uno: links);
> 
>  5- add a generic box "don't ask any more" on the warning window, that
>  disables future warnings for the _target of the current link_ (for
>  example ".uno:Reload" or "http://server.com/document.html;);
> 
>  6-  any other ideas worth discussing? 
> 
> Best regards.
> 


>> On 04.05.21 16:05, k...@kshelton.plus.com wrote:
>>> For some years I've had a Reload button in my Calc document to avoid having 
>>> to use the File menu. Just updated to 4.1.10 and now I get a message when 
>>> pressing Reload button:
>>>
>>> This hyperlink is going to open “.uno:Reload”. Do you want to proceed?
>>>
>>> Is there a way of switching off this message please?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Keith Shelton
>>>
>>>
>> -- 
>> 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
>>
> 






signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Encrypted Message

2021-05-06 Thread Keith N. McKenna
Greetings all;
My thoughts and opinions on this subject are solely based on my 20+
years in the field of Process Engineering, as I have very limited
experience with writing or designing code.
My thoughts on the subject will be expressed in line.
regards,
knmc (the other Keith in the room. ;))

On 2021-05-05 08:37, 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.
From a strictly process standpoint. I see a major problem with a "white
list" that depends on a user manually entering data or picking from a
drop-down list or multiple check boxes. The "average user" who may well
not know what ftps or .uno:is and does is likely to go for the "all of
the above" option. Given that aim of what were a re discussing is a fix
to a security vulnerability, that would be the last thing we would want
anyone to choose.

> 
> 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?
> 
> Other ideas that come to my mind at the moment, just for the sake of
> this discussion:
> 
>  1- whitelist individual targets such as ".uno:Reload" and any other
>  ``complaints'' we will received between one release and the next;

This could be a reasonable solution though I do see potential drawbacks.
1) Is dependent on users taking the time to give constructive
   feedback.
a)Conversely,it could generate serious aggravation from
  non-technical users generating a fair amount of
  bad publicity not only in the lists and the forum,
  but also in social media and word of mouth.
2) Could be a reasonable first step until a more automated
   approach can be explored.

> 
>  2- whitelist all ".uno:" targets (but would this open possible
>  malicious exploits?)

This could be an excellent solution. The one caveat is that it should be
well researched so that we do do not again fall into the trap of UC
(Unintended Consequences].This is in no way intended as criticism of the
excellent work that went into solving this security problem and getting
the Release out in a timely manner. The UC trap is always waiting to
ambush anybody in any walk of life.


> 
>  3- add a generic box "don't ask any more" on the warning window, that
>  disables _any_ future warnings;

Again I believe that this could cause problems for the non-technical
user getting frustrated and using it, thus negating the reason for the
check. .

> 
>  4- add a generic box "don't ask any more" on the warning window, that
>  disables future warnings for the _protocol of the current link_ (for
>  example all http:// or ftp:// or uno: links);
> 
>  5- add a generic box "don't ask any more" on the warning window, that
>  disables future warnings for the _target of the current link_ (for
>  example ".uno:Reload" or "http://server.com/document.html;);
> 
>  6-  any other ideas worth discussing? 
> 
> Best regards.
> 


>> On 04.05.21 16:05, k...@kshelton.plus.com wrote:
>>> For some years I've had a Reload button in my Calc document to avoid having 
>>> to use the File menu. Just updated to 4.1.10 and now I get a message when 
>>> pressing Reload button:
>>>
>>> This hyperlink is going to open “.uno:Reload”. Do you want to proceed?
>>>
>>> Is there a way of switching off this message please?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Keith Shelton
>>>
>>>
>> -- 
>> 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
>>
> 








signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Request Mwiki account

2021-05-05 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2021-05-03 15:59, Traill, Patrick wrote:
> For this e-mail address with user name "PJTraill", second choice
> "Patrick Traill".
> 

Patrick;
Welcome to AOO, (Apache OpenOffice) and to the mwiki. Account PJTrail
has been created, and a temporary password sent under separate cover. If
you have any difficulties just post to this list and we will answer them
as soon as possible, or reply with what prompted you to request this
account and we can can provide you with other of our specialized lists
for activities like documentation, translation, and others.

Regards
Keith N. McKenna



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


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

2021-04-26 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2021-04-25 16:15, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> 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 [ ]

The Release Candidate is good for production/GA:

[X] yes / +1

[ ] no / -1

My vote is based on

[X] binding (member of PMC)

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

[X] I have tested the binary RC on platform [Windows 10 Professional]

Also checked the the installer file against the GPG signature file and
Sha-256 and Sha-512 hashes. as well as the installer for the SDK and the
zip file for the source.

regards,
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: AOO 4.1.10 Release Notes - what about "feedback"?

2021-04-25 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2021-04-24 05:53, Czesław Wolański wrote:
> Hi Marcus,
> 
> Thank you for clarifying.
> I don't know if it is essential,
> just a question that occured to me while reading the ReadMe file for the
> umpteenth time.
> 
> Time is going by and I am devolving. ;-)
> 
> Regards,
> Czesław

As I remember correctly Release Notes for 3.4, 3.4.1 and 4.0.0 were
pretty much free style. Version 4.0 was a major release with big
enhancements, top of the list was the introduction of the side bar. In
the context of a major Release the statements that you reference made
sense as it was a major change to the UI.

Somewhere between 4.0.0 and 4.0.1 I developed the Template the we
currently use to generate release notes to give a consistent look and
feel as to where to find pertinent information.

I believe the information is covered, just in other sections of the
notes. However I am always open to suggestions on what could be added or
changed.

Regards
Keith

> 
> Am Sa., 24. Apr. 2021 um 11:19 Uhr schrieb Marcus :
> 
>> Am 24.04.21 um 10:59 schrieb Czesław Wolański:
>>> Release Notes 4.0   [*]
>>> section "General Remarks", the 5th paragraph:
>>>
>>> --
>>> As always we welcome your feedback:
>>>
>>> - Support questions are best directed to our community support forums.
>>> - Bug reports (but not support questions) should go to to our Bugzilla
>>> issue tracking system.
>>> - General questions can also be sent to our public users mailing list.
>>> --
>>>
>>> I know that hardly anyone reads the Release Notes and the issue is
>> trivial,
>>> but I musk ask:
>>>
>>> Does anyone know / remember why the said paragraph vanished?
>>> As of version 4.1, cf. the juxtaposition:
>>>
>>> https://pasteboard.co/JYMNAbw.jpg
>>>
>>> [*]
>>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Notes
>>
>> I don't think there was special reason. As you can see the the whole
>> notes are very different compared with the ones from today. Even in the
>> notes for 4.0.1 this text is no longer there.
>>
>> So, it's just the normal thing: Time is going by and things are
>> evolving. ;-)
>>
>> However, we could add it back if you think it's essential.
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Building on Windows Witj Java8

2021-04-25 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2021-04-25 18:00, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> Am 25.04.21 um 23:54 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>> I am in the process of redoing the template for the Release Notes.Is
>> there still a problem with building AOO on Windows with Java 8? If not I
>> will delete the Note in The Known Issues section.
> 
> That was fixed with AOO 4.1.8:
> 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.8+Release+Notes#AOO4.1.8ReleaseNotes-Improvements/Enhancements
> 
> Where can I find this template?
> 
> Regards,
> 
>    Matthias
> 
Thanks Matthias, i knew we had made that change just couldn't find it in
a quick perusal of the Release Notes.

As for the Template, it has been available as a Space Template on the
cwiki, and has been used as the basis of the Release Notes since Version
4.0.1 I believe.

The Template is available as a Space Template and can be invoked by
clicking the create button on the cwiki and looking for the Release
Notes template. Now that I think about it I will promote it so that it
shows as the top template in the Space.

It basically has the boilerplate text for the Note and asks you to for
the new version, previous version and what type of release and stores
those and inserts them where needed in the Note.

Regards
Keith





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Building on Windows Witj Java8

2021-04-25 Thread Keith N. McKenna
I am in the process of redoing the template for the Release Notes.Is
there still a problem with building AOO on Windows with Java 8? If not I
will delete the Note in The Known Issues section.

Regards,
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: AOO 4.1.10 Release Notes - what about "feedback"?

2021-04-24 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2021-04-24 05:19, Marcus wrote:
> Am 24.04.21 um 10:59 schrieb Czesław Wolański:
>> Release Notes 4.0   [*]
>> section "General Remarks", the 5th paragraph:
>>
>> --
>> As always we welcome your feedback:
>>
>> - Support questions are best directed to our community support forums.
>> - Bug reports (but not support questions) should go to to our Bugzilla
>> issue tracking system.
>> - General questions can also be sent to our public users mailing list.
>> --
>>
>> I know that hardly anyone reads the Release Notes and the issue is
>> trivial,
>> but I musk ask:
>>
>> Does anyone know / remember why the said paragraph vanished?
>> As of version 4.1, cf. the juxtaposition:
>>
>> https://pasteboard.co/JYMNAbw.jpg
>>
>> [*]
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Notes
>>
> 
> I don't think there was special reason. As you can see the the whole
> notes are very different compared with the ones from today. Even in the
> notes for 4.0.1 this text is no longer there.
> 
> So, it's just the normal thing: Time is going by and things are
> evolving. ;-)
> 
> However, we could add it back if you think it's essential.
> 
> Marcus

I will be setting aside time tomorrow after church to go through and
redesign the template that is used to generate the release notes. I will
then generate a dummy release note and send to dev@ and hope there is
more feedback on it than there was on the original.

Regards
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Problmes useing changes with Writer

2021-04-16 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2021-04-15 19:57, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
> On 2021-04-15 18:42, F Campos Costero wrote:
>> I had considerable stability problems with the Getting Started
>> Guide's files. My problem may be different than Keith's but it was fixed by
>> running my Windows 10 system in Safe Mode. The instability was most
>> commonly associated with manipulating (copying/pasting) images in frames.
>> A related symptom is that I cannot view macros stored in OpenOffice
>> documents unless I use Safe Mode because the program crashes. This has been
>> a problem with my current Windows system for a few years. I have tried to
>> determine what driver or program causes the crash but I have failed. Keith
>> - do you ever edit or view marcos?
>> I have a Linux Mint system on which I can test the Stability of the Getting
>> Started documents. I will try that and report the result.
>> Francis
>>
> 
> Francis;
> 
> Thanks for the hint about Safe Mode. I will give that a try.Thanks for
> checking on your Linux machine as well. I do not do macros at all,except
> when I am checking a bug report.
> 
> Regards,
> Keith

Francis;

Working in Windows safe mode did the trick. I look forward to the
results of your tests on your Linux machine.

Regards,
Keith


Regards
>> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 6:00 PM Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Apr 14, 2021, at 4:53 PM, Keith N. McKenna 
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 2021-04-14 19:21, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>>>>> On 2021-04-14 17:36, Marcus wrote:
>>>>>> Am 14.04.21 um 23:11 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>>>>> Greetings all;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am currently having problems with accepting changes with AOO Writer
>>>>>>> 4.1.9 on both Windows 10 Pro and Windows 7, both 64 bit. This is
>>>>>>> currently having an impact on being able to properly edit the New
>>> 4.1.x
>>>>>>> documentation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When I highlight and a change and press Accept in the edit > Changes
>>>>>>> dialog the systems go unresponsive and then crash. On Windows 10 there
>>>>>>> is no error message, the program just quiets, on Windows 7 the error
>>>>>>> message is OpenOffice 4.1.9 has stopped working A problem caused the
>>>>>>> program to stop working correctly.Windows will close the program and
>>>>>>> notify you if a solution is available.When you click the close button
>>>>>>> the program gracefully closes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just wanted to check if others have seen the problem before I open a
>>> bug
>>>>>>> in Bugzilla./
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OK; I'm starting with the usual questions to get some further details:
>>> ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Does it happen with a special document or also with more or all you
>>>>>>   have tried?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Does it also occur in Calc?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - If accessible for you, also a problem on Linux and / or macOS?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>> Hi Marcus;
>>>>>
>>>>> It has happened with all the Getting Started Guide chapters that I have
>>>>> tried. Haven't tried calc will do a quick test document for that.At this
>>>>> time I only have access to my 2 Windows machines.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Keith
>>>>>
>>>> I tried a quick test with calc with no problem. Then I tried an
>>>> unrelated Writer file with no problem. It appears that the problem is
>>>> related only from the files in openoffice-docs/Getting-Stared-Guide.
>>>>
>>>> I will do some further tests on that do not appear to be touched yet.
>>>
>>> Maybe try to do a Save As to a new filename first?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Keith
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
> 
> 




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Problmes useing changes with Writer

2021-04-15 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2021-04-15 18:42, F Campos Costero wrote:
> I had considerable stability problems with the Getting Started
> Guide's files. My problem may be different than Keith's but it was fixed by
> running my Windows 10 system in Safe Mode. The instability was most
> commonly associated with manipulating (copying/pasting) images in frames.
> A related symptom is that I cannot view macros stored in OpenOffice
> documents unless I use Safe Mode because the program crashes. This has been
> a problem with my current Windows system for a few years. I have tried to
> determine what driver or program causes the crash but I have failed. Keith
> - do you ever edit or view marcos?
> I have a Linux Mint system on which I can test the Stability of the Getting
> Started documents. I will try that and report the result.
> Francis
> 

Francis;

Thanks for the hint about Safe Mode. I will give that a try.Thanks for
checking on your Linux machine as well. I do not do macros at all,except
when I am checking a bug report.

Regards,
Keith
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 6:00 PM Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 14, 2021, at 4:53 PM, Keith N. McKenna 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2021-04-14 19:21, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>>>> On 2021-04-14 17:36, Marcus wrote:
>>>>> Am 14.04.21 um 23:11 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>>>> Greetings all;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am currently having problems with accepting changes with AOO Writer
>>>>>> 4.1.9 on both Windows 10 Pro and Windows 7, both 64 bit. This is
>>>>>> currently having an impact on being able to properly edit the New
>> 4.1.x
>>>>>> documentation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When I highlight and a change and press Accept in the edit > Changes
>>>>>> dialog the systems go unresponsive and then crash. On Windows 10 there
>>>>>> is no error message, the program just quiets, on Windows 7 the error
>>>>>> message is OpenOffice 4.1.9 has stopped working A problem caused the
>>>>>> program to stop working correctly.Windows will close the program and
>>>>>> notify you if a solution is available.When you click the close button
>>>>>> the program gracefully closes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just wanted to check if others have seen the problem before I open a
>> bug
>>>>>> in Bugzilla./
>>>>>
>>>>> OK; I'm starting with the usual questions to get some further details:
>> ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> - Does it happen with a special document or also with more or all you
>>>>>   have tried?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Does it also occur in Calc?
>>>>>
>>>>> - If accessible for you, also a problem on Linux and / or macOS?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> Marcus
>>>> Hi Marcus;
>>>>
>>>> It has happened with all the Getting Started Guide chapters that I have
>>>> tried. Haven't tried calc will do a quick test document for that.At this
>>>> time I only have access to my 2 Windows machines.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Keith
>>>>
>>> I tried a quick test with calc with no problem. Then I tried an
>>> unrelated Writer file with no problem. It appears that the problem is
>>> related only from the files in openoffice-docs/Getting-Stared-Guide.
>>>
>>> I will do some further tests on that do not appear to be touched yet.
>>
>> Maybe try to do a Save As to a new filename first?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Keith
>>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Problmes useing changes with Writer

2021-04-14 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2021-04-14 19:21, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
> On 2021-04-14 17:36, Marcus wrote:
>> Am 14.04.21 um 23:11 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>> Greetings all;
>>>
>>> I am currently having problems with accepting changes with AOO Writer
>>> 4.1.9 on both Windows 10 Pro and Windows 7, both 64 bit. This is
>>> currently having an impact on being able to properly edit the New 4.1.x
>>> documentation.
>>>
>>> When I highlight and a change and press Accept in the edit > Changes
>>> dialog the systems go unresponsive and then crash. On Windows 10 there
>>> is no error message, the program just quiets, on Windows 7 the error
>>> message is OpenOffice 4.1.9 has stopped working A problem caused the
>>> program to stop working correctly.Windows will close the program and
>>> notify you if a solution is available.When you click the close button
>>> the program gracefully closes.
>>>
>>> Just wanted to check if others have seen the problem before I open a bug
>>> in Bugzilla./
>>
>> OK; I'm starting with the usual questions to get some further details: ;-)
>>
>> - Does it happen with a special document or also with more or all you
>>   have tried?
>>
>> - Does it also occur in Calc?
>>
>> - If accessible for you, also a problem on Linux and / or macOS?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Marcus
> Hi Marcus;
> 
> It has happened with all the Getting Started Guide chapters that I have
> tried. Haven't tried calc will do a quick test document for that.At this
> time I only have access to my 2 Windows machines.
> 
> Regards,
> Keith
> 
I tried a quick test with calc with no problem. Then I tried an
unrelated Writer file with no problem. It appears that the problem is
related only from the files in openoffice-docs/Getting-Stared-Guide.

I will do some further tests on that do not appear to be touched yet.

Regards
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Problmes useing changes with Writer

2021-04-14 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2021-04-14 17:36, Marcus wrote:
> Am 14.04.21 um 23:11 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>> Greetings all;
>>
>> I am currently having problems with accepting changes with AOO Writer
>> 4.1.9 on both Windows 10 Pro and Windows 7, both 64 bit. This is
>> currently having an impact on being able to properly edit the New 4.1.x
>> documentation.
>>
>> When I highlight and a change and press Accept in the edit > Changes
>> dialog the systems go unresponsive and then crash. On Windows 10 there
>> is no error message, the program just quiets, on Windows 7 the error
>> message is OpenOffice 4.1.9 has stopped working A problem caused the
>> program to stop working correctly.Windows will close the program and
>> notify you if a solution is available.When you click the close button
>> the program gracefully closes.
>>
>> Just wanted to check if others have seen the problem before I open a bug
>> in Bugzilla./
> 
> OK; I'm starting with the usual questions to get some further details: ;-)
> 
> - Does it happen with a special document or also with more or all you
>   have tried?
> 
> - Does it also occur in Calc?
> 
> - If accessible for you, also a problem on Linux and / or macOS?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Marcus
Hi Marcus;

It has happened with all the Getting Started Guide chapters that I have
tried. Haven't tried calc will do a quick test document for that.At this
time I only have access to my 2 Windows machines.

Regards,
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Problmes useing changes with Writer

2021-04-14 Thread Keith N. McKenna
Greetings all;

I am currently having problems with accepting changes with AOO Writer
4.1.9 on both Windows 10 Pro and Windows 7, both 64 bit. This is
currently having an impact on being able to properly edit the New 4.1.x
documentation.

When I highlight and a change and press Accept in the edit > Changes
dialog the systems go unresponsive and then crash. On Windows 10 there
is no error message, the program just quiets, on Windows 7 the error
message is OpenOffice 4.1.9 has stopped working A problem caused the
program to stop working correctly.Windows will close the program and
notify you if a solution is available.When you click the close button
the program gracefully closes.

Just wanted to check if others have seen the problem before I open a bug
in Bugzilla./

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Language versions

2021-03-15 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 3/15/2021 4:10 AM, Man Rub wrote:
> *Good morning.*
> 
> *I would like to collaborate in creating the Venetian language (vec)
> version of Open Office. *
> *I didn't find any sections open for native speakers, so I sent this email.*
> *Could you give me some information about it? *
> 
> *Thank you.*
> 
Greetings Man and welcome to Apache OpenOffice.

Your best bet would be to subscribe to the l10n mailing list by sending
a blank e-mail to mailto:l10n-subscr...@openoffice.apache.org. You will
receive a reply back, which may go to your spam folder. Just click reply
on that and you will get another reply which which again my go to your
spam folder, telling you that you are subscribed.That list is where the
translators hang out and can give more information.

I would also suggest perusing the Orientation pages at
https://openoffice.apache.org/orientation/index.html. The first two
levels will give you an overview of how ASF works and how OpenOffice
fits into that structure and level 2 gives you background on decision
making and the projects infrastructure.

Regards
Keith N. McKenna





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: photo by text ....

2021-02-24 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2/24/2021 12:26 AM, Storm Gill wrote:
> Hello.
> I want to insert a photo next to text. as is seen .  All efforts separate the 
> text and insert the photo in the middle of it.  I have tried a 2 section 
> table, local columns, inserting a photo after editing format, making a pdf 
> with the photo scanned and trying to transform that to a .doc, and nothing 
> works.
> Please, what can I do to have a photo next to my introduction of self on a 
> resume or biography?
> Otherwise I love Open Office and loath MS products. 
> 
> Keep up the good work, and thank you.
> Storm Gill
> 
Storm;

Along with Francis's excellent advise, take a look at this Chapter of
the Writer Guide on our wiki.


Regards
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Priority Issues: (was: How to cope with duplicate attributes in XML tags )

2021-02-21 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2/20/2021 7:40 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
> I would like to answer the priority list first.
> 
> Currently I have following Issues on my mind. The list may not be
> complete or others may have other Opinions, which is fine.
> 
> 
> On 07.02.21 21:51, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
>> If we approve it, I will surely need your indication (as per a
>> previous thread on this ML) about the next "high priority issue" to
>> address.
> 
> Next:
> 
> File corruption:
> 
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126846 and
> https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7=1532
> 
> 
> next 4.2.0 Issues:
> 
> My filter in bugzilla points to:
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=runnamed_id=247426=4.2.0%20OpenIssues
> 
> 
> Maybe someone else has a better list.
> 
> 
> next:
> 
> Patches we have received and we need to integrate:
> 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENOFFICE-45
> 
> 
> 
> Next:
> 
> would be issues with corrupted profile files.
> 
> This seem to be still a thing. I found these Issues:
> 
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121930
> 
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121625
> 
> 
> Next:
> 
> Windows:
> 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENOFFICE-35
> 
> 
> Next:
> 
> Handling of other crashes:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENOFFICE-3
> 
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=125006
> 
> 
> 
> Issues with the extension manager:
> 
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127520
> 
> https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122297
> 
> 
> Issues that deal with Memory leaks
> 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENOFFICE-28
> 
> (Currently only one)
> 
> 

Peter;

Your link comes back as does not exist from Bugzilla. The following 2
links are set as share with registered users and should work for anyone
with a Bugzilla account.

https://bz.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem=run=4.2.0_ReleaseBlockers

https://bz.apache.org
/ooo/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=dorem=run=4.2.0Milestone

Regards
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Contribution to open office development

2021-02-19 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2/19/2021 12:34 PM, F Campos Costero wrote:
> Hi Juan,
> I am not a developer but I have often seen the suggestion that new
> developers try to build OpenOffice from the source so they can begin to
> contribute. The build process could be politely described by "nontrivial"
> from what I have seen on this list. There is a guide here
> . Note
> the platform specific instructions near the bottom. What is your preferred
> platform?
> I hope I am not misrepresenting anything in the above.
> Thanks for volunteering!
> Francis
> 
Francis;

I am not a developer either, but you hit the nail right on the head as
far as advice given by many of the developers. I am cc'ing Juan on this
as he is not subscribed to dev@ and would not have seen your excellent
advice.

The only thing I would add is for you to subscribe to this mailing list
by sending an e-mail to dev-subscr...@openoffice.apache.org You will
receive a reply (also check your spam folder) just click reply to it and
you should get a reply that you are that you are subscribed (again it
could end up in your spam folder). This is the best place to get help or
questions answered by the developers, and also were decisions affecting
the project get made.

Regards
Keith


> On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 9:48 AM juan francisco Minor 
> wrote:
> 
>> I can help with any of them. Wherever help is needed. Some assistance in
>> understanding the code base would be appreciated.
>>
>> BR,
>> Juan M.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Feb 19, 2021, at 8:09 AM, Bidouille  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Juan,
>>> Which application in OpenOffice could you help?
>>>
>>> - Mail original -
 De: "Juan Minor" 
 À: dev@openoffice.apache.org
 Envoyé: Vendredi 19 Février 2021 00:48:13
 Objet: Contribution to open office development

 Howdy,

 My name is Juan Minor. I am a computer engineer with experience in
 C/C++. I would like to volunteer my time to help out with this
 project
 should any help be needed.

 Best Regards,

 Juan M.


 -
 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
>>
>>






signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: How to cope with duplicate attributes in XML tags

2021-02-07 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2/7/2021 10:22 AM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> re-replying to Jim's message.
> 
> On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 02:25:16PM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> 
>> Funny that you bring this up... I'm been tracking down some bugs and they
>> all seem to be XML related... fastsax->libwriterfilter with occasional cores
>> due to __cxa_call_unexpected.
>>
>> I feel that making AOO more fragile by trying to work around cases where
>> invalid and/or non-compliant XML is encountered is just wrong. We should
>> either ignore the error (catch it) or raise an exception. Invalid data 
>> shouldn't
>> be tolerated. Additionally, trying to be "lenient" is an easy vector for
>> vulnerabilities.
> 
> For the record: the detection of duplicated attributes is made
> internally by the expat library. Our code just receives the error
> message and cannot do anything to recover it.
> 
> I don't believe it's worth patching expat to allow duplicated
> attributes. I don't know the library well and I fear about the
> consequences of tinkering with it.
> 
> But then my question becomes: do we want to offer any data recovery
> tools for corrupted documents? Like ``dumb'' XML parsers that just
> shave away XML errors?
> 
>  1- it could be an external tool, written in a language that is easier
> to code into? (like Python, Perl, Java... whatever)
> 
>  2- or an internal pre-parsing phase? It should not be based on the
> expat library though; do we have any other possibilities among the
> current modules?
> 
>  3- or we leave it to hand-crafting by knowledgeable people on the
> forum, as it is happening now?
> 
> I am looking forward to opinions ... and possibily reviews of PR 122
> please ;-)
> 
> Best regards,
> 
Purely from a users point of view I agree with Jim. It should not be
allowed to happen. Asking the user to run an external program, our to
send it to the forum to be hand edit is a recipe for disaster to our
user base and from a marketing standpoint.

I could see an external program as a  short term, stop gap work around.
However it should only be that.

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [Discussion] Would we enable volunteers that develop extensions

2021-02-05 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 2/5/2021 3:53 PM, Steve Lubbs wrote:
> Just a thought.
> 
> As part of an effort to enable volunteer extension authors would it make
> sense to selectively approve extension functionality for inclusion into
> AOO on a case by case basis? If it provides a level of new functionality
> that is considered important and compelling, say something that is on
> the wish list and that no one has the time to pursue? For instance a PDF
> importer that was mentioned earlier.
> 
> With the author's permission and effort the extension could be ported to
> be core code rather than an extension. The author, upon agreeing to
> these conditions could be given the right of first refusal to be the
> maintainer of the code. There should also be a proviso that the author
> will to do the port.
> 
> This, or some permutation, could be one way to reward extension authors
> for their efforts, provide incentive, and provide new supported
> functionality within the constraints of limited resources.
> 
> It goes without saying that this would need to be carefully managed and
> some way to vet the new code would be needed.
> 
> Like I said, just a thought.
> 
> Steve

That could be difficult, as right now extensions authors are free to
license there code any way they like. To bring it into the core code of
the product would require it be under the Apache License 2.0 (ALv2), and
could require a signed Individual Contributor License Agreement as well.

Regards
Keith McKenna

> 
> On 2/1/21 5:06 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> On 2/1/21 1:46 AM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>> I have a question. How much willing are we to support extensions.
>> I think for extensions like report builder where the code is donated
>> and it's a high-profile extension it makes sense.
>> Much more so if we build and bundle during a release.
>>
>> Freedom to do releases is another issue. If they're AOO sub-projects
>> we need to do the releases the same way as the Office and that can be
>> cumbersome for something as small as an extension when they are done
>> independently and frequently and most members may not have the
>> toolchains setup.
>>
>> I ran into this with things like the NetBeans plugin and some other
>> developer tools.
>>
>> I think for the same reason ASF wants a minimum number of developers
>> for a project, a lot of extensions are probably one or two developers
>> and we could end up with a lot of abandoned code.
>>
>>>
>>> I mean we have here a voice recognition questions, there is the
>>> reporting tool or wiki extension.
>>>
>>> We already thinking on creating repos for reporting tool or the wiki
>>> extensions.
>>>
>>> But how do we deal with those topics on the organisatorical level?
>>>
>>> Do we form I do not know how to name them, task force around them? Do
>>> the people who whish to be delevop these functions do this in an
>>> outside project (independant if this is a Apache project or github
>>> self sufficient hosted)
>>>
>>>
>>> I would opt that we agree on some form to enable volunteer to use the
>>> project infrastructure and provide them with a stronger feeling that
>>> they are part of the project even if they are only working on an
>>> extension of none core features.
>>
>> For most extensions I don't think this is necessary when they have
>> GitHub, Sourceforge, etc.
>>
>>>
>>> This makes it easier to bring the community together. I mean the
>>> wording 3rd parties bring a lot of discussion and the need to explain
>>> things, to the table.
>>
>> I think there are things we can do as a project to support a community
>> which we need to grow.
>> Some of which like forums and mailing lists we already do.
>> Extension developers are welcome on the dev@ list.
>>
>> There is an api@ list for that purpose but I thought it was shut down
>> for lack of traffic and I didn't subscribe anymore but I see there are
>> a few recent posts within the last year and almost no replies to them :(
>>
>> Jörg had some good points about Extension Manager support and other
>> tools for extensions and you may know I'm working on new extension
>> creation tools as well.  We can also make sure the Developer Guide is
>> up to date and things like that.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am just wondering what everyone else thinks.
>>>
>>> All the best
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


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

2021-01-19 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 1/18/2021 8:47 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
 Release Candidate is good for production/GA:

[X] yes / +1

 [ ] no / -1

My vote is based on

[X] binding (member of PMC)


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

[X] I have tested the binary RC on platform [Windows 10]
> 
> This vote will be open for 96hrs instead of the normal 72hrs to
> accommodate the US Holiday.
> 



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [discussion] rename the recruitment list

2021-01-13 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 1/13/2021 1:05 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Jan 13, 2021, at 9:55 AM, Marcus  wrote:
>>
>> Am 13.01.21 um 09:25 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>> I wonder if we can rename the recruitment list to something else. My theory 
>>> is that a lot of people do not understand OpenSource in general, and 
>>> recruitment is commonly strongly linked with Job offers. So have the theory 
>>> people write us with the hope on a job.
>>> Maybe a better name would support a better understanding, on how we work or 
>>> what to expect.
>>> Maybe something like enlistasvolunt...@openoffice.apache.org?
>>> Or simply volunt...@openoffice.apache.org or enl...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> what do you think? I am interested in all opinions, even if you are just a 
>>> passive reader or from other projects.
>>
>> I've also the impression that the expectation of this mail address is 
>> different to the one we have.
>>
>> The best is when the name itself says all.
>>
>> So, what about renaming to "volunteering@" or "IwantToVolunteer@"?
> 
> I like volunteer@ - it is a call to action. It is the proper verb.
> 
> Regards,
> Dave
> 

+1 for volunteer@

Keith

>>
>> My 2 ct
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: AOO 4.1.9 Info RC! verification Report

2021-01-11 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 1/3/2021 7:25 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
> .
>>>>> That may be the problem, you have to change the bootstrap.ini, otherwise
>>>>> you use the wrong AOO profile.
>>>>>>> I will do some more tests (next year) with multi install on Windows 10.
>>>>>> Thank you Matthias. I will boot up my old windows 7 machine and try
>>>>>> testing it there as sell
>>>>> I now tested on Windows 10 with multiple AOO installations (4.1.8,
>>>>> 4.1.9, 4.2.0) and could not see a regression.
>>>>>
>>>>> @all: Maybe some other can also test? I don't feel comfortable if we are
>>>>> only two persons...
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>>Matthias
>>>>>
>>>> Changing bootstrap.ini did the track and all problems disappeared. What
>>>> I do not understand is why. Leaving bootstrap.ini as is should just
>>>> point it to the standard profile
> 
> After changing bootstrap.ini all problems initially reported are gone.
> Attached is my updated QA report.
> 
> Regards
> Keith
> 
Attached is the 419 QA Verification Report

Regards
Keith



QAVerificationReport.odt
Description: application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [proposal} Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

2021-01-11 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 1/11/2021 1:04 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> If documentation is being moved to Gitbox/GitHub then we should use a new 
> repository. OpenOffice-Docs or something else?
> 
> Regards,
> Dave
> 
> Sent from my iPhone

OpenOffice-Docs sounds good to me. The only question is how we structure
it. I am very new to GitHub so that I could use some help on what would
be the most appropriate method would be.I had envisioned doing it by
software version with a Review and Published branch under each.

Regards
Keith

> 
>> On Jan 10, 2021, at 2:12 PM, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
>>
>> Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>>>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/license-faq.html#GPL
>>> I was a bit confused myself when I first read it, but why post it on an
>>> ASF FAQ site if it doesn't grant reciprocity?
>>
>> Because, if I recall correctly, back at the time the two Foundations worked 
>> together in order to achieve compatibility (which of course can only go one 
>> way: the GPL puts more restrictions, so it's impossible to use GPL code in 
>> Apache releases).
>>
>> And by the way, the entire GPL discussion is useless since the wiki contents 
>> will never go in a release anyway, as Dave pointed out. So people touting 
>> the "compatibility" are misunderstanding or trolling.
>>
>> Fact is, unless one has something personal against other open-source 
>> licenses, people can perfectly work on documentation that is not under ALv2 
>> (or that is under ALv2 only for the new sections) on the wiki. Unlike other 
>> Foundations, the ASF is rather liberal, or unopinionated, about other 
>> licenses, provided the deliverables are never part of a release; we never 
>> included user guides with releases, so I think we are fine and I agree with 
>> the "narrow" interpretation of the word "release" as defined in 
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-552
>>
>> Regards,
>>  Andrea.
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [proposal} Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

2021-01-09 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 1/9/2021 6:20 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> On 1/9/21 4:40 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>> On 1/9/2021 12:16 PM, Dennis Hamilton wrote:
>>> I think it is clear, from a continuing doc@oo.a.o thread, that there
>>> is no cheese to be found developing derivative AOO documentation from
>>> the original OpenOffice.org 3.2 documentation that was produced
>>> outside of OpenOffice.org itself.
>>>
>>> I wonder if a more vibrant and experienced avenue might be found by
>>> consulting the Apache OpenOffice Community Forum,
>>> <https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/>.
>>>
>>>   - Dennis
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Keith N. McKenna 
>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2020 14:58
>>> To: d...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> Cc: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: [proposal} Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort
>>>
>>> [orcmid] [ ... ]
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>> Actually Dennis that may not be true. According to the the Legal FAQ
>> site https://www.apache.org/foundation/license-faq.html#GPL the Gnu
>> Public License version 3 is compatible with ALv2.
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
> 
> I might be wrong but I'm reading that statement as ALv2 is compatible
> with GPL v3 not the other way around.
> It is a statement quoted from the FSF site.
> 
> Best regards,
> Carl

Carl;

I was a bit confused myself when I first read it, but why post it on an
ASF FAQ site if it doesn't grant reciprocity?

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [proposal} Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

2021-01-09 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 1/9/2021 12:16 PM, Dennis Hamilton wrote:
> I think it is clear, from a continuing doc@oo.a.o thread, that there is no 
> cheese to be found developing derivative AOO documentation from the original 
> OpenOffice.org 3.2 documentation that was produced outside of OpenOffice.org 
> itself.
> 
> I wonder if a more vibrant and experienced avenue might be found by 
> consulting the Apache OpenOffice Community Forum,
> <https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/>.
> 
>  - Dennis
> 
> -----Original Message-
> From: Keith N. McKenna  
> Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2020 14:58
> To: d...@openoffice.apache.org
> Cc: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [proposal} Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort
> 
> [orcmid] [ ... ]
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> 
Actually Dennis that may not be true. According to the the Legal FAQ
site https://www.apache.org/foundation/license-faq.html#GPL the Gnu
Public License version 3 is compatible with ALv2.

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: AOO 4.1.9 Info

2021-01-05 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 1/5/2021 12:46 PM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
> Hello All,
> 
> On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 02:42:47PM +0100, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> 
>> Hi Jim,
>>
>> Am 05.01.21 um 14:29 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>
 On Jan 5, 2021, at 7:51 AM, Matthias Seidel  
 wrote:

 Hi Jim,

 Am 05.01.21 um 13:29 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> Should we try for a RC1 early next week?
 I didn't hear any response regarding this issue yet:

 https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=128413 
 
>>> This was handled by making fakeroot required:
>>>
>>> 
>>> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/commit/4975252caf49bc46c383c6cef330cb927a635806
>>
>> OK, but did anyone confirm it with the test builds?
> 
> I can confirm that the Italian test builds in DEB format did not show
> the problem.
> 
> I am confident that the bug was fixed by Jim's commit.
> 
>> And besides Keith I didn't see any tests on the Windows builds.
> 
> I tried to ask if there is a procedure to follow for testing [1].
> Do we have any? I can follow it for the Italian builds.
> 
> Best regards.
> 
> References:
> 
> 1: 
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r54b17e3692b4207a1c9cdb132d836a7b803d2f65b3548529992c%40%3Cdev.openoffice.apache.org%3E
> 
Arrigio;

There is a lot of QA information on the wiki at:
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/QA. A lot of the information is either
dated, or obsolete but there is still much good information that can be
used.

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: AOO 4.1.9 Info

2021-01-05 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 1/5/2021 7:29 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Should we try for a RC1 early next week?
> 

It appears that we are ready and should go ahead and plan for next week.
regards
Keith

>> On Dec 27, 2020, at 8:49 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>>
>> The AOO419 branch has been created.
>> The version numbers, et.al. have been bumped.
>> The Release Status page has been cloned: 
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.9
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Linux virtual machines for release builds

2021-01-04 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 1/4/2021 11:57 AM, Marcus wrote:
> Am 04.01.21 um 16:27 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori:
>> On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 04:03:35PM +0100, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
>>
>>> first of all, thank you to Mechtilde, Carl, and Jim.
>>>
>> [...]
>>>
>>> I am trying to re-organize the page to make the official release
>>> builders clear, and hopefully leaving the appropriate space for
>>> further contributions.
>>>
>>> Link for a quicker click:
>>> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step
>>>
>>
>> I am done with the re-organization.  If there are no heavy criticism
>> against the current structure, we could add other distributions as
>> sub-chapters. Ubuntu 16.04 is already there as a draft.
> 
> yes please, otherwise the page will be longer and longer and ... ;-)
> 
>> I am open to criticism and/or suggestions on what else to add.
> 
> Is it possible to start with a general page? Then it can introduce the
> build system a bit and the instructions for every distribution has its
> own sub-page.
> 
> I think this would give a better structure to the whole.
> 
> Marcus
Marcus;

That section is only one of nine sections in the build guide. The
general information about the build process are the first section of the
guide.rigio and I have been discussing certain aspects of that on doc@

regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: AOO 4.1.9 Info

2021-01-03 Thread Keith N. McKenna
.
 That may be the problem, you have to change the bootstrap.ini, otherwise
 you use the wrong AOO profile.
>> I will do some more tests (next year) with multi install on Windows 10.
> Thank you Matthias. I will boot up my old windows 7 machine and try
> testing it there as sell
 I now tested on Windows 10 with multiple AOO installations (4.1.8,
 4.1.9, 4.2.0) and could not see a regression.

 @all: Maybe some other can also test? I don't feel comfortable if we are
 only two persons...

 Regards,

Matthias

>>> Changing bootstrap.ini did the track and all problems disappeared. What
>>> I do not understand is why. Leaving bootstrap.ini as is should just
>>> point it to the standard profile

After changing bootstrap.ini all problems initially reported are gone.
Attached is my updated QA report.

Regards
Keith


Verification_Report.odt
Description: application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: AOO 4.1.9 Info

2021-01-02 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 1/2/2021 11:07 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> Am 31.12.20 um 04:43 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>> On 12/30/2020 7:17 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>> Hi Keith,
>>>
>>> Just did a quick test with AOO 4.1.9 on Windows 7.
>>>
>>> Clipboard works as expected for me.
>>>
>>> Regarding the locked files, did you edit bootstrap.ini after "setup /a" 
>> No simply did setup /a and it installed it with the profile in the same
>> folder.
> That may be the problem, you have to change the bootstrap.ini, otherwise
> you use the wrong AOO profile.
>>> I will do some more tests (next year) with multi install on Windows 10.
>> Thank you Matthias. I will boot up my old windows 7 machine and try
>> testing it there as sell
> 
> I now tested on Windows 10 with multiple AOO installations (4.1.8,
> 4.1.9, 4.2.0) and could not see a regression.
> 
> @all: Maybe some other can also test? I don't feel comfortable if we are
> only two persons...
> 
> Regards,
> 
>    Matthias
> 
>>
Changing bootstrap.ini did the track and all problems disappeared. What
I do not understand is why. Leaving bootstrap.ini as is should just
point it to the standard profile

>> Regards
>> Keith
>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>>    Matthias
>>>
>>> Am 31.12.20 um 00:59 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>> On 12/28/2020 5:11 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 27.12.20 um 14:49 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>>>> The AOO419 branch has been created.
>>>>>> The version numbers, et.al. have been bumped.
>>>>>> The Release Status page has been cloned: 
>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.9
>>>>> First test builds for Windows are available at:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-419-Test/
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>>    Matthias
>>>>>
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>> Attached is my QA report for 4.1.9 based on Matthias's 2020-12-29. I
>>>> would appreciate someone checking the issues I point out as I have been
>>>> experiencing occasional oddities with my system of late.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Keith
>>
> 




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Policy to deal with old web content - Archiving pages?

2020-12-31 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 12/31/2020 4:38 AM, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Keith N. McKenna [mailto:keith.mcke...@comcast.net] 
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 9:42 PM
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Policy to deal with old web content - Archiving pages?
> 
>> I agree entirely that archiving is a waste of time and effort when the
>> current tools already can do what is needed.
> 
> And this is theory, because where is the evidence that the current tools can 
> do that?
> The fact that the tools can restore any old editing state is something else 
> than that everyone has access to the old web and wiki pages.
> 
> 
> Jörg
> 
Jorg;

Your lack of understanding of how the tools work does not constitute
them being a theory. You asked for proof here it is:
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Special:ListRedirects. As you see there
are hundreds of redirects in the mwiki. The process by which they can be
created is explained in the MediaWiki documentation which is linked to
in the mwiki sidebar.

Regards
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: AOO 4.1.9 Info

2020-12-30 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 12/30/2020 7:17 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> Just did a quick test with AOO 4.1.9 on Windows 7.
> 
> Clipboard works as expected for me.
> 
> Regarding the locked files, did you edit bootstrap.ini after "setup /a" 

No simply did setup /a and it installed it with the profile in the same
folder.
> 
> I will do some more tests (next year) with multi install on Windows 10.

Thank you Matthias. I will boot up my old windows 7 machine and try
testing it there as sell

Regards
Keith

> 
> Regards,
> 
>    Matthias
> 
> Am 31.12.20 um 00:59 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>> On 12/28/2020 5:11 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Am 27.12.20 um 14:49 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>>> The AOO419 branch has been created.
>>>> The version numbers, et.al. have been bumped.
>>>> The Release Status page has been cloned: 
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.9
>>> First test builds for Windows are available at:
>>>
>>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-419-Test/
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>>    Matthias
>>>
>>>> -
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>
>>> Attached is my QA report for 4.1.9 based on Matthias's 2020-12-29. I
>> would appreciate someone checking the issues I point out as I have been
>> experiencing occasional oddities with my system of late.
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
> 




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: AOO 4.1.9 Info

2020-12-30 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 12/28/2020 5:11 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Am 27.12.20 um 14:49 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> The AOO419 branch has been created.
>> The version numbers, et.al. have been bumped.
>> The Release Status page has been cloned: 
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.9
> 
> First test builds for Windows are available at:
> 
> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-419-Test/
> 
> Regards,
> 
>    Matthias
> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>
> Attached is my QA report for 4.1.9 based on Matthias's 2020-12-29. I
would appreciate someone checking the issues I point out as I have been
experiencing occasional oddities with my system of late.

Regards
Keith


Verification_Report.odt
Description: application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Policy to deal with old web content - Archiving pages?

2020-12-30 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 12/30/2020 10:46 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Dec 30, 2020, at 2:06 AM, Peter Kovacs  wrote:
>>
>> 
>>> On 30.12.20 00:08, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>
> On Dec 29, 2020, at 11:50 AM, Fernando Cassia  wrote:

> On Tue., 29 Dec. 2020, 05:55 Jörg Schmidt,  wrote:

>
>
> Much easier, and imho functionally sufficient, would be a footer on each
> archive page informing that this is an archive page plus a link to the
> start page (web and wiki) of the current pages.
>
 I like the model used by Mozilla here:

 https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Archive/Web/Browser_Detection_and_Cross_Browser_Support

 Header " *This is an archived page.* It's not actively maintained."

 Blurb: " *Warning:* *The content of this article may be out of date.* This
 article was written in 2003"
>>> I like that approach.
>>>
>>> I’ll work to support it.
>>
>> I can work with this too. However currently you can select one or the other 
>> for all our pages.
>>
>> In the discussion we have to go through each page and decide what we do with 
>> this page. I do not believe there is any way to get around the principle.
>>
>> That is why I would like to have a basic concept that we can apply. And the 
>> concept should encourage work and not block it. In this context this seems 
>> like a fair approach
> 
> The two websites are in a Git repository and changes can be reverted. There 
> is no need to be concerned about mistakes.
> 
> MediaWiki pages track versions. I think (but need confirmation) that as long 
> as pages are not moved or deleted that changes can be reverted.

You are correct Dave and they can also be redirected if the entire
document is outdated and have the new document opened if someone clicks
on the outdated link.

> 
> I fail to see a need to officially archive separately when our tools already 
> fill this need.

I agree entirely that archiving is a waste of time and effort when the
current tools already can do what is needed.

Regards
Keith

> 
> Plus, the Way Back Machine - web.archive.org is crawling our websites since 
> 2011.
> 
> Regards,
> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> 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
>>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Policy to deal with old web content - Archiving pages?

2020-12-30 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 12/30/2020 7:29 AM, Carl Marcum wrote:
> Hi Jörg,
> 
> On 12/30/20 1:42 AM, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Carl Marcum [mailto:cmar...@apache.org]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2020 7:55 PM
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: Policy to deal with old web content - Archiving pages?
>>>
>>> Hi Jörg,
>>>
>>> On 12/29/20 3:54 AM, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
 

> We all contribute where we a happiest :)
> 
> I think for something like the developer guides (Basic included) that it
> is more likely that a paragraph may be outdated rather than a whole page
> and how do we also account for that.

That is more than likely a correct statement Carl and there are ways to
deal with it. There are many templates in the mwiki designed for just
this type of thing. They can be found in the Wiki Editing Policy at
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Dashboard/Wiki_Editing_Policy#List_of_Existing_Documentation_Templates.

If we need a new one specific to this problem I can make a new one or
anyone can by following the directions at
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Dashboard/Wiki_Editing_Policy#Adding_a_new_Documentation_Template.

> 
> And we need a way that someone who can and wants to fix things can find
> them. Tags, keywords, etc.
> 

One could file a fig in Bugzilla using the Product Infrastructure then
give a link to the document you are writing it about and gin any or all
sections marked with the template.

Regards
Keith
> Best regards,
> Carl




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Policy to deal with old web content - Archiving pages?

2020-12-30 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 12/30/2020 2:18 AM, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
>  
> 
>> -Original Message-----
>> From: Keith N. McKenna [mailto:keith.mcke...@comcast.net] 
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 2:29 AM
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Policy to deal with old web content - Archiving pages?
> 
>>> If only parts are outdated, then the complete page cannot 
>> be outdated.
>>> Then we have to mark only the respective parts as outdated.
>>>
>>
>> This has been a problem on the wiki for years, even before the project
>> came to Apache. It has only gotten worse as we have hemorrhaged people
>> capable of keeping these pages up to date.
>>
>>
>>>> Many pages are seemingly(!) outdated, but in reality they 
>> are needed
>>>> (e.g. for the daily voluntary support on mailing lists or 
>> in forums).
>>>> Look e.g. at the extremely important pages with technical 
>> info for the
>>>> creation of extensions:
>>>>
>> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Extens
>> ions/Extensions
>>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe we should send pointers to these collections of pages 
>> to dev@ and
>>> judge case by case what to do.
>>>
>> That may be the best way to proceed at the moment. If we know what
>> articles need work we can pool our resources and develop a plan to
>> update what we can to a usable level.
> 
> Yes, without a doubt, but it has nothing to do with archiving.

I respectfully disagree that this thread is only about archiving. The
thread started as a general question about how to handle outdated  wiki
documentation. Some one changed the tittle of the thread and put
archiving? in the tittle. That does not constitute changing the subject
of the thread. At best it adds a sub-topic.

> 
> The discussion here is already huge, but we're not making any progress 
> because we're talking too much about the details. 

That is what a discussion is supposed to be all about; discovering other
ways to do what is being asked about.
> 
> If I, comparatively, have a file whose contents I want to update, what do I 
> do?
> 
> 1. I make a copy of the file first, just to be safe. 
> 2. I make the necessary changes to the file. 
> 
> And regarding the website and the wiki, we should first clarify how to do 
> point 1, where the term for this is not "copy", but "archive".
> 

That is really a very simple question too answer. The mwiki makes a new
version every time you save your edits. If the edits are not to your
liking you can either edit that new version, or revert the current back
to the previous one.

Both Websites are now in separate repositories in or gitbox repository.
any committer can make changes to the pages which will be sent first to
the staging website where they can be viewed and decide whether or not
they meet your intent. Like all other commits they can also be reverted
if they get to the website and there are objections to them or edited
again to make the needed corrections or additions.

Regards
Keith

> 
> 
> Jörg
> 



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Test of AOO-dev 4.19

2020-12-30 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 12/30/2020 7:11 AM, Rory O'Farrell wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:37:18 -0500
> Jim Jagielski  wrote:
 (Off topic: A "Good Thing", in capital letters, is a normally reference to a 
> comic history of England "1066 and All That", by WC Sellar and RJ Yeatman, 
> [London 1930], which boiled all English history down into 103 Good Things, 5 
> Bad Kings, and 2 Genuine Dates.  For people my age (now mid 70s), their 
> division of history into Good Things and Bad Things greatly simplified the 
> historical scene!)
>  

 As a former History major I loved 1066 and all that. Their use of
humour greatly enhanced what can too often be a dry subject. I need to
replace my copy of that fine book.

Regards
Keith






signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Policy to deal with old web content - Archiving pages?

2020-12-29 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 12/29/2020 6:40 AM, Marcus wrote:
> Am 29.12.20 um 09:54 schrieb Jörg Schmidt:
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2020 1:24 AM
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: Policy to deal with old web content - Archiving pages?
>>>
>>> On 22/12/2020 Jörg Schmidt wrote:
 my personal opinion is very simple:
 for me it would be enough to archive a static copy of the
>>> current state of the web pages, a history is not needed (in
>>> my opinion).
>>>
>>> This is what we get by using SVN/GIT (for static content,
>>> like the main
>>> OpenOffice.org site). And I believe this is enough to our
>>> preservation
>>> purposes.
>>>
>>> For mwiki we have templates and that is probably fine; but
>>> maybe we can
>>> find a way (with appropriate plugins) to inject "[OUTDATED]" into the
>>> HTML "title" tag of relevant pages, so that people who use search
>>> engines will not be misled into outdated pages.
>>
>> How do we want to define "outdated pages"?
> 
> in general, for me a page is outdated when there is a new one with
> updated content.
> 
> If only parts are outdated, then the complete page cannot be outdated.
> Then we have to mark only the respective parts as outdated.
>

This has been a problem on the wiki for years, even before the project
came to Apache. It has only gotten worse as we have hemorrhaged people
capable of keeping these pages up to date.


>> Many pages are seemingly(!) outdated, but in reality they are needed
>> (e.g. for the daily voluntary support on mailing lists or in forums).
>> Look e.g. at the extremely important pages with technical info for the
>> creation of extensions:
>> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Extensions/Extensions
>>
> 
> Maybe we should send pointers to these collections of pages to dev@ and
> judge case by case what to do.
> 
That may be the best way to proceed at the moment. If we know what
articles need work we can pool our resources and develop a plan to
update what we can to a usable level.

regards
Keith

>> These pages are outdated in parts, but still there is no more current
>> information.
>>
>>
>> We don't need a super solution, we just need a reliable(!) archive for
>> previous web and wiki pages, i.e. an archive of which we are sure that
>> it includes all previous content.
>>
>> Of course, an 'intelligent' search engine tagging would be a
>> nice-to-have, but I wouldn't really want to spend time on that,
>> especially since, as I just described with an example, it's difficult
>> to clearly tell which pages are really outdated.
>>
>> Much easier, and imho functionally sufficient, would be a footer on
>> each archive page informing that this is an archive page plus a link
>> to the start page (web and wiki) of the current pages.
> 
> The footer is only visible when you scroll comletely down. But many
> pages are longer and the searched information is maybe not far away from
> the top. Then you don't notice that the content is outdated.
> 
> I don't recomemnd to put it in the footer. Having it on top is more
> helpful.
> 
> Marcus




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: New Committer: Arrigo Marchiori

2020-12-26 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 12/26/2020 4:19 PM, Marcus wrote:
> The Apache OpenOffice project is happy to have a new committer on board:
> 
> Arrigo Marchiori
> 
> Please give him a warm welcome. :-)
> 
> Marcus
> (on behalf of the Apache OpenOffice PMC)

Welcome and congratulations Arrigio.

Regards
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [CWiki] Account Whitelisting

2020-12-24 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 12/24/2020 12:46 AM, marcia wilbur wrote:
> 
> Hi.
> Pls whitelist me.
> 
> username: aicra
> Real Name: Marcia Wilbur
> 
> aka - sleepless in Arizona
> 
> Thanks
> 
Account whielisted.

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [CWiki] Account Whitelisting

2020-12-23 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 12/21/2020 5:50 PM, Eric Tian wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I am trying to add my name into the “Directory of Volunteers” page. Could you 
> please whitelist my account? Thank you.
> 
> Name: Tian, Eric
> Username: eric0892
> 
> 
> 
Account whitelisted

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Policy to deal with old web content - Archiving pages? (was: Old build Documentation)

2020-12-20 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 11:03:17 -0800, Dave Fisher wrote:

> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Dec 20, 2020, at 9:58 AM, Keith N. McKenna
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> Greetings Peter, comments are inline.
>>> On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 00:32:15 +0100, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>> 
>>> I change subject since I venture to more generic topic.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 19.12.20 22:15, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>>>>  The Policy for the mwiki is and has been since the days of
>>>>  OpenOffice.org
>>>> (OOo) to NOT delete pages from the wiki but mark them as outdated and
>>>> be sure there is a link to any replacement document.
>>> 
>> All I am attempting to do is to explain what longstanding policy has
>> been for the wiki. If the community wants to change that fine I do
>> believe it needs a [Discusstion] thread of it's own rather than just a
>> change of topic in a related thread.
>> 
 
>>> I suggest we create a archive site (suggestion:
>>> archive.openoffice.org) site, and move pages there, that have only
>>> historic value.
>> 
>> Again should be in a [Discussion} thread devoted to a policy change.
> 
> I don’t think the effort to move obsolete Wiki pages to static html is
> worth it. It’s better to label and point. Perhaps it can be done with a
> macro.
> 

Dave I agree with you. There is a way to redirect outdated pages to the 
newer documents. I will look into the mediawiki documents for the way to 
do it.

regards
Keith

> For obsolete html in www.OpenOffice.org we could mark and move to
> Www.OpenOffice.org/archive/ rather than maintain yet another repository
> and website.
> 
> I think though we can add metadata and a template to quickly mark pages
> as obsolete. Redirection or inserted link using additional metadata is
> possible. This is a few hours work to setup. I would volunteer to enable
> it.
> 
> Regards,
> Dave
> 
> 
>> 
>>> There is no rush, but cleaning up would help us to refresh our minds.
>>> But to forget stuff is important or we run all the time with loads of
>>> old baggage around. And we have difficulties to find the right
>>> information.
>> 
>> That is where we definitely agree. The mwiki has suffered from neglect
>> for far to long and needs an overhaul. Whether that takes place here or
>> in a thread of it's own is up to the community.
>> 
>> Regards Keith
>> 
>> 
>>> just my 2 cents.
>>> 
>>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_be_forgotten
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> 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: Policy to deal with old web content - Archiving pages? (was: Old build Documentation)

2020-12-20 Thread Keith N. McKenna
Greetings Peter, comments are inline.
On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 00:32:15 +0100, Peter Kovacs wrote:

> I change subject since I venture to more generic topic.
> 
> 
> On 19.12.20 22:15, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>>   The Policy for the mwiki is and has been since the days of
>>   OpenOffice.org
>> (OOo) to NOT delete pages from the wiki but mark them as outdated and
>> be sure there is a link to any replacement document.
> 
All I am attempting to do is to explain what longstanding policy has been 
for the wiki. If the community wants to change that fine I do believe it 
needs a [Discusstion] thread of it's own rather than just a change of 
topic in a related thread.

> For me this rule does not add up. Marking pages out dated is not the
> solution. We are not a museum.

> These pages are so dire old, no body knows if that what the pages are
> saying are any accurate, or what.

That is why they were to be marked as outdated ank links to the newer 
documents provided. There is also a way to create internal redirects to 
the newer pages such that if the old document is clicked it automatically 
opens the newer document.

> We should create an Archive section, and then create there a static html
> site that preserves the state in order to honor history.

That is another way to handle it that deserves to be in a [Discussion] 
thread for a policy change.

> We can add some information maybe like contributors and stuff. If this
> sentiment is important. But we should move pages that are confusing and
> irrelevant to our work somewhere they are not in the way.
> 
> I suggest we create a archive site (suggestion: archive.openoffice.org)
> site, and move pages there, that have only historic value.

Again should be in a [Discussion} thread devoted to a policy change.

> 
> There is no rush, but cleaning up would help us to refresh our minds.
> But to forget stuff is important or we run all the time with loads of
> old baggage around. And we have difficulties to find the right
> information.

That is where we definitely agree. The mwiki has suffered from neglect for 
far to long and needs an overhaul. Whether that takes place here or in a 
thread of it's own is up to the community.

Regards
Keith

> 
> just my 2 cents.
> 
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_be_forgotten



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



Re: Old build Documentation

2020-12-19 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On Sat, 19 Dec 2020 13:11:10 -0500, Carl Marcum wrote:
Comments inline
> Hi Peter,
> 
> On 12/19/20 12:09 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>
>> On 19.12.20 14:38, Carl Marcum wrote:
>>> Hi Peter,
>>>
>>> On 12/19/20 8:13 AM, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
 Hello Peter,

 On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 01:30:21AM +0100, Peter Kovacs wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> do we still need the documentation description for:
>
> https://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/source/build_windows_pre638.html
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/tools/dev_docs/build_windows.html
>
> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide
 I read quickly through them and vote for: no, please let us get rid
 of them.

> I mean, the first link is the first relevant result on my search
> results on duck duck go.
>
> And then you click through the history.
>
> My search words are: OpenOffice windopws build
 This is quite infortunate, and (still IMHO) one more reason to get
 rid of those pages as quickly as possible.

 Or, better, have them redirect straight to
 https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO so
 that who clicks on the outdated links is redirected to the more up to
 date documentation.

 Best regards,
>>> I hate running into old cruft on the wiki also. However..
>>>
>>> I think it comes down to keeping thinks for historical purposes.
>> If we want to do that we should create an Archive. And we should then
>> make shure the stuff can be build by offering all needed dependency.
>>>

 The Policy for the mwiki is and has been since the days of OpenOffice.org 
(OOo) to NOT delete pages from the wiki but mark them as outdated and be 
sure there is a link to any replacement document.
>>> We keep old sources around so my thinking is that we should somehow
>>> maintain a place for people to find build instructions.
>> We have the instruction in our Git Repository.
>>>
>>> I do think it would help if they were more specific in exactly what
>>> versions they were appropriate for and have links to current pages.
>>>
>>> These instructions don't always have to be in the form of a wiki page
>>> since they are historical in nature. PDF maybe?
>>>
>>> Kind of like when I recently went looking for information on the mwiki
>>> IDL extension and found the page was deleted 8 years ago.
>> There is a difference between old information that we still need and
>> out dated Information.
>> Maybe we could do something with Archive.org? Maybe we find people that
>> would look into the stuff and create a plan how to archive this stuff.
> I agree there is a LOT of wiki pages and other things that are either
> not relevant anymore or just outdated.
> I'm not sure about depending on a third party as an archive.
> 
> I think a banner paragraph about being outdated with a link to the
> current page is one way to handle it.

I have already marked it with the outdated template and there is alreay a 
link to the replacement doc.

Regards
Keith


> A redirect would be another but hard to view it if it's actually needed
> by someone.
> Maybe a combination of moving the contents to an archive area, adding
> the redirect and adding a link to the archive somewhere on the new page?
> 
> I don't think something like our database backed mwiki is the best going
> forward either if we need to migrate it or upgrade it every few years.
> Plus the dev guide breaking issue we just resolved.
> I'm much more in favor of a file based solution. But a migration would
> be a huge effort also unless some automation is used.
> 
> Maybe this should be a more overall project discussion on how we want to
> handle these cases.
> 
> Best regards,
> Carl



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



Re: Fwd: Broken_Link: "https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Basic/Accessing_Libraries_from_Basic"-rm201208-

2020-12-11 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 12/11/2020 10:01 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> I am not sure what you are talking about here...
> 
> The discussion is about a non working extension for our Wiki server.
> 
> The repository is for our Media Wiki extension?
> 
> 2 totally different things...
> 
> Matthias

Matthias;

The repository Peter created is for custom MediaWiki extensions that
were created specifically for our mwiki. The one in particular is the
one raising havoc with many pages in the development section of the
mwiki were multiple pages will not open because some instructions were
deprecated.

Regards
Keith

> Am 11.12.20 um 12:22 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> I have created the Repository for MWiki extensions with my Proposed name:
>>
>> openoffice-mwiki-ext.git
>> <https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice-mwiki-ext.git>
>>
>> It is ready to add our MWiki extensions.
>>
>>
>> On 10.12.20 20:35, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>>> On 12/9/2020 5:38 PM, Marcus wrote:
>>>> Am 09.12.20 um 18:35 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>> How about we create a OpenOffice-Mwiki-ext Repo in gitbox?
>>>>>
>>>>> We could do the same for the forums customizations.
>>>>>
>>>>> So we have more control over our support code.
>>>> +1
>>>> This increases the chance that also others can have a look and give
>>>> some
>>>> hints when problems arise.
>>>>
>>>> Marcus
>>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Keith
>>>>
>>>>> On 09.12.20 18:24, Dick Groskamp wrote:
>>>>>> On 2020/12/09 11:34:03, Carl Marcum  wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Dick,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have copied it out and it's contents are below.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It should be in github or svn but I haven't had time to do anything
>>>>>>> with it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 12/9/20 5:42 AM, Dick Groskamp wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2020/12/08 18:56:25, Carl Marcum  wrote:
>>>>>>>>> There are still hundreds of broken pages in the dev guide.
>>>>>>>>> Yes it seems to be idls and ildm tags.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There is a new upgraded VM setup for the wiki waiting to get
>>>>>>>>> changed to
>>>>>>>>> but I had hoped to look into before it get switched over.
>>>>>>>>> But I have had limited time and I haven't been able to do any
>>>>>>>>> testing
>>>>>>>>> with it since the URL is being redirected.
>>>>>>>>> I don't know anything about MediaWiki extensions, yet anyway :)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The Infra ticket for our VM is [1].
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The only place I know where the code is in the current wiki under:
>>>>>>>>> extensions/OOoIDLtags/OOoIDLtags.php
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-20339
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>> Carl
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Carl, thanks i will check into it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is it possible to export/copy the IDLTags extension from the MWiki
>>>>>>>> to a more accessible place ?
>>>>>>>> That way it might be accessible for editing or reversed
>>>>>>>> engineering. I think for now it is not reachable.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The filename is OOoIDLtags.php
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> >>>>>> /**
>>>>>>>     * IDL Tag extension
>>>>>>>     * The IDLTagExtension was written to manage the IDL lin

Re: Fixing not showing pages of DevGuide

2020-12-11 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 12/11/2020 5:50 AM, Dick Groskamp wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2020/12/10 19:13:38, "Keith N. McKenna"  wrote: 
>> On 12/9/2020 11:42 AM, Dick Groskamp wrote:
>>> Started this morning to fix the pages that are not showing in the DevGuide.
>>> Due to a broken extension tags ,  and  prevent pages 
>>> from displaying content.
>>>
>>> However, content is there.
>>> Content is editable by tweaking the URL of the not showing page
>>>
>>> For instance:
>>> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Basic/Accessing_Libraries_from_Basic
>>>
>>> needs to become:
>>> https://wiki.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Documentation/DevGuide/Basic/Accessing_Libraries_from_Basic=edit
>>>
>>> so: replacing wiki/ by w/index.php?title=  and add =edit to the end 
>>> of the URL.
>>>
>>> Content is then editable.
>>>
>>> tag  can be changed to  to make it work again
>>> tag  and  need to be replaced by an url to the page.
>>>
>>> Like 
>>> [http://api.openoffice.org/docs/common/ref/com/sun/star/lang/XMultiComponentFactory.html#createInstanceWithContext,
>>>  followed by the content of the tag en closing bracket ]
>>>
>>> Like
>>> [http://api.openoffice.org/docs/common/ref/com/sun/star/lang/XMultiComponentFactory.html#createInstanceWithContext
>>>  com.sun.star.lang.XMultiComponentFactory:createInstanceWithContext]
>>>
>>> It is a manual job and there are a lot of pages. (I'll be busy :-) )
>>>
>> Dick; I will be more than happy to help if you would like to coordinate
>> what is done and what we each can do.
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
>>
>>
>>
> Keith,
> 
> thanks for the offer, much appreciated.
> 
> In the other thread 
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9b07bbcb478d65bb24cb34e41d2dbd68ee6a36ddc734befe391a3148%40%3Cdev.openoffice.apache.org%3E
>  I'm talking to Carl to see if it is possible to make a change to the 
> extension IDLTags by replacing the obsolete ereg_replace function by 
> pereg_replace function, which should work on PHP > 7.0.*
> 
> My suggestion is to see/wait if that is possible on a short term and if not, 
> or if it won't work, to go on with replacing the tags ,  and 
>  by hardcoded URLs. The tag  is still working, probably 
> because it uses str_replace function and not the obsolete ereg_replace 
> function.
> Most frequent tag seems to be , but the problem is that if one of the 
> other tags is on the same page the whole page won't show.
> 
> I hope someone with more knowledge of PHP can help us with this on the short 
> term.
> 
> In the mean time I will check the pages to see where the conflicting tags 
> are, so we have a kind of index to the pages we might have to change.
> That way we have an impression on how much there is to do and how we, if 
> necessary, can divide the workload.
> 
> Does that make sense ?
> 

That makes perfect sense Dick.Will be much better to fix the extension.
I see Peter has set up a a repo for the custom extensions like that on
our gitbox account so once the redirect is removed and someone can get
to those we will be in much better shape to handle this kind of problem
in the future.

If we do need to change things manually it will be great to have the
list of pages so the work can be divided up more easily.

Regards
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Fwd: Broken_Link: "https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Basic/Accessing_Libraries_from_Basic"-rm201208-

2020-12-10 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 12/9/2020 5:38 PM, Marcus wrote:
> Am 09.12.20 um 18:35 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> How about we create a OpenOffice-Mwiki-ext Repo in gitbox?
>>
>> We could do the same for the forums customizations.
>>
>> So we have more control over our support code.
> 
> +1
> This increases the chance that also others can have a look and give some
> hints when problems arise.
> 
> Marcus
> 

+1

Keith
> 
> 
>> On 09.12.20 18:24, Dick Groskamp wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2020/12/09 11:34:03, Carl Marcum  wrote:
 Hi Dick,

 I have copied it out and it's contents are below.

 It should be in github or svn but I haven't had time to do anything
 with it.

 On 12/9/20 5:42 AM, Dick Groskamp wrote:
> On 2020/12/08 18:56:25, Carl Marcum  wrote:
>> There are still hundreds of broken pages in the dev guide.
>> Yes it seems to be idls and ildm tags.
>>
>> There is a new upgraded VM setup for the wiki waiting to get
>> changed to
>> but I had hoped to look into before it get switched over.
>> But I have had limited time and I haven't been able to do any testing
>> with it since the URL is being redirected.
>> I don't know anything about MediaWiki extensions, yet anyway :)
>>
>> The Infra ticket for our VM is [1].
>>
>> The only place I know where the code is in the current wiki under:
>> extensions/OOoIDLtags/OOoIDLtags.php
>>
>>
>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-20339
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Carl
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
> Carl, thanks i will check into it.
>
> Is it possible to export/copy the IDLTags extension from the MWiki
> to a more accessible place ?
> That way it might be accessible for editing or reversed
> engineering. I think for now it is not reachable.
>
>
 The filename is OOoIDLtags.php
 
 >>> /**
    * IDL Tag extension
    * The IDLTagExtension was written to manage the IDL links in the
 OpenOffice.org Developer's Guide.
    * The extension converts Java paths to links back to the online IDL
 documentation.
    * @version 1.0.2
    * @link
 http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Wiki_maintenance/IDLTagExtension
    */

 if ( !defined( 'MEDIAWIKI' ) ) {
       die( 'This file is a MediaWiki extension, it is not a valid entry
 point' );
 }

 // Extension credits that will show up on Special:Version
 $wgExtensionCredits['parserhook'][] = array(
       'name' => 'IDL Tags',
       'version' => '1.0.2',
       'author' => array( 'Clayton Cornell', 'Terry Ellison' ),
       'description' => 'Manage the IDL links in the OOo Dev Guide ',
       'url' =>
 'http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Wiki_maintenance/IDLTagExtension',
 );

 global $wgExtIDLtags;
 $wgExtIDLtags   = new RenderIDLtags;
 $wgExtensionFunctions[] = array( &$wgExtIDLtags, 'oooIDLTags' );

 class RenderIDLtags {

       function oooIDLTags() {
           global $wgParser;
           $wgParser->setHook( 'idl', array( &$this, 'renderIDL' ) );
           $wgParser->setHook( 'idlm', array( &$this, 'renderIDLM' ) );
           $wgParser->setHook( 'idls', array( &$this, 'renderIDLS' ) );
           $wgParser->setHook( 'idlmodule', array( &$this,
 'renderIDLMODULE' ) );
           $wgParser->setHook( 'idltopic', array( &$this,
 'renderIDLTOPIC'
 ) );
       }

       function renderIDL( $input, $args, $parser ) {
           $parser->disableCache();
           $output = $parser->recursiveTagParse( $input );
           $output = '>>> href="http://api.openoffice.org/docs/common/ref/' .
               str_replace ('.','/',$output).'.html" class="external
 text">'.$output.'';
           return $output;
       }

       function renderIDLM( $input, $args, $parser ) {
           $parser->disableCache();
           $output = $parser->recursiveTagParse( $input );
           $page = ereg_replace ('\.','/',$output);
           $anchor = ereg_replace (':','.html#',$page);
           $function = ereg_replace ('^.*:','',$page);
           $output = '>>> href="http://api.openoffice.org/docs/common/ref/' .
               $anchor.'" class="external text">'.$function.'';
           return $output;
       }

       function renderIDLS( $input, $args, $parser ) {
           $parser->disableCache();
           $output = $parser->recursiveTagParse( $input );
           $function = ereg_replace ('^.*\.','',$output);
           $output = '>>> href="http://api.openoffice.org/docs/common/ref/' .
               ereg_replace 

Re: Fixing not showing pages of DevGuide

2020-12-10 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 12/9/2020 11:42 AM, Dick Groskamp wrote:
> Started this morning to fix the pages that are not showing in the DevGuide.
> Due to a broken extension tags ,  and  prevent pages from 
> displaying content.
> 
> However, content is there.
> Content is editable by tweaking the URL of the not showing page
> 
> For instance:
> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Basic/Accessing_Libraries_from_Basic
> 
> needs to become:
> https://wiki.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Documentation/DevGuide/Basic/Accessing_Libraries_from_Basic=edit
> 
> so: replacing wiki/ by w/index.php?title=  and add =edit to the end of 
> the URL.
> 
> Content is then editable.
> 
> tag  can be changed to  to make it work again
> tag  and  need to be replaced by an url to the page.
> 
> Like 
> [http://api.openoffice.org/docs/common/ref/com/sun/star/lang/XMultiComponentFactory.html#createInstanceWithContext,
>  followed by the content of the tag en closing bracket ]
> 
> Like
> [http://api.openoffice.org/docs/common/ref/com/sun/star/lang/XMultiComponentFactory.html#createInstanceWithContext
>  com.sun.star.lang.XMultiComponentFactory:createInstanceWithContext]
> 
> It is a manual job and there are a lot of pages. (I'll be busy :-) )
> 
Dick; I will be more than happy to help if you would like to coordinate
what is done and what we each can do.

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [discussion] future embedded DB in AOO

2020-12-07 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 12/7/2020 1:38 PM, Peter Kovacs wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I would like to know how you guys feel we should move on with our base
> Database. Our current strategy is a small sized embedded DB using HSQLDB
> (BSD). There are 2 other options in the same weight class, that is H2
> (EPL1 or MPL2) and Apache Derby (AL2).
> 
> Something like SQLLite (PublicDomain) could be technical interesting,
> but I think their licensing is not so appealing.
> 
> We could also consider firebird (MPL) like LO, but I have the impression
> that this is not a lightweight DB, but featurerich. And I wonder if this
> is really something we should provide. I would rather develop a way to
> make it easy to switch the DB when a Project grows.
> 
> What are your thoughts?
> 
> 
> All the Best
> 
> Peter

My first question has to be : Why are we still using such an old version
of HSQLDB? As memory serves it is `1.8.0 and the latest release of
HSQLDB is 2.5.1.

Second is why cannot we upgrade to HSQLDB 2.X.

As a process engineer and not a programmer these are simple questions I
need answers for to intelligently contribute to this discussion. Thanks
all for your understanding.

Regards
Keith.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Product Pages - was Re: Flyer for AOO

2020-11-18 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 11/17/2020 7:02 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:

>
> Keith - I just noticed the French product page is broken and the German 
> one is not used. Should there be an effort to translate and normalize 
> those? I took the confusing extra markup off in the CMS migration. I 
> wonder if we can get help from the L10n team? 
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
 Dave,
 I think that a message to the l10n list would be a good idea. Unless the
 translators also follow dev@ they may not even be aware that the switch
 is being made. As you are the one to spearhead the switch and are most
 knowledgeable do you want to reach out? If not I can try and put a post
 together.
>>>
>>> Once we switch tomorrow it will make sense to let the l10n list know about 
>>> the simplification in the product markdown and ask them to consider 
>>> translating the product page.
>>>
>>> Do you think that the English version should be updated first?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>> I am not sure that it really matters if the English version gets done
>> first or not. Do you see any benefit from having the English one updated
>> first? The only possible one that I see is if doesn't have a working
>> knowledgs of French thean having the english one to translate from might
>> be a good idea.
> 
> Exactly. Well, if we have English, French and German a l10n person can take 
> their pick.
> 
> It comes to me also that some of what we want we should have strings for in 
> the SDF files.
> 
> Regards,
> Dave
> 
Yes having the 3 languages would be helpful. As far as there being
strings in the sdf file; All I can say is that historically the two
translation processes have been totally separate and I have no idea if
it is even feasible for the two too be merged. Hopefully someone more
knowledgeable with both processes can speak to that.

 Regards
>> Keith
>>
>>
>>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Product Pages - was Re: Flyer for AOO

2020-11-17 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 11/17/2020 1:43 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Nov 17, 2020, at 9:54 AM, Keith N. McKenna  
>> wrote:
>>
>> On 11/17/2020 11:54 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>> Hi -
>>>
>>> Thanks Emilie!
>>>
>>> Please use the updated AOO logo that shows ® instead of ™ 
>>>
>>> Keith - I just noticed the French product page is broken and the German one 
>>> is not used. Should there be an effort to translate and normalize those? I 
>>> took the confusing extra markup off in the CMS migration. I wonder if we 
>>> can get help from the L10n team? 
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>>
>> Dave,
>> I think that a message to the l10n list would be a good idea. Unless the
>> translators also follow dev@ they may not even be aware that the switch
>> is being made. As you are the one to spearhead the switch and are most
>> knowledgeable do you want to reach out? If not I can try and put a post
>> together.
> 
> Once we switch tomorrow it will make sense to let the l10n list know about 
> the simplification in the product markdown and ask them to consider 
> translating the product page.
> 
> Do you think that the English version should be updated first?
> 
> Regards,
> Dave
I am not sure that it really matters if the English version gets done
first or not. Do you see any benefit from having the English one updated
first? The only possible one that I see is if doesn't have a working
knowledgs of French thean having the english one to translate from might
be a good idea.

Regards
Keith





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Flyer for AOO

2020-11-17 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 11/17/2020 11:54 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> Hi -
> 
> Thanks Emilie!
> 
> Please use the updated AOO logo that shows ® instead of ™ 
> 
> Keith - I just noticed the French product page is broken and the German one 
> is not used. Should there be an effort to translate and normalize those? I 
> took the confusing extra markup off in the CMS migration. I wonder if we can 
> get help from the L10n team? 
> 
> Regards,
> Dave
> 
Dave,
I think that a message to the l10n list would be a good idea. Unless the
translators also follow dev@ they may not even be aware that the switch
is being made. As you are the one to spearhead the switch and are most
knowledgeable do you want to reach out? If not I can try and put a post
together.

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Flyer for AOO

2020-11-17 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 11/17/2020 11:39 AM, Emilie Drd wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> French and English are both my native languages so I’m fine with doing the 
> English version. It shouldn’t take too much time. But I would be happy to 
> have your advice once I finish.
> 
> Kind regards,
> Emilie Durand
> 
Emile;

I did not realize that you were a native speaker of both. I am very
happy to play editor.

Regards
Keith


> From: Keith N. McKenna<mailto:keith.mcke...@comcast.net>
> Sent: mardi 17 novembre 2020 17:33
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org<mailto:dev@openoffice.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Flyer for AOO
> 
> On 11/16/2020 5:11 AM, Emilie Drd wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I'm the one who made the flyer, I can make an english version if you'd like. 
>> I wouldn't mind.
>> It would be nice if we could distribute them.
>>
>> Emilie
> 
> Greetings Emile;
> 
> I believe that an English flyer would be a good idea. I am quite willing
> to collaborate on that as English is my native tongue.
> 
> Regards
> Keith N, McKenna
> 
> 
> 




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Flyer for AOO

2020-11-17 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 11/16/2020 5:11 AM, Emilie Drd wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> I'm the one who made the flyer, I can make an english version if you'd like. 
> I wouldn't mind.
> It would be nice if we could distribute them.
> 
> Emilie

Greetings Emile;

I believe that an English flyer would be a good idea. I am quite willing
to collaborate on that as English is my native tongue.

Regards
Keith N, McKenna




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [VOTE] Release AOO 4.1.8-RC2 as GA

2020-11-03 Thread Keith N. McKenna

   [X] yes / +1

   [ ] no / -1

 My vote is based on

   [X] binding (member of PMC)

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

   [X] I have tested the binary RC on platform [windows 10 Home]

Verified .asc and sha 256, and 512 and multiple issues tagged as
Milestone 4.1.8.
Full report can be downloaded from
https://1drv.ms/f/s!AsMYmStvrJNJinVnnJWlYCHrxzmc



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Wiki Publisher

2020-10-27 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 10/26/2020 10:52 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Joost,
> 
> Am 26.10.20 um 13:19 schrieb Joost Andrae:
>> Hi Matthias,
>>
>> I've just tried it out against a different MediaWiki and I can confirm
>> it is running well !
> 
> Thanks, that's great news!
> 
> @Keith: Is this useful for your documentation efforts?
> 
> Regards,
> 
>    Matthias
> @Matthias: Theoretically yes it would be, however the response from doc@
has been totally underwhelming.

Keith
>>
>> Best regards, Joost
>>
>> Am 26.10.2020 um 00:53 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I just discovered that the Wiki Publisher we build with AOO 4.1.8 does
>>> seem to work!
>>>
>>> https://wiki.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Test-MS
>>>
>>> The remaining problem is that it does not get bundled with the release.
>>> I will investigate further...
>>>
>>> Can you please test:
>>>
>>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/wiki-publisher.oxt
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>>     Matthias
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>
> 




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: AOO418-RC2: General Error on opening files on Ubuntu

2020-10-17 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 10/17/2020 8:23 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Let's go ahead and pull those in. I will then bump up to RC3. I'll provide a 
> quick Linux64 build for people to test w/ some configure changes to better 
> match Andrea's and if they look OK, I'll do a full suite of Rc3 builds.
> 
> Sound like a plan?

+1

Keith

> 
>> On Oct 16, 2020, at 4:01 PM, Matthias Seidel  
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jim,
>>
>> We already have two potential PRs that could go into a possible RC3.
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/105
>> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/106
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>Matthias
>>
>> Am 15.10.20 um 00:05 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> My next trial will be w/o stdlibs.
>>>
>>>
 On Oct 14, 2020, at 5:08 PM, Peter Kovacs  wrote:

 Jim is building on an older CentOS. Could that trigger something?

 Am 14.10.20 um 23:05 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> Am 14.10.20 um 21:19 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>>> I'm just looking to see where the fix/patch is :-)
>> The problem is... There was none. It just vanished at one point. ;-)
> If the bug is in code, I don't understand why my builds at
> https://home.apache.org/~pescetti/openoffice-4.1.8-rc2/
> don't have the error then.
>
> On the same Ubuntu 20.04 system I can consistently reproduce the error 
> with Jim's DEBs but not with mine (either the custom build or the one 
> with release flags). And they are obviously all based on the same code.
>
> Of course, I'd prefer very much that the error is found and fixed, even 
> if this doesn't look easy. But I'm also available for the "quick" 
> solution, i.e., I can build DEBs for all languages, doing my best to 
> apply the release flags/scripts properly, the coming weekend. The builds 
> would be done on CentOS 7 (glibc 2.17), which means the DEBs would run on 
> Ubuntu 13.04 and later.
>
> Regards,
>  Andrea.
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

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




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: AOO 4.1.8 Release Notes - draft

2020-10-15 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 10/15/2020 7:25 AM, Dick Groskamp wrote:
> Fixed the entries mentioned bij Czeslaw
> 

Thanks Dick. I had seen the request but got tied up with the grand kids
and forgot to set a reminder to fix it.

Regards
Keith

> On 2020/10/12 14:49:01, Matthias Seidel  wrote: 
>> Hi,
>>
>> Am 12.10.20 um 16:44 schrieb Czesław Wolański:
>>> Hi Matthias,
>>>
 You might not know, but as a committer
 you can log into cWiki by using
 your ASF credentials.
>>> Yes, I might not know, with emphasis placed on "might".
>>> Better late then ever. ;-)
>>
>> Shouldn't that be "than never" then? ;-)
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>    Matthias
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Czesław
>>>
>>>
>>> пн, 12 окт. 2020 г. в 16:10, Matthias Seidel :
>>>
 Hi Czesław,

 Am 12.10.20 um 13:36 schrieb Czesław Wolański:
> Hi,
>
> Draft AOO 4.1.8 Release Notes, section "Known Issues" - "For macOS
 users":
> *1. Space*
> Space is needed in "password.This".
> (space is present in AOO 4.1.7 Release Notes)
>
> *2. "than"*
>
> I suspect that "than" is inappropriate in the sentence:
>
>"If not able to upgrade to Java 9 than install the legacy version of
> Apple Java from the following link: Legacy Apple Java 6."
>
> "than" is also in AOO 4.1.7 Release Notes. Could it be changed to
 "then"? (
>   Better late then ever  ;‑)   ).
 Hawkeye... ;-)

 You might not know, but as a committer you can log into cWiki by using
 your ASF credentials.

 You should be able to edit it then.

 Regards,

Matthias

> See image file available at the following link:
>
>
 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rR3j8PGvyzfydZMxG8X31e2T80nFTmR1/view?usp=sharing
>
> Regards,
> Czesław Wolański
>

>>
>>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Verification Report for AOO 4.1.8 RC2

2020-10-10 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 10/10/2020 7:20 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> Am 11.10.20 um 01:06 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>> On 10/10/2020 6:25 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>> Hi Keith,
>>>
>>> Am 11.10.20 um 00:06 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>> As I have seen no mention of a formal cancellation
>>>> of 4.1.8 RC2 My final QA Report can be downloaded from:
>>>> https://1drv.ms/f/s!AsMYmStvrJNJinVnnJWlYCHrxzmc
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> I am certain this report is for RC2 but it mentions one of my Test builds:
>>>
>>> Apache Open OfficeAOO418m1(Build:9801) - Rev. 2b2dfb9831
>>> 2020-08-23 01:29 - CYGWIN_NT-10.0-WOW i686 - Development Test Build
>>>
>>> RC2 on Windows seems OK, but I think we must investigate other problems.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>>    Matthias
>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Keith
>>>>
>> I am confused Matthias as the only report in
>> https://1drv.ms/f/s!AsMYmStvrJNJinVnnJWlYCHrxzmc is a PDF of the RC2
>> Release. here was an old .txt file for an older dev build of yours that
>> may not have finished deleting when you checked,
> 
> I am talking about the PDF available via your link.
> 
> It says it is about RC2:
> 
> Verification of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.8-RC2
> 
> But later on:
> 
> Operating System: Windows 10 Version 2004 (OS Build 19041.508)
> Apache Open OfficeAOO418m1(Build:9801) - Rev. 2b2dfb9831
> 2020-08-23 01:29 - CYGWIN_NT-10.0-WOW i686 - Development Test Build
> 
> I am sure you tested RC2 and not my build from August 23. ;-)
> 
> Regards,
> 
>    Matthias
> 

Yes that is a cut and paste from a notes tool and I forgot to update it.
I will take care of that right know so it will be right for the next round.

Keith

>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
> 




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Verification Report for AOO 4.1.8 RC2

2020-10-10 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 10/10/2020 6:25 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> Am 11.10.20 um 00:06 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>> As I have seen no mention of a formal cancellation
>> of 4.1.8 RC2 My final QA Report can be downloaded from:
>> https://1drv.ms/f/s!AsMYmStvrJNJinVnnJWlYCHrxzmc
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> I am certain this report is for RC2 but it mentions one of my Test builds:
> 
> Apache Open OfficeAOO418m1(Build:9801) - Rev. 2b2dfb9831
> 2020-08-23 01:29 - CYGWIN_NT-10.0-WOW i686 - Development Test Build
> 
> RC2 on Windows seems OK, but I think we must investigate other problems.
> 
> Regards,
> 
>    Matthias
> 
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
>>
> 
I am confused Matthias as the only report in
https://1drv.ms/f/s!AsMYmStvrJNJinVnnJWlYCHrxzmc is a PDF of the RC2
Release. here was an old .txt file for an older dev build of yours that
may not have finished deleting when you checked,

Regards
Keith


Regards



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Verification Report for AOO 4.1.8 RC2

2020-10-10 Thread Keith N. McKenna
As I have seen no mention of a formal cancellation
of 4.1.8 RC2 My final QA Report can be downloaded from:
https://1drv.ms/f/s!AsMYmStvrJNJinVnnJWlYCHrxzmc

Regards
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: potential problem with version 4.1.8 RC2

2020-10-09 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 10/9/2020 4:25 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
> On 10/9/2020 2:56 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> Hi Keith,
>>
>> Am 09.10.20 um 20:51 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>> When I install 4.1.8 RC2 on windows 10: System Configuration:
>>> Processor: Intel  Pentium CPU 4450U @2.10GHz
>>> Installed Memory: 8.00 GB
>>> System Type 64-bit Operating System X64-based processor
>>> Operating System: Windows 10 Version 1909 (OS Build 18363.1016)
>>> I get the following error message:
>>>
>>> OpenOffice 4.1.8 - Fatal Error
>>> The application cannot be started.
>>> [context= "shared"]caught unexpected exception
>>
>> It starts without problem on my Windows 10 2004.
>>
>> Can you try one of these:
>>
>> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-418-Test/Full%20Installation/
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>    Matthias
>>
>>>
> 
> Hi Matthias;
> 
> Tried the en-us from there with same. I installed the RC1 with no
> problem I will do a complete uninstall of that and try RC2 again.
> 
> Keith
> 
Greetings all;

Uninstalled RC1 and then installed RC2 again and know opens with no
problem. Thanks to all

Regards
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: potential problem with version 4.1.8 RC2

2020-10-09 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 10/9/2020 2:56 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> Am 09.10.20 um 20:51 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>> When I install 4.1.8 RC2 on windows 10: System Configuration:
>> Processor: Intel  Pentium CPU 4450U @2.10GHz
>> Installed Memory: 8.00 GB
>> System Type 64-bit Operating System X64-based processor
>> Operating System: Windows 10 Version 1909 (OS Build 18363.1016)
>> I get the following error message:
>>
>> OpenOffice 4.1.8 - Fatal Error
>> The application cannot be started.
>> [context= "shared"]caught unexpected exception
> 
> It starts without problem on my Windows 10 2004.
> 
> Can you try one of these:
> 
> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-418-Test/Full%20Installation/
> 
> Regards,
> 
>    Matthias
> 
>>

Hi Matthias;

Tried the en-us from there with same. I installed the RC1 with no
problem I will do a complete uninstall of that and try RC2 again.

Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: potential problem with version 4.1.8 RC2

2020-10-09 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 10/9/2020 2:53 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> Do you get similar with DOA RC1?

Just installed 4.1.8 RC1 and opened with no problem.

> 
>> On Oct 9, 2020, at 11:51 AM, Keith N. McKenna  
>> wrote:
>>
>> When I install 4.1.8 RC2 on windows 10: System Configuration:
>> Processor: Intel  Pentium CPU 4450U @2.10GHz
>> Installed Memory: 8.00 GB
>> System Type 64-bit Operating System X64-based processor
>> Operating System: Windows 10 Version 1909 (OS Build 18363.1016)
>> I get the following error message:
>>
>> OpenOffice 4.1.8 - Fatal Error
>> The application cannot be started.
>> [context= "shared"]caught unexpected exception
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
>>



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


potential problem with version 4.1.8 RC2

2020-10-09 Thread Keith N. McKenna
When I install 4.1.8 RC2 on windows 10: System Configuration:
Processor: Intel  Pentium CPU 4450U @2.10GHz
Installed Memory: 8.00 GB
System Type 64-bit Operating System X64-based processor
Operating System: Windows 10 Version 1909 (OS Build 18363.1016)
I get the following error message:

OpenOffice 4.1.8 - Fatal Error
The application cannot be started.
[context= "shared"]caught unexpected exception

Regards
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Results of QA testing on 4.1.8 0c0e82a55d

2020-10-05 Thread Keith N. McKenna
Attached is the QA report for my testing on AOO 4.1.8 0c0e82a55d.

Regards
Keith
Verification of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.8 Rev 0c0e82a55d

System Configuration:
Processor: Intel  Pentium CPU 4450U @2.10GHz
Installed Memory: 8.00 GB
System Type 64-bit Operating System X64-based processor
Operating System: Windows 10 Version 2004 (OS Build 19041.508)

Apache Open Office
AOO418m1(Build:9801)  -  Rev. 2b2dfb9831
2020-08-23 01:29 - CYGWIN_NT-10.0-WOW i686 - Development Test Build
Language: en_US
Additional Language Packs: None

Test to Execute 
Result
Downloaded Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.8_Win_x86_install_en-US.exe
Completed Download
Verify Sha512 checksum using File Checksum Tool from KRyLack SOFTWARE   Not 
Availible
Verify install file against GPG signature file via GPG4WIN  
Not Availible

Verify Selected Blocker Issues  
No Blockers

Other Tests
Issue 10687 Cannot insert .dib files
Verified
Issue 123912 Word Count Dialog: last digit truncated at the right   
Verified
Issue 128296 Writer 
Verified
Issue 83432 Floating Frame Properties   
Verified
Issue 127138 replace Quicktime  
No Mac to verify
Issue 125359 PDF Export crashes for Source Han Sans / Noto CJK fontsVerified
Issue 127158 AOO-logo in Start Center looks misplaced   
Verified
Issue 128283 Issue with layout of dialog "Solver"   
Verified
Issue 125696 Remove information from Help on Error Reporting tool   
Verified
Issue 127789 update error(s) including program and extension
Verified
Issue 125431 "The Password is incorrect. The file cannot be opened."Verified
Issue 128353 AOO Writer, Find & Replace, Format: dialog's title 
Verified

Notes




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Results of 4.1.8 QA Testing on rev. 5e8bc5703f for Windows 10

2020-09-26 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 9/26/2020 2:54 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> I just did an administrative install on Windows 10.
> 
> Extract the package, open cmd.exe move to the OpenOffice folder and do
> "setup.exe /a"
> Unless you are talking about something different?
> 
> Regards,
> 
>    Matthias
>

Hi Matthias;


I am taking about an administrative install as defined here:
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Run_OOo_versions_parallel

This allows you to run multiple versions on Window with there own
profile separate from the released one.

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Results of 4.1.8 QA Testing on rev. 5e8bc5703f for Windows 10

2020-09-26 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 9/24/2020 11:43 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> Am 24.09.20 um 17:33 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>> On 8/23/2020 1:35 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>>> The results of my testing can be downloaded from the following link:
>>> https://1drv.ms/t/s!AsMYmStvrJNJixd-w2GbfJt6h9S5
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Keith
>>>
>> Attached pleas find the results of my QA testing for version 4.1.8
>> Revision 2b2dfb9831.
> 
> Thanks for testing!
> 
> Regarding "Issue 125696 Remove information from Help on Error Reporting
> tool        Still see info in help[1]"
> 
> You might need a more recent build:
> 
> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-418-Test/
> 
> Regards,
> 
>    Matthias
> 
Matthias;

I installed your test build fro 2020-09-24. When I did the
administrative install the program could only be opened with Run as
Administrator. This has never happened before, did you perhaps use some
different parameters for the build?

Regards
Keith





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Results of 4.1.8 QA Testing on rev. 5e8bc5703f for Windows 10

2020-09-24 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 9/24/2020 11:43 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> Am 24.09.20 um 17:33 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>> On 8/23/2020 1:35 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>>> The results of my testing can be downloaded from the following link:
>>> https://1drv.ms/t/s!AsMYmStvrJNJixd-w2GbfJt6h9S5
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Keith
>>>
>> Attached pleas find the results of my QA testing for version 4.1.8
>> Revision 2b2dfb9831.
> 
> Thanks for testing!
> 
> Regarding "Issue 125696 Remove information from Help on Error Reporting
> tool        Still see info in help[1]"
> 
> You might need a more recent build:
> 
> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-418-Test/
> 
> Regards,
> 
>    Matthias
> 
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
> 
 Hi Matthias

I just saw your new revision and am installing it know will retest that
one and issue a new report.

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Results of 4.1.8 QA Testing on rev. 5e8bc5703f for Windows 10

2020-09-24 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 8/23/2020 1:35 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
> The results of my testing can be downloaded from the following link:
> https://1drv.ms/t/s!AsMYmStvrJNJixd-w2GbfJt6h9S5
> 
> Regards
> Keith
> 

Attached pleas find the results of my QA testing for version 4.1.8
Revision 2b2dfb9831.

Regards
Keith
Verification of Apache OpenOffice 4.1.8 Rev 2b2dfb983
System Configuration
System Configuration:
Processor: Intel  Pentium CPU 4450U @2.10GHz
Installed Memory: 8.00 GB
System Type 64-bit Operating System X64-based processor
Operating System: Windows 10 Version 2004 (OS Build 19041.508)

Apache Open Office
AOO418m1(Build:9801)  -  Rev. 2b2dfb9831
2020-08-23 01:29 - CYGWIN_NT-10.0-WOW i686 - Development Test Build
Language: en_US
Additional Language Packs: None

Test to Execute 
Result
Downloaded Apache_OpenOffice_4.1.8_Win_x86_install_en-US.exe
Completed Download
Verify Sha512 checksum using File Checksum Tool from KRyLack SOFTWARE   Not 
Availible
Verify install file against GPG signature file via GPG4WIN  
Not Availible

Verify Selected Blocker Issues  
No Blockers
Other Tests
Issue 10687 Cannot insert .dib files
Verified
Issue 123912 Word Count Dialog: last digit truncated at the right   
Verified
Issue 128296 Writer 
Verified
Issue 83432 Floating Frame Properties   
Verified
Issue 127138 replace Quicktime  
No Mac to verify
Issue 125359 PDF Export crashes for Source Han Sans / Noto CJK fontsVerified
Issue 127158 AOO-logo in Start Center looks misplaced   
Verified
Issue 128283 Issue with layout of dialog "Solver"   
Verified
Issue 125696 Remove information from Help on Error Reporting tool   
Still see info in help[1]
Issue 127789 update error(s) including program and extension
Verified
Issue 125431 "The Password is incorrect. The file cannot be opened."Verified
Issue 128353 AOO Writer, Find & Replace, Format: dialog's title 
Verified[2]

Notes
[1] I see no difference in the Help regarding the Error Report Tool between 
4.1.7 and 4.1.8 unless
I miss understand what the changes were supposed to do.
[2] This was difficult to verify as the Help entry on windows is different than 
the one in the
screenshots. On windows that entry is FIND and Replace


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: AOO 4.1.8 release

2020-09-16 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 9/15/2020 7:01 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Are we ready for us to start coordinating an AOO418 release in earnest?
> 
> Do we need a RM? If so, I can volunteer...
> 
+1




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Help Wanted Inquiry

2020-09-13 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 9/7/2020 9:34 PM, Philip Parzygnat wrote:
> Dear Open Office,
> I am a computer scientist with MA in the field. I have limited professional 
> experience in open source projects. I would like to assist the Open Office 
> team in some way. I reviewed the Easy section of the help wanted posting. I 
> am reaching out to see which tasks you need help with. I have experience with 
> Foundation Email. My ultimate goal in helping with the Open Office project is 
> to become more familiar with developing using C/C++, however, before working 
> on these more difficult tasks, I though selecting something from Easy and 
> then Medium will be the right course of action. I can also fill the role of a 
> technical writer in the Medium section after getting some work done in the 
> Easy section. As a note, I have a very busy schedule so hopefully work can be 
> done as time permits.
> Thank you,
> Philip Parzygnat
> 
> Philip Parzygnat
> W: http://linkedin.com/in/pparzygnat 
> M: 1 (347) 435-8873
> 
> 
> 
Welcome to the project Phillip. When you are ready we certainly could
use your help as a tech writer as well.

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: About 20th anniversary plans

2020-09-07 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 9/7/2020 5:52 AM, Pedro Lino wrote:
> Hi Jörg
> 
>> On 09/07/2020 9:24 AM Jörg Schmidt  wrote:
> 
>> I had recently suggested replacing the yellow (at 20 years) with a color 
>> that would be more recognizable.
>>
>> I mentioned orange as an alternative color, but I can't say if this would be 
>> the best choice.
>> Maybe you should just use the red-brown of the Apache lettering?
> 
> I agree. Maybe some colour from the Apache feather
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Apache_Feather_Logo.svg
>  
>> Unfortunately it is not so easy to create an example directly because "20 
>> years" contains antialiasing.
> 
> Yes, this requires that the original author does that (or shares a vector 
> version of the original)
> 
> This raises another question: in some versions of the AOO logos there is a TM 
> and in others a R. Which is correct?
> 
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Apache_OpenOffice_logo_and_wordmark_(2014).svg
> 
> Regards,
> Pedro
> 
Pedro

® is the preferred as OpenOffice is now a registered TM in the United States

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Results of 4.1.8 QA Testing on rev. 5e8bc5703f for Windows 10

2020-08-23 Thread Keith N. McKenna
Hi Matthias;
On 8/23/2020 1:51 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> Am 23.08.20 um 19:35 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>> The results of my testing can be downloaded from the following link:
>> https://1drv.ms/t/s!AsMYmStvrJNJixd-w2GbfJt6h9S5
> 
> Thanks for testing
You are very welcome, we need to get this moving forward.
> 
> Regarding "Noto CJK font", I downloaded this one from Google:
> https://noto-website-2.storage.googleapis.com/pkgs/NotoSansCJKjp-hinted.zip
> 
Thanks the original link in the issue did not have it. Will download and
retest
> Regarding update check, my latest builds have updated openSSL:
> https://home.apache.org/~mseidel/AOO-builds/AOO-418-Test/
> 
Downloaded and will install and retest later tonight or tomorrow.

> Regards,
> 
>    Matthias
> 
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
>>
> 




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Results of 4.1.8 QA Testing on rev. 5e8bc5703f for Windows 10

2020-08-23 Thread Keith N. McKenna
The results of my testing can be downloaded from the following link:
https://1drv.ms/t/s!AsMYmStvrJNJixd-w2GbfJt6h9S5

Regards
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Tech writer

2020-08-21 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 8/11/2020 1:51 PM, Nicola Kamper wrote:
> Hello,
> I have enjoyed Apache Open Office, and am grateful for the work that you
> do. I am an experienced Tech Writer and interested in volunteering some of
> my time and effort to your organization. Please let me know what your needs
> are in this area.
> Best regards,
> Nicola
> 

Greetings Nicola;

Our Documentation needs help especially in the User Documentation Area.
We have long suffered from the lack of volunteers with your skills. The
current attempt at a User Guide can be found at
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/UserGuide.

I have also started investigating ways to transform the current process
to make it more attractive to volunteers that may not be tech writers,
but are familiar with Write to be able to contribute.

All the time that you can contribute to this effort is very welcome indeed.

Regards
Keith N. McKenna



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Dev-m2 on macOS

2020-08-06 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 7/15/2020 12:01 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> Am 15.07.20 um 17:24 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>> On 7/8/2020 3:15 PM, Peter wrote:
>>> Maybe we have a general issue with extensions on 4.2.0? I mean other
>>> extensions crash AOO. And if hunspell is not working, maybe it does not
>>> crash but just does not work?
>> I just checked the Windows Version of AOO 4.2.0 I have been going
>> through and the Spell Check works fine. I will load the other extensions
>> that I have installed on 4.1.7 and check them as well.
> 
> On Windows can you please try:
> 
> https://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/oracle-report-builder
> 
> and
> 
> https://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/pdf-import-apache-openoffice
> 
> Regards,
> 
>    Matthias
> 
>>
Hi Matthias;

Sorry for taking so long to get back on this. This message slipt by me
on gmane and just saw it. I tried to install both the above extension
into 4.2.0-dev-2 and both exhibit the same problem. They start to
install and then immediately freeze AOO and it can only be closed by a
force quit through task manager.

Regards
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Reporting broken links

2020-07-27 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 7/27/2020 1:50 PM, Charlie Smith wrote:
> After download and repairing openoffice for windows 10, I was unable to:
> check for updates failed
> after setting java, help find failed.
> 
> Thank you for *all *your excellent work!
> Most respectfully,
> Charlie Smith
> San Francisco north bay
> Charlie;

This is a known issue and has been reported. The current released
version is 4.1.7 and can be downloaded form  our official download site
at https://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html.

Regards
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Dev-m2 on macOS

2020-07-15 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 7/8/2020 3:15 PM, Peter wrote:
> 
> Am 08.07.20 um 20:50 schrieb Larry Gusaas:
>> On 2020-07-06 3:03 a.m., Rory O'Farrell wrote:
>>> On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 02:41:00 -0600
>>> Larry Gusaas  wrote:
>>>
 On 2020-07-06 12:15 a.m., Rory O'Farrell wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Jul 2020 17:33:54 -0600
> Larry Gusaas  wrote:
>
>> Downloaded Apache_OpenOffice_Dev_4.2.0_MacOS_x86-64_install_en-US
>> from
>> https://home.apache.org/~jim/AOO-builds/AOO-dev-50c544e5/
>>
>> Spellcheck does not work. Nothing is marked incorrect. Checked
>> using both Canadian and US
>> language setting. Changed my user profile to the one I'm using
>> with 4.1.7. Still didn't work.
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> _
>>
>> Larry I. Gusaas
> The initial check: does the chosen language show in the middle of
> the status bar?
>
 Yes. It is English (Canada).

 In extension manager: "English spelling, hyphenation dictionaries
 and thesaurus 2020.07.01"
 installed.

 In Preferences/Language Settings/Language: Language of/Locale
 setting: Default - English (Canada)


 Aha: Here's the problem:

 In Preferences/Language Settings/Writing Aids/Available language
 modules: No spellcheck modules
 listed.

 In AOO 4.1.7 I have Hunspell SpellChecker & Mac OS X Spell Checker
 listed

 If I copy my user profile from AOO 4.1.7 into AOO Dev-m2 I still
 have no spell checkers. listed.
>>> I'm not into the OpenOffice code, but am asking questions answers to
>>> which I have learned from Forum are helpful.  I presume hunspell is
>>> (or ought) be installed on your Mac.  in linux,
>>> "locate hunspell" in a terminal shows its locations. Can you confirm,
>>> with a Mac equivalent command, if hunspell is installed on your Mac,
>>> and its locations?  The problem is possibly the incorrect
>>> configuration of a file path in the code.
>>>
>> Since spellcheck works in AOO 4.1.7 that word indicate that hunspell
>> is installed on my Mac. I checked in terminal and confirmed it is
>> installed.
>>
>>
>> I also tried Dev-m2 on my production MacBook Pro running macOS 10.14
>> Mojave. (I have macOS 10.15 Catalina on this MacBook Pro) to check if
>> it was a compatibility problem with the latest macOS.
> Maybe we have a general issue with extensions on 4.2.0? I mean other
> extensions crash AOO. And if hunspell is not working, maybe it does not
> crash but just does not work?
I just checked the Windows Version of AOO 4.2.0 I have been going
through and the Spell Check works fine. I will load the other extensions
that I have installed on 4.1.7 and check them as well.

Regards
Keith


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




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: 4.2.0 on the 20th Anniversary? (was Re: Website Migrations)

2020-07-12 Thread Keith N. McKenna
Hi Pedro, Matthias, and all;
Please see comments in line

On 7/12/2020 6:08 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Pedro,
> 
> Am 13.07.20 um 00:04 schrieb Pedro Lino:
>> Hi Matthias, all
>>
>>> What we must not forget is that on October 13th we have the 20
>>> anniversary of OpenOffice.org.
>>>
>>> One way or the other, we need a working website around that time.
>>>
>>> Additionally I would like to release AOO 4.1.8 and we must have a
>>> working download page for that.
>>> (Side note: At the moment I am the only volunteer for 4.1.8 but maybe
>>> others show their interest?)
I am also here Matthias along with starting the Release Notes; I have
finished a review of the next to last test build you did, and will
re-run that test against the the latest one.
>> Wouldn't it make sense to focus on 4.2.0 and make it the anniversary release 
>> 4.20th on the 20th anniversary?
>>
>> Can't we motivate the developers to focus on this common goal and fix the 
>> remaining release blockers?
> 
> The release blockers are not trivial and known for ages...
> 
> But maybe you have better luck than me (with motivating)? ;-)

Not only that, but running a search on Bugzilla looking at Issues marked
as Milestone 4.2.0 there are 267 items. That is a lot of items, some may
have been already done, others may be hanging out there unfinished for
whatever reason. With that number it should be looked at closely and
well could complicate getting a 4.2.0 Release done and we need to get a
release fairly soon to keep on track for a once a year release. The
search I use is 4.2.0Milestone and is set as shared so anyone can run it.

Regards
Keith

> 
> Regards,
> 
>    Matthias
> 
>>
>> Regards,
>> Pedro
>>
>>
>>> Am 11.07.20 um 20:48 schrieb Dave Fisher:
 Hi -

 It’s time to start the process of migrating two of our websites from the 
 deprecated Apache CMS to a new method of building. This will be a major 
 undertaking and there are several goals.

 The sites are:
 https://openoffice.apache.org/
 https://www.openoffice.org/

 We have a CWiki page for planning at 
 https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Website+Migrations 
 

 We have empty Git repos:
 https://github.com/apache/openoffice-project
 https://github.com/apache/openoffice-org

 The request is in to rename the “master” branch to “trunk”. These 
 repositories are currently empty.

 If someone has a “modern” design paradigm to suggest now is the time.

 If someone has suggestions for content to eliminate or move now is the 
 time.

 I’d prefer to work out new site build mechanics on the project site first.

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




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

2020-07-11 Thread Keith N. McKenna
Greetings Detlaf;
See comments in-line

On 7/10/2020 7:00 AM, Detlef Nannen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> so far I only have experience with documentation written in AOO itself.
> I've been experimenting with Markdown and Pandoc from time to time, and
> wasn't always happy with the results and the possibilities. An amount of
> time that I was not willing to give. And even now I don't have the time
> to go deeper into it. The maximum what I can do beside my other tasks is
> to cooperate in the creation of the documentation.

If that is all you can do that is no problem.That is what the Apache Way
is about in part; contributing your time and talents when and where you

can.
> 
> Since this is supposed to be about the documentation, I consider the
> tool for this to be of secondary importance. We have AOO. We can write
> the documentation with it or update existing documentation with it.
> 

My original intention was to use AOO to write the documentation and then
use something along the lines of DocBook or Pandoc to create different
delivery formats. Updating existing documentation is problematic as any
of OOo Authors documentation is dual licensed under the GNU General
Public License Version 3 or later, or the Creative Commons Attribution
License Version 3 or later. Since they would not be part of a formal AOO
release I believe we could continue to distribute both ODT and PDF
formats from the mwiki but I would feel more comfortable running it by
legal discuss. he other alternative would be continue trying to get the
current mwiki documentation written or updated.

> There's certainly nothing to be said against converting the results into
> another format later using Docbook (which I only looked some Minutes at)
> or Pandoc.
> 
> However, I'm thinking about the people who want to work on the
> documentation. I don't have any experience here, so I don't know how
> many people want to or can work on it. Is there a plan? Maybe there are
> some who read this and ask themselves the same questions. Apart from the
> tools, this seems to me to be an important topic. Has it perhaps been
> discussed before? I haven't found anything current on the AOO website.
> For a task like documentation I think an organization is necessary.
> Wouldn't it be fatal if, for example, three different people were to
> write about a topic without knowing about each other? One person uses
> AOO with templates, another person writes in a simple text editor.
> 

It was never the intention to have the average volunteer use the
conversion tools, but a small group of people that were interested in
learning to use them to create the alternative sources. ODF and PDF
files can be created direct from AOO. Things like the mwiki format or
EPUB cannot.

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: should we conduct a 20 year anniversary online conference / meetup?

2020-07-05 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 7/5/2020 7:39 AM, Carl Marcum wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
> 
> On 7/4/20 5:52 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> Hi Carl,
>>
>> Am 04.07.20 um 18:16 schrieb Carl Marcum:
>>> Hi Matthias,
>>>
>>> On 7/4/20 11:32 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
 Hi all,

 Bumping up this one again...

 Additionally, we have a virtual ApacheCon this year:
 https://apachecon.com/acna2020/
 What about some talks about our project?

 Regards,

  Matthias
>>> I would definitely attend an online meetup unless the time of day was
>>> in the middle of my night or something.
>> We should be able to find a time frame (on a weekend) that is suitable
>> for all timezones.
>>> I was planning to attend ApacheCon now that is virtual.
>> I will definitely try to follow as much content as possible.
>>> Doing presentations is definitely not my strongest ability but I have
>>> a topic I've been thinking about putting a presentation together for.
>>>
>>> I'm finishing up the documentation before I announce it on dev@ but
>>> I've finished an new extension to add Apache Groovy to AOO as a macro
>>> language and another extension that recreates most of the built-in
>>> macro examples in Groovy.
>>> The third project is the Groovy UNO project that I've updated after a
>>> long while.
>>>
>>> These are more AOO ecosystem and developer tool topics than directly
>>> project related so I'm not sure.
>> Sounds great!
>> Indeed, it is very specific for AOO so maybe it fits better for our own
>> meeting?
> 
> Yes that sounds good.
> 
> 
>> Regards,
>>
>>     Matthias
>>
> 
> Regards,
> Carl

Carl & Mathias;

you can treat this as just 2¢ but I think those talks would fit well in
either venue, or in both. Yes they are tools specific to AOO, but they
also demonstrate that we are also "good citizens" of the ASF as well and
were applicable we will utilize content from other ASF projects within
our own. Given that I see a place for those presentations at both
ApacheCon and our own meetup. Both of which I plan to attend this year!

Regards
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

2020-07-04 Thread Keith N. McKenna
Hi Carl see comments in-line

On 7/4/2020 5:32 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> On 7/2/20 11:18 AM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>> On 5/30/2020 8:41 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>>> I should probably have my head examined but I am thinking of one more
>>> time trying to revive the documentation effort for AOO. One of the
>>> drawbacks is that most people that have started to help have left as
>>> there has been very limited availability of mentoring. I do not see this
>>> changing but I am hoping that by defining a new process we can reduce
>>> the dependency on mentoring.
>>>
>>> One idea for this would require that the MediaWiki extension be made
>>> functional again. This would allow for using Writer to create the source
>>> which could be stored in the git repository and then be transferred to
>>> the mwiki for easy online access. By storing the source in the
>>> repository it would give us better revision control over the
>>> documentation. Plus it may help relieve the mentoring problem as many
>>> more people are familiar with using Writer.
>>>
>>> Another would be to use Docbook, though this is not as appealing as I
>>> have no familiarity with it and it appears that there is a steep
>>> learning curve to its use and that would be a disadvantage to attracting
>>> new people.
>>>
>>> I look forward to any other suggestions that could move this effort
>>> along as it has languished for far to long.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Keith
>>>
>> Greetings All;
>>
>> I unfortunately have no good news to report at this time. It is over 2
>> weeks since I posted the Proposal document to doc@ and there has been
>> zero response from the list except a couple from Detlef and Francis. I
>> will send out another reminder today and wait another week to see if any
>> responses come from that.
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
> 
> Forgive me but I'm not any expert on documentation or technical writing
> but I'll offer my opinion.

Feel free to offer because truth to tell neither am I. As a Process
Engineer I have written, contributed too, and edited technical
documents, mostly Standards for my former employers and process
documents for building finished modules from raw printed circuit boards
(PCB).

>
> I like markup formats for the ease of source control and revision
> tracking.  I don't think binary files work well in this context.
> I'm not real familiar with Docbook but it appears to be an XML format
> which isn't all that readable on it's own but I also haven't
> investigated any editors as I'm sure there are some.

My preference if at all possible is to use ODF files,mostly writer.odt
files, as the source documents. The product we are producing is an
Office Suite so what better way to create the source documentation with
the product and use that as marketing feature. The use DocBook would be
limited to a small number of individuals to create other alternative
delivery formats such as EPUB e-books.
> 
> My experience with online editing like our MWiki hasn't always been
> great due to time-outs for example.

MWiki is not my favorite way to write documentation, but it is a good
way to present it online and OpenOffice.org did it and the beginnings of
the AOO documentation effort the decision was to go the MWiki route and
to actually write the documentation there a decision I believe was not a
good one and has turned out that way as the major driver behind it left
the project and we have had a difficult time recruiting people to the
effort.

> 
> Lately I've been using AsciiDoc format and an editor called AsciiDocFX
> (because it uses JavaFX for the UI) and I work right out of my project
> source's local repo.
> 

I looked at AsciiDoc and Markdown when I first started researching
alternatives, and decided against them as my initial preference was to
use AOO to create the source, but they could be used if using Writer
does not pan out.

> I'm not sure what our arrangement is with GitHub but my understanding is
> that accounts get 1 github.io site and projects get unlimited pages
> which are html.
>

I have started playing with GitHub a little bit but aside from a little
exposure to SVN and the CMS applet here, my last exposure to source
control was with deccms when I worked for digital equipment corporation
(dec). So far I have mixed feelings about it for .odt files.

> For example on my GitHub code projects I have a docs folder that
> contains the AsciiDoc text files and the HTML exports from the
> AsciiDocFX editor. These files are tracked with Git along with the
> project code.
> 
> So to give you a feel for it you can see a source example [1].
&

Re: New Committer: Detlef Nannen

2020-07-02 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 6/30/2020 6:10 PM, Marcus wrote:
> The Apache OpenOffice project is happy to have a new committer on board:
> 
> Detlef Nannen
> 
> Please give him a warm welcome.
> 
> Marcus
> (on behalf of the Apache OpenOffice PMC)

Welcome to the ranks of the committers Detlef.

Regards
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

2020-07-02 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 5/30/2020 8:41 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
> I should probably have my head examined but I am thinking of one more
> time trying to revive the documentation effort for AOO. One of the
> drawbacks is that most people that have started to help have left as
> there has been very limited availability of mentoring. I do not see this
> changing but I am hoping that by defining a new process we can reduce
> the dependency on mentoring.
> 
> One idea for this would require that the MediaWiki extension be made
> functional again. This would allow for using Writer to create the source
> which could be stored in the git repository and then be transferred to
> the mwiki for easy online access. By storing the source in the
> repository it would give us better revision control over the
> documentation. Plus it may help relieve the mentoring problem as many
> more people are familiar with using Writer.
> 
> Another would be to use Docbook, though this is not as appealing as I
> have no familiarity with it and it appears that there is a steep
> learning curve to its use and that would be a disadvantage to attracting
> new people.
> 
> I look forward to any other suggestions that could move this effort
> along as it has languished for far to long.
> 
> Regards
> Keith
> 
Greetings All;

I unfortunately have no good news to report at this time. It is over 2
weeks since I posted the Proposal document to doc@ and there has been
zero response from the list except a couple from Detlef and Francis. I
will send out another reminder today and wait another week to see if any
responses come from that.

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: New Committer: Czesław Wolański

2020-07-02 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 6/30/2020 6:10 PM, Marcus wrote:
> The Apache OpenOffice project is happy to have a new committer on board:
> 
> Czesław Wolański
> 
> Please give him a warm welcome.
> 
> Marcus
> (on behalf of the Apache OpenOffice PMC)
Greetings Czeslaw and welcome to the ranks of committers for OpenOffice.

Regards
Keith



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: New Committer: Pedro Lino

2020-06-19 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 6/17/2020 6:44 PM, Marcus wrote:
> The Apache OpenOffice project is happy to have a new committer on board:
> 
> Pedro Lino
> 
> Please give him a warm welcome.
> 
> Marcus
> (on behalf of the Apache OpenOffice PMC)
Welcome Pedro;

Nice to see you have joined the committer ranks and thank you for all
the hard work for the project that made this possible.

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

2020-06-14 Thread Keith N. McKenna
See inline
On 6/14/2020 4:41 AM, Peter wrote:
 
> I want to remind you on the talk I posted earlier, which refers to a
> toolchain on docbook, and which talks on Issues and chances there are
> (the editor has been mentioned as use what you want.)
> 
> I also would like to suggest to check if an exporter to pelikan (our new
> static webpage generator) would not be more usefull. maybe some tool
> exists docbook -> markup we could uce.

The only thing I could find in a quick online search was an ant task to
convert DocBook -> markdown [1]. My question to you would be why would
you want to do that conversion?  I may be misunderstanding your
question. Are you thinking to publish the documentation on the web site,
or a more general question not necessarily related to this proposal?

[1] http://ant4docbook.sourceforge.net/index.html

Regards
Keith




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

2020-06-13 Thread Keith N. McKenna
Francis; replies in-line
On 6/13/2020 1:46 PM, F Campos Costero wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> I have been playing with DocBook and it certainly takes a while to learn. I
> suspect that once it was figured out, it would be a workable way to produce
> documents in various formats. I say that based on the progress I made in
> about a week starting from zero knowledge. I am, however, still struggling
> and it is not an easy path.
I have not tried it yet but I do intend to. One question for you what
version of the DocBook DTD did you download to your system. The AOO Save
As function generates it's XML file against Version 4.2.

>  I have two questions at the moment. The second one is really for anyone.
> 1. I do not see a way  to publish to MediaWiki from DocBook. I thought you
> mentioned there is an extension and I fear I am being stupid but I am not
> finding it. Can you point me in the right direction?

I know I saw one at some point but cannot seem to find it at the moment.
The only ones I see now are to go from MediaWiki to DocBook. I will keep
checking, if there are not any that option may have to be abandoned
.
> 2. My AOO 4.2.0 version does not include the DocBook format in the Save As
> dialog from Writer. I rolled back to 4.1.7 and used that. Is there a known
> reason for 4.2.0 to be lacking that option?

I am currently using AOO 4.2.0 Dev2 and have no problem outputting
DocBook XML files. In fact I used that version to create the source
document and also to output the DocBook XML file.
> 
> In general, I really like the idea you present of having the document
> production based on Writer. Allowing new people to contribute immediately
> should greatly lower a barrier to recruitment. To adopt that strategy we
> have to demonstrate the viability of Writer -> MediaWiki transfers. Is
> there anyone with the knowledge and time to look at the Wiki Publisher
> extension? I think we have to get that question clearly posed and  answered
> so we know whether that approach can be considered.

It only makes sense to me to write the documentation for the product
using the product we are writing the documentation for. I remember
seeing Updating of the extension on a cwiki page that Peter  had set up
but do not remember the the link off hand. Peter could you shed some
light on this?

Regards
Keith

> 
> Regards,
> Francis
> 
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 10:14 AM Keith N. McKenna 
> wrote:
> 
>> On 6/13/2020 5:05 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>> Hi Keith,
>>>
>>> Thank you for your effort!
>>>
>>> I found some typos:
>>>
>>> "Apace" should be "Apache"
>>>
>>> "Anaysis" should be "Analysis" (in file properties)
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>>Matthias
>>
>> Thanks Matthias;
>>
>> Thought I had got all those in the source.
>>
>> Keith
>>> Am 13.06.20 um 01:42 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>> On 6/3/2020 9:11 AM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>>>>> On 5/30/2020 8:41 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>>>>>> I should probably have my head examined but I am thinking of one more
>>>>>> time trying to revive the documentation effort for AOO. One of the
>>>>>> drawbacks is that most people that have started to help have left as
>>>>>> there has been very limited availability of mentoring. I do not see
>> this
>>>>>> changing but I am hoping that by defining a new process we can reduce
>>>>>> the dependency on mentoring.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One idea for this would require that the MediaWiki extension be made
>>>>>> functional again. This would allow for using Writer to create the
>> source
>>>>>> which could be stored in the git repository and then be transferred to
>>>>>> the mwiki for easy online access. By storing the source in the
>>>>>> repository it would give us better revision control over the
>>>>>> documentation. Plus it may help relieve the mentoring problem as many
>>>>>> more people are familiar with using Writer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Another would be to use Docbook, though this is not as appealing as I
>>>>>> have no familiarity with it and it appears that there is a steep
>>>>>> learning curve to its use and that would be a disadvantage to
>> attracting
>>>>>> new people.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I look forward to any other suggestions that could move this effort
>>>>>> along as it has languished for far to long.
>>>>>

Re: Trying to re-generate the Documentation effort

2020-06-13 Thread Keith N. McKenna
On 6/13/2020 5:05 AM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Keith,
> 
> Thank you for your effort!
> 
> I found some typos:
> 
> "Apace" should be "Apache"
> 
> "Anaysis" should be "Analysis" (in file properties)
> 
> Regards,
> 
>    Matthias

Thanks Matthias;

Thought I had got all those in the source.

Keith
> Am 13.06.20 um 01:42 schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>> On 6/3/2020 9:11 AM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>>> On 5/30/2020 8:41 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>>>> I should probably have my head examined but I am thinking of one more
>>>> time trying to revive the documentation effort for AOO. One of the
>>>> drawbacks is that most people that have started to help have left as
>>>> there has been very limited availability of mentoring. I do not see this
>>>> changing but I am hoping that by defining a new process we can reduce
>>>> the dependency on mentoring.
>>>>
>>>> One idea for this would require that the MediaWiki extension be made
>>>> functional again. This would allow for using Writer to create the source
>>>> which could be stored in the git repository and then be transferred to
>>>> the mwiki for easy online access. By storing the source in the
>>>> repository it would give us better revision control over the
>>>> documentation. Plus it may help relieve the mentoring problem as many
>>>> more people are familiar with using Writer.
>>>>
>>>> Another would be to use Docbook, though this is not as appealing as I
>>>> have no familiarity with it and it appears that there is a steep
>>>> learning curve to its use and that would be a disadvantage to attracting
>>>> new people.
>>>>
>>>> I look forward to any other suggestions that could move this effort
>>>> along as it has languished for far to long.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Keith
>>>>
>>> AS part of this effort I am working on a document laying out What I see
>>> as the need for this project and a number of alternatives that could be
>>> used to to address those needs. Once completed I will share it both here
>>> and on doc@for more comments and suggestions.
>>>
>>> Thanks to all who have responded for there time and suggestions
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Keith
>>>
>> As promised the document is ready to be shared. There are tow versions,a
>> ODT file and a PDF one that can be downloaded from the following link
>> https://1drv.ms/f/s!AsMYmStvrJNJin9GvgxRst1AMk2c. There are Two
>> versions, PDF and ODT just pick the one you want and download it. All
>> comments and suggestions are welcome.
>>
>> I am also going to be starting a thread over on doc@ to try and solicit
>> from there as well.
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
>>
> 




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


  1   2   3   4   5   >