Re: macOS 10.13 High Sierra AOO testers

2017-10-16 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Nevermind. I think I found them:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.4-RC5/binaries/
Louis

On 16 October 2017 at 08:18, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> Anyone onlist using High Sierra and able to test AOO
> 4.1.4-RC5?
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>

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



Re: macOS 10.13 High Sierra AOO testers

2017-10-16 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Jim, et al.,
So, where are the macOS builds of RC5? FWIW, finding these using the
website's obvious (to me) routes is … fruitless. Finding them using my
old bookmarks also bootless.

Louis

On 16 October 2017 at 08:18, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> Anyone onlist using High Sierra and able to test AOO
> 4.1.4-RC5?
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>

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



Re: macOS 10.13 High Sierra AOO testers

2017-10-16 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
I've been playing with LibreOffice on a dev version of High Sierra
(10.13.1)  with no ill effects, but that was a short while ago. I can
try it with AOO, but is there anything in particular I should look
for? I use office suites sparingly and lightly but am game to try out
a suite of tests.

Note: other apps that do more or less the same thing have not given me
surprises, at least now. Earlier… different story.

Louis

On 16 October 2017 at 08:18, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> Anyone onlist using High Sierra and able to test AOO
> 4.1.4-RC5?
>
> -
> 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: Community building: give our User a chance to contribute!

2017-01-27 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 2017-01-27, at 14:04, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
> 
> While there was much heat, I don't think Sun was pure in this matter.  Not by 
> any means.  Whatever the case, when Apache OpenOffice was founded, it was as 
> an Apache Project, not any other kind.  The "original" that you speak of 
> exists no longer.

Indeed. 
Which tabula rasa state could lead us to imagine a more collaborative world.

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



Re: future of OpenOffice

2017-01-12 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
On 12 January 2017 at 18:29, Simon Phipps  wrote:
> S.
> (speaking here only as an AOO community member)

Thanks, Simon. I have long desired for there to be a useful confluence
and even convergence of code, effort, vision--I mean between LO and
AOO. Would still be nice, if only for the sake of large-scale users.

I left AOO PMC a while ago, in part because of other calls on my time,
and also because I did not see a solution to the situation.

best
louis

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



Re: Meson: yet another build system

2016-12-05 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 05 Dec 2016, at 11:32, Pedro Giffuni  wrote:
> 
>> Objective C? Yacc? Cygwin? Custom compiler flags to disable C++ exception
>> handling, build some files with optimizations disabled?
>> 
>> Our build systems are not our biggest problem. Meson, or SCons, or others,
>> could be good if we were starting a new project. We aren't. We are
>> maintaining one we poorly understand.
>> 
> 
> I agree the build system is not our biggest problem.
> 
>> Porting to Meson will not be any easier than porting to gbuild. Writing
>> gbuild code becomes easy with practice. *Understanding* dmake / build.lst /
>> d.lst is hard...
>> 
> 
> So you are now a fan of gbuild? ;).
> 
> Moving python would be a huge step forward towards getting rid of dmake
> as it seems to be required for any alternative build system (other than 
> gbuild which of course would require it to build with gbuild anyways).

I presume that LibreOffice also uses the same build system? Would they be 
interested in using Meson, you think? Note, I hope that any notion of invidious 
difference (e.g., competitive and implicitly jealous differentiation) plays no 
role here in the larger goal of making building OpenOffice more feasible for 
more.
Louis

> 
>> I've spend the last day trying to port several more modules to gbuild. I've
>> succeeded with main/fileaccess, main/io and main/package, but ran into
>> walls with main/rdbmaker and main/store. Dmake apparently has ways to name
>> libraries that gbuild can neither produce nor find (eg. libstore.so.3,
>> libreg.so.3). These culprits use the evil UNIXVERSIONNAMES setting which
>> generates such names:
>> 
>> cppu
>> cppuhelper
>> jvmaccess
>> jvmfwk
>> registry
>> salhelper
>> sal
>> store
>> 
>> 
> 
> Jikes.
> 
> Pedro.
> 
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> 


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



Meson: yet another build system

2016-11-29 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Pedro, *
Thanks for the hint. I've not tried Meson (http://mesonbuild.com/index.html) 
out yet and am just reading up on "Wrap",* the tech that Meson uses. 

BTW,
"Why is it called Meson?

(When the name was originally chosen, there were two main limitations: there 
must not exist either a Debian package or a Sourceforge project of the given 
name. This ruled out tens of potential project names. At some point the name 
Gluon was considered. Gluons are elementary particles that hold protons and 
neutrons together, much like a build system's job is to take pieces of source 
code and a compiler and bind them to a complete whole.

(Unfortunately this name was taken, too. Then the rest of physical elementary 
particles were examined and Meson was found to be available.")**

If Meson works as one would hope, and if it satisfies the licensing 
requirements of the project, and if it is easier to use than existing 
(frustrating, for me, at least) means. 

Cheers, 
Louis

* Meson's Wrap documentation https://goo.gl/YKJdN9
** https://goo.gl/BgqRvH


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



Re: [VOTE] Recommend Marcus Lange (marcus) as the New Vice President for Apache OpenOffice

2016-09-16 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
+1
Louis


> On 15 Sep 2016, at 11:54, Keith N. McKenna  wrote:
> 
> Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>> [BCC to PMC]
>> 
>>RESOLUTION: That Marcus Lange (marcus) be recommended to the
>>Apache Software Foundation Board to serve as Vice President 
>>for Apache OpenOffice.  
>> 
>> The Vice President for Apache OpenOffice serves in accordance with and 
>> subject to the direction of the Board of Directors and the Bylaws of the 
>> Foundation.  The Vice President for Apache OpenOffice is the Chair of the 
>> OpenOffice Project Management Committee.
>> 
>> Please vote by reply to this dev@-list thread on approval of the resolution.
>> 
>> [  ] +1 Approve
>> [  ]  0 Abstain
>> [  ] -1 Disapprove, with explanation
>> 
>> This is a procedural vote and a majority of binding votes is sufficient to 
>> carry the resolution.
>> 
>> Please do not do anything but [VOTE] (with any -1 explanations) on this 
>> thread.
>> 
>> To discuss this vote or the process, please use a [DISCUSS][VOTE] reply 
>> rather than discussing on the [VOTE] thread.
>> 
>> The [VOTE] will conclude no sooner than Monday, 2016-09-19T16:00Z.
>> 
> [ X ] +1 Approve
> [  ]  0 Abstain
> [  ] -1 Disapprove, with explanation
> 
> Keith N. McKenna
> 
> 


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



Re: Spelling of Ancient Greek

2016-06-29 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

louis=C2=A0

-Original Message-
=46rom:=C2=A0=CE=91=CF=80=CF=8C=CF=83=CF=84=CE=BF=CE=BB=CE=BF=CF=82 =CE=A3=
=CF=85=CF=81=CF=8C=CF=80=CE=BF=CF=85=CE=BB=CE=BF=CF=82 

Re: Finally retiring from openoffice.org

2016-06-08 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Greetings, Oliver-Rainer!
Welcome to the afterlife! :-)

With fond memories--and better expectations,
louis



On 8 June 2016 at 13:44, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> for a long time I had contributed to openoffice.org.
> But since approx. 1.5 years I was not able to continue my engagement.
> Thus, I decided to retirer from this great project, also as a PMC member.
>
> I wish you all the best. Keep the project going as I will continue to use
> it :-)
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>


Re: Mac Dev. Builds?

2016-02-16 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 16 Feb 16, at 12:40, Kay Schenk <kay.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 02/16/2016 05:50 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
>> So, what's going on with the OS X dev builds? They have not been there for 
>> some time now.
>> 
>> louis
> 
> We don't have a Mac buildbot up and running. The last non-release
> you saw were probably referenced on the wiki page for the last release.
> 
> We could use a volunteer for Mac building. ;)

I can also broadcast the desire for such. What requirements? They are, I'm 
guessing stipulated on the dev pages?
louis
> 
> -- 

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



Mac Dev. Builds?

2016-02-16 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
So, what's going on with the OS X dev builds? They have not been there for some 
time now.

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



Re: Going

2016-01-29 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 29 Jan 16, at 16:28, Dennis E. Hamilton <orc...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> Louis,
> 
> I am the one to do that.
> 
> I did not know you wanted to drop your AOO committer karma.
> 
> I will take care of both PMC and committer today.
> 

Thanks, Dennis.

louis


> - Dennis
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-
>> From: Louis Suárez-Potts [mailto:lui...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 10:53
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Going
>> 
>> 
>>> On 29 Jan 16, at 12:31, Kay Schenk <kay.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I'm happy to see that you're still remaining on the "dev" list. ☺
>> 
>> I might that way help out or at least gripe entertainingly and
>> occasionally voice the desire that users of AOO and LO be better served
>> by not having to figure out which project to back…..
>> 
>> However…
>> 
>> @Dennis (or ?) can you remove committer privileges from my account? I
>> had presumed that announcing my departure from the PMC was sufficient
>> but it may not be. It may also be that I just have to do it myself….?
>> 
>> cheers,
>> Louis
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


Re: Going

2016-01-29 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 29 Jan 16, at 12:31, Kay Schenk  wrote:
> 
> I'm happy to see that you're still remaining on the "dev" list. ☺

I might that way help out or at least gripe entertainingly and occasionally 
voice the desire that users of AOO and LO be better served by not having to 
figure out which project to back…..

However…

@Dennis (or ?) can you remove committer privileges from my account? I had 
presumed that announcing my departure from the PMC was sufficient but it may 
not be. It may also be that I just have to do it myself….?

cheers,
Louis


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


Going

2016-01-28 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi All,
I'm stepping down from the AOO PMC after many years. If one includes the decade 
plus I dedicated to Openoffice.org as the community manager and chair of the 
community council, as well as lead and co-lead of many projects, big and small, 
and the five years since on the PMC, it's been 16 years of OpenOffice. A span 
that has been wonderful, exasperating, exhilarating; and now, for me, it's 
becoming a rut. I'm not contributing much at all, and other open source efforts 
and works take up my time and intellectual focus. Some of these will surely 
intersect with OpenOffice and other Apache projects….

I'll remain subscribed to this and other lists, but am leaving the PMC. You can 
always reach me via the usual ways.

Cheers,
Louis


---

Louis Suárez-Potts
Skype: louisiam
Twitter: @luispo
Personal: http://www.luispo.com/














signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


Re: John McCreesh

2016-01-18 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Thanks, Simon, though the news is bleak.

I'll post to the Facebook page, at the least. I knew John for many years and 
kept in touch with him after OOo fell apart. This is brutal news, and far more 
for those who loved him closely. I don't think I exaggerate in saying that 
without his efforts, his intelligence, so much of what we did would have never 
been. 

With affection,
louis


> On 18 Jan 16, at 09:58, Simon Phipps  wrote:
> 
> Those of us who were also part of the former OpenOffice.org project will be
> shocked to hear of the sudden and untimely death of John McCreesh, who used
> to be the (volunteer) marketing lead for the project. I have written more
> in [a public post on Facebook][1] which also includes a newspaper report of
> his death. Those with access to his Facebook wall will see a long list of
> tributes.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Simon
> 
> [1]: https://www.facebook.com/simon.phipps/posts/10153969052221654


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



Re: Does GPL apply when building AOO under CygWin?

2015-10-26 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi

> On 26 Oct 15, at 04:47, Roman Kuksin  wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I am currently building AOO sources with CygWin under Windows XP x86 using 
> this instruction:
> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO/Step_by_step#Windows_7
> 
> According to the link below I must distribute executables under the terms of 
> GPL3+ if the Cygwin DLL is linked:
> https://cygwin.com/licensing.html
> 
> Is it the case?
> Is the Cygwin DLL linked when building AOO?
> Is it legal to distribute the AOO executables under the Apache license when 
> CygWin is used?

I don't think that is the case. See Red Hat's statement on that Cygwin page: 

"As a special exception to GPLv3+, Red Hat grants you permission to link 
software whose sources are distributed under a license that satisfies the Open 
Source Definition with libcygwin.a, without libcygwin.a itself causing the 
resulting program to be covered by GPLv3+."


OO is licensed using Apache SL2. I haven't checked very recently, but that 
likely satisfies the OSI open source definition. 

Historically, usage of Cygwin, which has been extensive, and long (I've been 
advocating it and helping people with it since 2001, at least, and that 
includes some OO work) has not caused license panic. Red Hat seems intent on 
ensuring that calm prevails and that people use it freely and regularly without 
having that heart stopping moment of regret that would turn them to something 
else.

But, I could be wrong here. About everything.

Cheers,
Louis


> Regards,
> Roman.
> 
> P.S.:
> I also posted this question here:
> https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6=79966


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



Re: Meeting at ApacheCon

2015-10-01 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi-
> On 01 Oct 2015, at 14:43, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
> 
> It seems that several of us are (or are going to be) at ApacheCon Europe 
> today y and tomorrow, but it's difficult to find people in the huge crowd.
> 
> Louis suggested that we organize a meeting tomorrow morning (do you have any 
> more details about proposed time/place, Louis?).
> 
> I expect that we manage to find each other at the reception tonight anyway.


We can try to meet up. I doubt we will have—nor should we—any conversation that 
would not be had in pubic, as on this list. It’s more to talk as easily as 
in-peson meetings can only make possible.

But I think the issues are those that we all here are aware of. They are also 
public, or should be.

Briefly:

* We need developers. We need them to continue with the project, with what 
we’ve been doing for almost exactly 15 years (13 October), and we need them to 
address the needs that those who use OO (or LO) on a large scale really need.

— those needs are, interoperability with MS OOXML and probably also the binary 
formats (.doc, etc.) and also collaboration—a vague term.
We also need core developers who can initiate and then help lead new and 
interesting features that extend the reach of the ODF.

The other big issue that we all have discussed relates to working with those at 
LibreOffice/TDF. I am aware of the issues and obstacles and also histories that 
obstruct the flows of community work. But the current situation is not really 
helping anyone and is confusing everyone. Even if issues like license, workflow 
culture, notions of community, etc. prevent actual collaboration on any but the 
most essential security issues, my guess is that we can probably help the 
larger community of OO/LO users by clarifying what our identities and 
differences are and what users can expect. We are both open source projects. We 
ought therefore to be able to be as transparent in these matters as we are in 
our code. And we owe it to the community of users who want to know what keeps 
us apart and why we can’t just get along.

Of course, I hardly expect that we’ll have anything like an agreement on this 
matter tonight, should we even discuss it! And of course, any real, substantive 
discussion will necessarily include the community, else it won’t have happened.


> 
> Regards,
>  Andrea.

Best,
Louis

PS I had a rather interesting discussion with several people on the state of 
the ODF today, at ApacheCon. Among them was Giovanni Grazia, who led the 
migration from MSFT 2003 to AOO of the significant Italian polity of Regione 
Emilia-Romagna. I’ll draft a short account of it as well as other elements that 
speak to the state of ODF today.


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


Re: Macs for building / testing AOO?

2015-09-30 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts


> On 29 Sep 2015, at 20:44, Damjan Jovanovic  wrote:
> 
> Hi
> 
> Do we have any Macs we can use for building and testing AOO?
> 
> I've made some progress on a commonly reported serious regression on
> MacOS (#125431), where encrypted ODF files cannot be opened with
> recent AOO versions (password allegedly incorrect), but need a Mac to
> build and test AOO on.
> 
> Can anyone help?

I see I’m a little late in the offer, but, FWIW,

I actually have a Mac that could be used—devoted—to this purpose. It’s an old 
one, so slow: 2007 MacBookPro. However, it can do work. It’s at home, in 
Toronto, far from where I am now, Budapest.
> 

> Thank you
> Damjan

louis


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


Re: Wrongful information on the Wikipedia

2015-09-16 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 16 Sep 15, at 13:56, Rob Weir  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 4:52 PM, John D'Orazio
>  wrote:
>> Interestingly mr. David Gerard IS a moderator on Wikipedia it seems. He
>> still has to abide by the rules though. And there is quite a bit of
>> discussion on the talk page, where some users have opted to split the
>> "Apache OpenOffice" project onto its own page as a completely separate
>> derivative project. All that is needed is to chime in on the article talk
>> page citing references to legal info about OpenOffice.org being officially
>> in the hands of the Apache Software Foundation. If there is evidence of
>> that (which seems obvious to me, I'm a newcomer but I go to the webpage and
>> I see Apache OpenOffice on the OpenOffice.org webpage), it just needs to be
>> cited on the talk page to back any kind of edits to the article that
>> reflect that. Seems that the article has already been split and "Apache
>> OpenOffice" has it's own wikipedia article (
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_OpenOffice), I wouldn't make a big
>> deal about having a separate article but I would oppose the POV opinions
>> about Apache not having legal rights to the OpenOffice.org project (hence
>> the corrections to the infobox information).
>> I don't know all of the technicalities, so the edits I just made might not
>> be precise, for example which release was the first release to have the
>> Apache license?
>> 
> 
> Is this the same David Gerard discussed here?
> 
> https://encyclopediadramatica.se/David_Gerard
> 

Oh, I hope so!

Louis



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



Re: Wrongful information on the Wikipedia

2015-09-16 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 16 Sep 15, at 15:38, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
> 
> Time, gentlemen, time.
> 
> We're far across the ad hominem boundary and it is time to let this thread go 
> night-night.
> 
> Whatever is thought of about what happens on Wikipedia, it is not ASF and AOO 
> business.  We have our own business to attend to.  If folks want to keep 
> fussing about it, there are many better places to do that than here on dev@.
> 
> - Dennis
> 
> [ … ]


?? I don’t think this is a) a gentleman kind of thing, if only for gender 
reasons; b) I think I rather like Mr G. and hardly deem this to be an ad 
hominem event. If others are like me, once you read over Mr G’s bio, a *lot* 
gets forgiven. He’s a card, a character, a source of necessary comic inversion. 
No one is flaming anyone here and we are actually kind of having fun.

Louis

> 
> 
> -
> 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: Wrongful information on the Wikipedia

2015-09-16 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 16 Sep 15, at 14:31, Max Merbald <max.merb...@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> According to the links on that page it's him.

Fantastic.

One hopes he’s reading this. 

Louis

PS in case others didn’t bother to follow up on Rob’s link, the title 
(self-appointed, I assume) held by Mr Gerard is enough to earn his keep, I’m 
sure.
> 
> 
> 
> Am 16.09.2015 um 19:58 schrieb Louis Suárez-Potts:
>>> On 16 Sep 15, at 13:56, Rob Weir <r...@robweir.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 4:52 PM, John D'Orazio
>>> <john.dora...@cappellaniauniroma3.org> wrote:
>>>> Interestingly mr. David Gerard IS a moderator on Wikipedia it seems. He
>>>> still has to abide by the rules though. And there is quite a bit of
>>>> discussion on the talk page, where some users have opted to split the
>>>> "Apache OpenOffice" project onto its own page as a completely separate
>>>> derivative project. All that is needed is to chime in on the article talk
>>>> page citing references to legal info about OpenOffice.org being officially
>>>> in the hands of the Apache Software Foundation. If there is evidence of
>>>> that (which seems obvious to me, I'm a newcomer but I go to the webpage and
>>>> I see Apache OpenOffice on the OpenOffice.org webpage), it just needs to be
>>>> cited on the talk page to back any kind of edits to the article that
>>>> reflect that. Seems that the article has already been split and "Apache
>>>> OpenOffice" has it's own wikipedia article (
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_OpenOffice), I wouldn't make a big
>>>> deal about having a separate article but I would oppose the POV opinions
>>>> about Apache not having legal rights to the OpenOffice.org project (hence
>>>> the corrections to the infobox information).
>>>> I don't know all of the technicalities, so the edits I just made might not
>>>> be precise, for example which release was the first release to have the
>>>> Apache license?
>>>> 
>>> Is this the same David Gerard discussed here?
>>> 
>>> https://encyclopediadramatica.se/David_Gerard
>>> 
>> Oh, I hope so!
>> 
>> Louis
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> 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: Slow but steady, please

2015-09-16 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi,

> On 14 Sep 15, at 20:13, Pedro Giffuni  wrote:
> 
> Hi Bruce;
> 
> I just looked a bit ...
> Calligra does look nice and I see it has advanced quite nicely.
> 
> There's probably still the issue of multi-platform support but it
> is certainly refreshing to see something different.

I’ve played around a lot with KOffice, Calligra, and on Linux (KDE) and wished 
I could use, without encountering the inevitable crash, the durn things on OS 
X. I think Calligra is great. I love the modularity, love their support of ODF, 
but wish it were more complete, though it’s frankly good enough. At the Orvieto 
conference, Inge W., who then led the KOffice team, described the challenges of 
modularizing the previously monolithic code and making it modular. Far more 
successful than Mozilla’s efforts, the team succeeded in its goal. At the time, 
I was hopeful that the same dedication could be applied to OO. Certainly, there 
were at least two competing architectures to the one we had. But history….

And now KDE and Calligra. One has to wonder, however good the application was, 
is and will be, how relevant is it? (Yes, I am aware this query applies as well 
to AOO and all children of OOo.) Another way of putting that query, I suppose, 
would be, What makes for a relevant suite or set of related applications? I 
think the obvious answer is something like, "It works with what we’ve got," and 
"It’s easy to integrate into what we’re thinking about getting."

I would further nuance that with, 

* Let’s focus on public sector use. Open government practices are making more 
and more documents accessible to the public. These can use PDF but for 
necessarily interactive ones, the choice can be OOXML, HTML, ODF

* Archival usage
* Education (for students, by professors/teachers, by admin)

Desired features of all such (and also a raging buzzword, rather ill-defined): 
Collaboration.

Right now, I don’t think it’s simply about not spending money poorly. I rather 
think it’s about anticipating use cases and remaining flexible both as a 
productive environment and as a product.

Louis


> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Pedro.
> 
> On 09/14/15 17:18, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>> Hello;
>> 
>> This may sound controversial, and is indeed just IMHO, but I am afraid
>> that the general Office-suite marketplace is stuck and people shouldn't
>> expect much more from it.
>> 


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



Re: Google Test now in gbuild and other good news

2015-09-16 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi Damjian,


> On 16 Sep 15, at 15:53, Damjan Jovanovic  wrote:
> 
> Hi
> 
> I finally managed to win a long battle against GNU make and integrate
> Google Test into gbuild :-). Also updated the documentation on
> https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Googletest. Currently only main/sfx2
> uses it, but I plan on migrating the other gbuild+cppunit modules.
> It's very platform dependent; it definitely works on Windows, Linux
> and FreeBSD, but I couldn't test my changes to MacOS, Solaris, OS/2 or
> MinGW.
> 
> In other good news (which we seem to need of late):
> * Broken javadocs in a number of .java files that were causing the
> build to break when using Java 8's very strict javadoc tool have all
> been fixed, and AOO now builds with Java 8.
> * oowintool was broken by a recent commit, and ./configure was failing
> on Windows as a result. This regression was reported to its committer
> and is now fixed.
> * Several unit tests that were breaking the Windows build have been
> fixed, and I am resolving more.
> 
> Damjan
> 
> —

So, I’m impressed :-)

This is terrific, and more than just good news. Hope you blog about it!

Louis


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



Re: Wrongful information on the Wikipedia

2015-09-16 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 16 Sep 15, at 17:27, Rob Weir  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  
>> wrote:
>>> Time, gentlemen, time.
>>> 
>>> We're far across the ad hominem boundary and it is time to let this thread 
>>> go night-night.
>>> 
>>> Whatever is thought of about what happens on Wikipedia, it is not ASF and 
>>> AOO business.  We have our own business to attend to.  If folks want to 
>>> keep fussing about it, there are many better places to do that than here on 
>>> dev@.
>>> 
>> 
>> Ad hominem?  Excuse me?   The web page has a record of Wikipedia
>> abuses attributed to Mr. Gerard and cites several cases where he was
>> sanction for it.   One can talk about his actions without slurring his
>> person, especially when such acts are directly relevant to the topic
>> of this thread.
>> 
> 
> Last word, in case the inference is unclear.   We're dealing with a
> sophisticated serial infringer on Wikipedia.  Correcting erroneous
> information, which is proper to do, is unlikely to be achieved via an
> edit war.  Don't bring a knife to a gunfight.   Any progress would
> only be made by showing Mr. Gerard's own conflict  and his bad will
> (not hard to do),  and escalating it within the the formal Wikipedia
> appeals process, patiently dealing with the ministerial types to whom
> bureaucratic process is dear.  Since Dennis does not want to discuss
> this on the list, feel free to contact me offline if anyone wishes to
> discuss this further.
> 
> -Rob
> 

But Dennis does not control the lists, just as King Canute did not control the 
waves. :-/

Rob, your points are good; I was being too facetious, stunned by the attitude 
of Mr Gerard. Clearly, unless we are reading him wrongly, he would seem more 
likely to stick to his position, regardless of reason and logic, than accept 
the ignominy of somebody else being right.

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



Re: AOO-Earmarked Funds

2015-09-10 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 10 Sep 15, at 01:57, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
> 
> Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>> I notice, from time-to-time that there seem to be funds that there are 
>> AOO-earmarked funds that the ASF received..
> 
> I do not know more about this than anyone else does. It's all in this mailing 
> list archives. For example see here:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/2012+June
> (June 2012)
> We were able to initiate transfer of SPI funds formerly earmarked for
> OpenOffice.org to the ASF. However, due to changes in the ASF Fundraising
> chair, this transfer has been postponed. Followup with ASF Fundraising is
> needed to complete this transaction. These funds, as previously discussed,
> will primarily be used for developer travel when needed.
> 
> (Note: I'm sure that the transfer was later done successfully and that the 
> ASF Treasurer now manages these funds under a separate chapter)

Yes. It occurs to me that as Dennis’ query is utterly rational it would further 
make sense to have a note to undo the mystification of all other PMC members.
> 
>> Is it the case that those funds are dedicated to events, such as attendance 
>> allowances and collateral materials?
> 
> They were collected for a range of possible targets, but the only one 
> feasible at Apache was events. Again, the discussion happened before 
> mid-2012, I wasn't Chair and I didn't have any role in the discussion or in 
> the project at the time.
> 
>> One case that comes to mind would be funding Infra
> 
> I don't remember if this was one of the possible uses, but again I didn't 
> have a major role in the discussion about this in 2012.

I read over many of the relevant emails and actually infra was mentioned. 
Discussions on use of the funds are probably most interesting very early in the 
history of AOO.

louis

> 
> Regards,
>  Andrea.

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



Software Freedom Day

2015-09-10 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi All,
This year’s Software Freedom Day (SFD) is 25 September. (See 
http://softwarefreedomday.org/)
We’ve usually done something for it (along with doing something to honour 
Document Freedom Day, in March). But I’m unsure what has been discussed this 
year. 

Thoughts?

louis 



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



Re: ODF Plugfest: participation and leaflets

2015-09-07 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 07 Sep 15, at 12:09, Roberto Galoppini  wrote:
> 
> Agreed, and I'm really sorry I couldn't make it. In future we might want to
> have a small team of people who knows how ODF Plugfests work and are
> willing to attend, give a speech and run tests. I believe we need all these
> three pieces to make our participation meaningful.


Yes. I suggested that when Andrea mentioned it. Ecce :

> This is what we should learn—some suggested guidelines:
> 
> * ODF Plugfests are something we care about and deem important.
> * If community members are able and willing to present at and thus represent 
> AOO at ODf Plugfests, then they should list themselves on a wiki devoted to 
> this and also make sure that they post to the dev@aoo mail list their 
> interest and ability in representing AOO at the plugfest. 
> * If they need money to attend, let us all know on the dev@aoo list.
> * If they cannot make it and if it seems as if no one can make it, 
> yikes—maybe.
> * collateral material (eg, leaflets), etc. can be produced using our funds 
> but we all need to know of this need and it must sit within our broader 
> mandate as part of ASF as well as any local need. 
> 
> These guidelines represent an effort to make visible what is probably already 
> codified and also practiced. There are events, ongoing processes (like the 
> ODF plugfests) that affect us (as a larger community) and in which I think we 
> have an interest. The ODF plugfest is, however, just one instance; there are 
> others, I have no doubt. 
> 
> The guidelines are intended to make it easier for us to track such interests. 
> Of course, we’ve done this all before, and there’s no harm in importing what 
> has worked before.

(Note, those of us with long standing in this project, and I count among them 
Andrea, Roberto, me, plus many others, may be forgiven moments of déjà vu, the 
sense that, "Haven’t we done this before? Solved that? Written the wikis, the 
guidelines? Established best practices?" To which, one can answer, Yes. Now 
let’s do it again.)
louis



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



Re: Status page for OpenOffice 4.1.2

2015-09-06 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 06 Sep 15, at 14:39, Steve  wrote:
> 
>> I’m curious—perhaps someone would want to undergo the pain of comparing our 
>> 4.1.2 with
>> LibreOffice’s 5.0.1? A task somewhat beside the point. But possibly of 
>> marketing use. And also a means
>> by which we and others can evaluate what is meant by our respective releases.
> 
> Keep in mind that by the time OpenOffice 4.1.2 is released, LibreOffice may 
> have released versions 5.0.2 or 5.0.3 
> (https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan#5.0_release).
> This may flaw your comparison.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Steve

No, or only if we were foolishly dogmatic. You seem to miss my point. The idea 
is to help users understand the alternatives. To aid them in making our point. 
This has nothing to do with satisfying any personal interest of mine.

Louis


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



Re: Status page for OpenOffice 4.1.2

2015-09-05 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Andrea, et al.,
Thanks!

> On 05 Sep 15, at 17:08, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
> 
> I've started a status page for OpenOffice 4.1.2 at
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.1.2
> 
> It is not complete yet (for example, the Bugzilla queries are still missing, 
> I know Kay sent some updated ones, feel free to edit), and it does not 
> contain anything really new for people who do follow this list. But it may be 
> useful to occasional readers of this list, just to see where we are and what 
> is ongoing.
> 
> Actually, there is a "Volunteers" column where you can add your name for 
> specific tasks: please do!
> 
> The page is loosely based on other pages and on a model proposed by Marcus 
> several months ago, but it doesn't get into details since it is just an 
> overview page rather than a precise task list: we have this mailing list for 
> discussions.
> 
> Regards,
>  Andrea.

I’m curious—perhaps someone would want to undergo the pain of comparing our 
4.1.2 with LibreOffice’s 5.0.1? A task somewhat beside the point. But possibly 
of marketing use. And also a means by which we and others can evaluate what is 
meant by our respective releases.

louis

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



Re: ODF Plugfest: participation and leaflets

2015-09-05 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 05 Sep 15, at 06:49, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
> 
> For 1) we have Louis' availability but by the time everything is approved it 
> will be unrealistic that he can still arrange an intercontinental flight 
> (which is a pity since we started discussing the Plugfest attendance three 
> months ago, we should really learn from this).


Yes. 
This is what we should learn—some suggested guidelines:

* ODF Plugfests are something we care about and deem important.
* If community members are able and willing to present at and thus represent 
AOO at ODf Plugfests, then they should list themselves on a wiki devoted to 
this and also make sure that they post to the dev@aoo mail list their interest 
and ability in representing AOO at the plugfest. 
* If they need money to attend, let us all know on the dev@aoo list.
* If they cannot make it and if it seems as if no one can make it, yikes—maybe.
* collateral material (eg, leaflets), etc. can be produced using our funds but 
we all need to know of this need and it must sit within our broader mandate as 
part of ASF as well as any local need. 

These guidelines represent an effort to make visible what is probably already 
codified and also practiced. There are events, ongoing processes (like the ODF 
plugfests) that affect us (as a larger community) and in which I think we have 
an interest. The ODF plugfest is, however, just one instance; there are others, 
I have no doubt. 

The guidelines are intended to make it easier for us to track such interests. 
Of course, we’ve done this all before, and there’s no harm in importing what 
has worked before.

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



Re: [DISCUSSION] ODF Plugfest, September 2015

2015-09-04 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi

> On 04 Sep 15, at 07:42, Roberto Galoppini  wrote:
>> 
>> Here at dev@ we can work up a status report that anyone could deliver and
>> also development of any contributions to the interoperability testing that
>> would be useful for cross-implementation demonstration/confirmation in
>> those sessions.
>> 
>> I am happy to cooperate in any way I can in the development of such
>> materials.  I trust Roberto will continue to participate on the calls
>> (since they tend to be at 6am in my local time).
>> 
> 
> I will surely do if any will be set, but I guess for this ODF-Plugfest
> we're done. If someone - not me, as per my message on another thread I
> can't commit to this now - is willing to go, we better give heads up to the
> organizers so that a talk of us can be added to the agenda.
> 
> Roberto
> 



Status, then, is:

* We need to update the English flyer that OpenDocs Society has created. 
Roberto (or DH) seem to think this is a PMC-level decision. Be that as it may, 
I think it’s in our interest as ODF implementers to do it. 

* We are agreed that it would be good to have an AOO representative at the 
upcoming ODF Plugfest. "Upcoming" is an understatement; it’s nearly imminent, 
15& 16 September of this year. 

* Roberto cannot go. Andrea cannot go. Dennis (whose has invested a lot of time 
into ODF matters) cannot go. I may be able to go but would need to have my 
travel taken care of by our bursary. As I live in Toronto, it’s bound to be 
more expensive than someone coming from Europe. 

- Rob would also be a choice, as he used to lead, and may still, the Oasis TC, 
where ODF matters are decided (or not…). Rob? Rob would also encounter the same 
Atlantic as I, and as he is with a large company, there may be issues with him 
accepting AOO funds. (There were such issues when I was with large 
corporations.)

Why is this event important? The UK government back in 2014 announced its ODF 
desires for a large swath of public documents. Other governmental entities in 
other parts of continental Europe, have been hedging towards ODF or at least 
away from 20th-century style desktop/intranet installations and toward what 
could be a future (or just a lousy investment). This ODF plugfest has several 
of the governmental practitioners presenting or attending. 

Our concern is that they look to AOO and see…. nada. An absence the would 
confirm what the tech journos love writing about us, that we’re dead, dying, 
and worse, stifle the living communities. 


I don’t think those representations are justified at all, and I would hate for 
them to be given the semblance of truth by our absence 

But this is not the only Plugfest that will happen nor is it the first that has 
taken place since the UK gov’t’s announcement. The world will not come to an 
end because we do not show. But it would be better if we did.

Finally, if we do need to take a PMC vote on updating the English flyer, then 
let’s get that going. Personally, I’d just think that if someone wants to 
tackle it, please, go ahead and drag in whomever else you want and is willing 
to help out. Why do we need to add yet more bureaucracy to this?

Because to print out a lot of the flyers and make them look glossy and cool, 
that takes money, which we can spend, but only after the PMC has voted on doing 
so. Hence the PMC vote.

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



Re: [DISCUSSION] ODF Plugfest, September 2015

2015-09-04 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Comments inline; Roberto, feel free… 


> On 04 Sep 15, at 13:10, Dennis E. Hamilton <orc...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> It is not clear to me what is being discussed here.  Can we separate out the 
> parts, please?
> 
> 1. There is discussion of sending someone to participate in the ODF Plugfest 
> to be held on 2015-09/15-16, 11 days from now.  That includes a request for 
> travel funding.

Yes. Honestly, tho this could be an important event, the rush and cost are such 
that unless someone is closer to the event—i.e., not on the wrong side of the 
Atlantic—the cost would seem prohibitive, especially if my presence would only 
be to relay status.

> 
> 2. It is not clear to me exactly what that participation would be.

Quite.

>  Is it only to participate in status and not testing?

If I were to go, that would in fact be the case: status not testing. However, 
there is also the point that I’ve been trying to make (and I think Roberto, 
too) about the optics—the appearance—of our presence or nonpresence.

>  If it is status, it appears that any status presentation is likely part of 
> an agenda item to be led by Gijs Hillenius of OSOR.  

Yes.

> See 
> <http://plugtest.opendocsociety.org/doku.php?id=plugfests:201509_thehague:info>.
>   The topic is "ODF in the market place."  That is an interesting topic if it 
> remains the focus.  I'm not certain what we know about in that respect.  I 
> definitely think it would be useful to have concrete information about that 
> specific topic with respect to Apache OpenOffice.  If we figured it out, we 
> could offer a slide or two without having to be there.  Would that suffice?

Yes, but given the malleability of things, I’d guess that we could shape the 
topic to a degree. By concrete information, I am guessing you have in mind data 
we can cite indicating uptake or usage of AOO and thus of our implementation of 
ODF. To this point, Rob did point out that we could re-do our survey, which 
looked at preferred open source office suites. One could also conceivably add 
more questions illuminating AOO’s market currency. (Eg, percentage in any 
sector or other useful data points that suggest a picture of how and where AOO 
is being used. We did this a long while ago, at the Oasis ODF Adoption TC.)
> 
> 3. I don't understand what English flyer from the OpenDocs Society is being 
> spoken of.  I don't recall the ASF and certainly not the AOO Project being 
> participants/sponsors of the OpenDocs Society.  Am I mistaken?  Is a draft 
> available?

You are not mistaken as far as I know regarding sponsorship. I think a draft is 
available and was sent by Basil, but….
I think the money here, which we have some discretionary control over, 
independent of ASF—perhaps Andrea can explain it better—would go for printing. 
But: this, too is coming thick and fast. I mean the call for action on this 
matter.

> 
> 4. Also on this thread, there is some question about payment.  If this is 
> with regard to sponsoring this event, or being a sponsor in the production of 
> a flyer, the timing is very short here and it seems to me that the window may 
> have closed.
> 
> Also, please note that today is the early-start beginning of a major 3-day 
> Holiday weekend in the United States.  We must move deliberately but 
> inclusively.
> 
> Please clarify,

Doubtless Roberto or Andrea can shed more light.  I had been aware of the event 
but had not planned on going before, as it interacted (and still does) with a 
prior personal engagement. But the event does strike me as potential important. 
But not so important as to cause the sky to fall, should we not make it. 

The status report Gijs would read out is good. But my point that being there 
and meeting the government developers and representatives, as well as the 
others involved, would send a strong signal to an admittedly small but probably 
significant group.

But Roberto, who went last time, and Rob, who’s gone many times, can probably 
evaluate the scenario better than I. And we can also meet the principals 
elsewhere. Like at ACEU. Indeed, inviting them to the event and then holding 
much more informed and less rushed meetings there, would be good; but it would 
depend on them being there.

best
louis 



> 
> - Dennis
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Louis Suárez-Potts [mailto:lui...@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Friday, September 4, 2015 07:27
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] ODF Plugfest, September 2015
> 
> Hi
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
> 
> 
> Status, then, is:
> 
> * We need to update the English flyer that OpenDocs Society has created. 
> Roberto (or DH) seem to think this is a PMC-level decision. Be that as it 
> may, I think it’s in our interest as ODF implementers to do it. 
> 
> * We are agreed that it would be good

Re: ODF Plugfest: participation and leaflets

2015-09-04 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Note, to Basil, Stuart, Graham— (Wave of hello!—)

Just an alert that we are cc’ing the infinitely public dev@ list. It is not a 
private list. What you write, including your signature, etc. will be public and 
stay that way.

You probably know this already. And I’m being late about my warning. So it goes.

best
louis


> On 04 Sep 15, at 13:10, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
> 
> My apologies, Basil (and hello again!),
> 
> This came up very late and we may not be able to sort things out in time for 
> you.  
> 
> Do you have a hard deadline, and is that imminent?
> 
> Also, if there is some sort of draft that we can use for context, that would 
> be helpful.
> 
> (Attachments don't survive on this list though.)
> 
> If you prefer that work-in-progress not be posted to this public list, you 
> are welcome to respond to private@ openoffice.apache.org where the Project 
> Management Committee can look it over.  We will probably need to have a link 
> to some repository location.
> 
> 
> -- Dennis E. Hamilton
>orc...@apache.org
>dennis.hamil...@acm.org+1-206-779-9430
>https://keybase.io/orcmid  PGP F96E 89FF D456 628A
>X.509 certs used and requested for signed e-mail
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Basil Cousins [mailto:ba...@openforumeurope.org] 
> Sent: Friday, September 4, 2015 08:12
> To: Roberto Galoppini 
> Cc: dev ; Stuart Mackintosh ; 
> Graham Taylor 
> Subject: Re: ODF Plugfest: participation and leaflets
> 
> Roberto,
> 
> The designers are pressing us hard.  I will put in Apache OO Logo
> provisionally. OK?
> 
> Basil
> 
> On 4 September 2015 at 15:37, Roberto Galoppini > wrote:
> 
>> Basil,
>> 
>> I'm sure you'll get an answer, but unfortunately I can't commit to provide
>> you with an answer in a short time frame. Our Chair will sort out a way to
>> manage this situation, though.
>> 
>> Roberto
>> 
>> 2015-09-04 16:25 GMT+02:00 Basil Cousins :
>> 
>>> Roberto,
>>> 
>>> We need to close very soon.  When can you let me know about English
>>> version?
>>> 
>>> Basil
>>> 
>>> On 4 September 2015 at 15:04, Roberto Galoppini <
>>> roberto.galopp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
 Hi Basil,
 
 Nice to catch up again. I want to clarify that here I'm expressing only
 my opinion, we do need the PMC to establish if we want - as a community -
 to sponsor the English version.
 
 Thanks,
 
 2015-09-04 14:31 GMT+02:00 Basil Cousins :
 
> Hi Roberto,
> 
> Great to be in touch.  I will ask Graham Taylor to raise an invoice for
> £100+VAT to cover the English Version.
> Can you let us have the address to be put on the invoice?
> 
> Shal we use the same logo as in the London version for Apache Open
> Office or is there a more recent one?
> 
> Basil
> [ ... ]
> 
> 
> -
> 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: ODF Plugfest: participation and leaflets

2015-09-04 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi all,
(dropped the cc’d outside of AOO).

> On 04 Sep 15, at 15:32, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
> 
> Stuart,
>  
> Thank you for your rapid response.
>  
> I assume 2015-09-08T16:00 is UTC+0100 (BST)?
>  
> I think there are two matters.
>  
> First, it would be very useful to know what the modifications to the 
> “Application Choices” table are, and also anything new with respect to 
> differences concerning the International Standards mentioned and also 
> application differences.
>  
> Secondly, I am concerned that there are various advocacy and high-level 
> claims that may be inappropriate for the ASF and, consequently, Apache 
> OpenOffice, to appear associated with.  That’s a provisional observation.  
> Further discussion will occur here, I’m certain. 

>  
> I personally favor the technical activities of the ODF Plugfests and also the 
> informational activities of the Plugfest events.  The only issue is how 
> sponsoring the “Open Document Principles” booklet reflects on the AOO 
> Project’s charge to operate with good will to all software projects and focus 
> on producing software, free to the public, as a public good.

Dennis, I can’t claim to be enamoured of your legalistic phrasing and parsing 
of whether any endorsement of the leaflet would be in keeping with the ASF’s 
articulated (and tax sensitive) mission. I appreciate your point, however. It 
is not a trivial observation and does merit discussion, action, by the 
community. But the language is somewhat off-putting, or at least it was with 
me. The blunter language of your last paragraph is much more to the point and 
comprehensible. It’s something we in this community can work with. 

Note, our support of the plugfests has a long history, antedating AOO. 
"Support" does not mean monetary; it means, here, a support of the cause of the 
ODF. Specific instances would be Roberto participating as the AOO rep. last ODF 
Plugfest. (My prior participations were under my own recognisance or as a 
member of Oasis; same for Rob, I think.)

If we, the community want to discuss supporting the leaflet, I’d suggest we get 
on it. I’d like to set a deadline so that we can let Stuart know sooner than 
later.

I’d also like to learn if we are going to send someone to the event. As time 
drips into the sewage of the past, the answer edges toward "no." :-)

louis


>  
> -   Dennis
>  
> From: Stuart J Mackintosh [mailto:s...@opusvl.com] 
> Sent: Friday, September 4, 2015 10:27
> To: orc...@apache.org; dev@openoffice.apache.org; 'Roberto Galoppini' 
> 
> Cc: 'Graham Taylor' 
> Subject: Re: ODF Plugfest: participation and leaflets
>  
> Dennis,
>> Do you have a hard deadline, and is that imminent?
> Sorry that this came so late for you. As I am sure you understand, it takes 
> time to muster volunteer commitment so we are somewhat against the clock. 
> There is an imminent deadline, print will be finalised and sent Tuesday 
> 08/09/2015 at 16:00.
> 
>> Also, if there is some sort of draft that we can use for context, that would 
>> be helpful.
> Yes, the 11th ODF Plugfest booklet titled "Open Document Format principles 
> for Government Technology" will follow a similar style and content to the 
> booklet produced after the 10th Plugfest and published on Document Freedom 
> Day 2015 (downloadable from 
> http://blogs.opusvl.com/_attachment/283/OFE-COIS-DFD-ODF-Open-Document-Principles-for-Government-Technology-March-2015.pdf),
>  but updated to reflect the Dutch government involvement in the 11th plugfest 
> and an improved "Application Choices" table. 
> 
> An A3 poster copy of the ODF infograpic (downloadable from 
> http://blogs.opusvl.com/_attachment/281/OFE-COIS-ODF-infographic-release-02150325-by-sa.png)
>  will also be printed and enclosed within the 11th Plugfest booklet, both 
> printed in English and Dutch.
> 
> The document and many translations make up the OFE ODF toolkit which can be 
> found here: http://www.openforumeurope.org/library/odf-toolkit-2/
> 
> I hope this helps inform you of our project.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Stuart.
> 
> PS Louis, thanks for the note.
> 
> 
>>  
>>  
>>  -- Dennis E. Hamilton
>> orc...@apache.org
>> dennis.hamil...@acm.org+1-206-779-9430
>> https://keybase.io/orcmid  PGP F96E 89FF D456 628A
>> X.509 certs used and requested for signed e-mail
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Basil Cousins [mailto:ba...@openforumeurope.org] 
>> Sent: Friday, September 4, 2015 08:12
>> To: Roberto Galoppini 
>> Cc: dev ; Stuart Mackintosh ; 
>> Graham Taylor 
>> Subject: Re: ODF Plugfest: participation and leaflets
>>  
>> Roberto,
>>  
>> The designers are pressing us hard.  I will put in Apache OO Logo
>>  provisionally. OK?
>>  
>> Basil
>>  
>> On 4 September 2015 at 15:37, Roberto Galoppini 

Re: [DISCUSSION] ODF Plugfest, September 2015

2015-09-04 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 04 Sep 15, at 16:05, Roberto Galoppini <roberto.galopp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 2015-09-04 19:39 GMT+02:00 Louis Suárez-Potts <lui...@gmail.com>:
> 
>> Comments inline; Roberto, feel free…
>> 
>> 
> 
> Actually I didn't go since the Orvieto Plugfest, that is almost 10 years
> ago. Anyway, I believe we missed the opportunity to come up with something
> valuable and interesting for the agenda, unless someone has a different
> idea. If I would have gone I would have joined the technical sessions, but
> again our understanding of how AOO is or is not compliant with the finally
> approved ODF 1.2 is little at best.
> 

Interesting; I had the impression you’d gone to the most recent. Then, it would 
seem the case Rob and I have gone to more, as I’ve attended most of them, 
though not since 2012 Brussels. 

> To all this we should add the concerns and questions rightfully raised by
> Dennis, here and on the other thread.

Y.
> 
> I would favor us to get a hold of where are we in respect of such a
> standard, and plan to join the next Plugfest.

I would go further and suggest we shape the content of our future. Not spectate.



> 
> My two cents.

I raise you a loony. (Loony: the Canadian dollar but probably less than that, 
given the plunging value of "money"; also a bird and useful adjective 
indicating craziness.)
> 
> Roberto
> 
> 
>> 
>> best
>> louis
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> - Dennis
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Louis Suárez-Potts [mailto:lui...@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Friday, September 4, 2015 07:27
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] ODF Plugfest, September 2015
>>> 
>>> Hi
>>> 
>>> [ ... ]
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Status, then, is:
>>> 
>>> * We need to update the English flyer that OpenDocs Society has created.
>> Roberto (or DH) seem to think this is a PMC-level decision. Be that as it
>> may, I think it’s in our interest as ODF implementers to do it.
>>> 
>>> * We are agreed that it would be good to have an AOO representative at
>> the upcoming ODF Plugfest. "Upcoming" is an understatement; it’s nearly
>> imminent, 15& 16 September of this year.
>>> 
>>> * Roberto cannot go. Andrea cannot go. Dennis (whose has invested a lot
>> of time into ODF matters) cannot go. I may be able to go but would need to
>> have my travel taken care of by our bursary. As I live in Toronto, it’s
>> bound to be more expensive than someone coming from Europe.
>>> 
>>> - Rob would also be a choice, as he used to lead, and may still, the
>> Oasis TC, where ODF matters are decided (or not…). Rob? Rob would also
>> encounter the same Atlantic as I, and as he is with a large company, there
>> may be issues with him accepting AOO funds. (There were such issues when I
>> was with large corporations.)
>>> 
>>> Why is this event important? The UK government back in 2014 announced
>> its ODF desires for a large swath of public documents. Other governmental
>> entities in other parts of continental Europe, have been hedging towards
>> ODF or at least away from 20th-century style desktop/intranet installations
>> and toward what could be a future (or just a lousy investment). This ODF
>> plugfest has several of the governmental practitioners presenting or
>> attending.
>>> 
>>> Our concern is that they look to AOO and see…. nada. An absence the
>> would confirm what the tech journos love writing about us, that we’re dead,
>> dying, and worse, stifle the living communities.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I don’t think those representations are justified at all, and I would
>> hate for them to be given the semblance of truth by our absence
>>> 
>>> But this is not the only Plugfest that will happen nor is it the first
>> that has taken place since the UK gov’t’s announcement. The world will not
>> come to an end because we do not show. But it would be better if we did.
>>> 
>>> Finally, if we do need to take a PMC vote on updating the English flyer,
>> then let’s get that going. Personally, I’d just think that if someone wants
>> to tackle it, please, go ahead and drag in whomever else you want and is
>> willing to help out. Why do we need to add yet more bureaucracy to this?
>>> 
>>> Because to print out a lot of the flyers and make them look glossy and
>> cool, that takes money, which we can spend, but only after the PMC has
>> voted on doing so. Hence the PMC vote.

Re: ODF Plugfest: participation and leaflets

2015-09-04 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Roberto, do you want to initiate the discussion for a vote by the community 
including the binding PMC members? I would prefer to keep it all public and 
just have the PMC members indicate at vote their status.

But go ahead and let’s get the issue a) clarified and b) framed in such a way 
that we can act on it.

louis


> On 04 Sep 15, at 10:04, Roberto Galoppini <roberto.galopp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Basil,
> 
> Nice to catch up again. I want to clarify that here I'm expressing only my
> opinion, we do need the PMC to establish if we want - as a community - to
> sponsor the English version.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 2015-09-04 14:31 GMT+02:00 Basil Cousins <ba...@openforumeurope.org>:
> 
>> Hi Roberto,
>> 
>> Great to be in touch.  I will ask Graham Taylor to raise an invoice for
>> £100+VAT to cover the English Version.
>> Can you let us have the address to be put on the invoice?
>> 
>> Shal we use the same logo as in the London version for Apache Open Office
>> or is there a more recent one?
>> 
>> Basil
>> 
>> Basil
>> 
>> On 4 September 2015 at 12:38, Roberto Galoppini <
>> roberto.galopp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2015-09-04 5:06 GMT+02:00 Louis Suárez-Potts <lui...@gmail.com>:
>>> 
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> Comments inline.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 03 Sep 15, at 16:24, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> As we discussed some weeks ago, the next ODF Plugfest will be held in
>>>> The Hague, Netherlands, mid-September:
>>>>> http://plugfest.opendocumentformat.org/2015-thehague/programme/
>>>>> 
>>>>> There are three issues that require attention in a very short time.
>>>> Deadline is 8 September when not otherwise specified.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 1) Is anyone going in the end? We discussed this at length. I've never
>>>> considered going since it overlaps with another event I'm scheduled to
>>>> attend. Dennis and Roberto were both mentioned (and Dennis later clarified
>>>> he is busy in the US). Of course if someone goes we can still discuss to
>>>> allocate a budget from our events fund.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> When I made plans to go I didn't know about much about my calendar of
>>> business meetings. As of now I can't commit to that trip, unfortunately.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The event somewhat overlaps with a personal engagement but that may be
>>>> negotiable. It depends on how much subsidy we have to support this very
>>>> late trip—of mine, I mean. I’d be coming from Toronto, Canada. A quick
>>>> price check via Orbitz reveals that for a flight via the dodgy Air Transat
>>>> the cost (R/T) would be about 740 USD. Include an Airbnb room—don’t know
>>>> how much that would be but probably not that much, though still, for three
>>>> days, at leasts 150 USD, and probably more. (I’m guessing the Hague is
>>>> costly.) Besides Air Transat, the average price for airfare to AMS is about
>>>> 1300 USD; to the Hague (Rotterdam) 500 USD more or so. I’m guessing a train
>>>> trip from AMS is cheaper.
>>>> 
>>>> I’ve been to several of these events, including, I think, the initiating
>>>> one. I know ODF fairly well, was on the Oasis TCs, etc. (I quit them a
>>>> couple of years ago.) The drawback for me going is I’m not developing ODF
>>>> or for ODF and though I can certainly represent AOO’s continued interest in
>>>> furthering usage of ODF, not to mention other Apache projects’ ODF work, to
>>>> some extent I’ll be mostly competent at relaying speech.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I agree, and I think it would be important to give a speech about our
>>> concerns around office formats' interoperability.
>>> I believe we can still ask Michiel or Basil to accommodate a similar ask.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 2) I was contacted (for no special reason; I've never attended a
>>>> Plugfest) by Basil Cousins of Openforum Europe, who gave me permission to
>>>> forward his request here, about updating a leaflet for the next ODF
>>>> Plugfest. The 2014 version is here:
>>>>> 
>>>> http://openforumeurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/OFE-COIS-DFD-ODF-Open-Document-Principles-for-Government-Technology-March-2015.pdf
>&

Re: ODF Plugfest: participation and leaflets

2015-09-04 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi all,

> On 04 Sep 15, at 22:13, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamil...@acm.org> wrote:
> 
> I think the idea is to work toward consensus.  The proposal of a [VOTE] on a 
> matter not yet made specific and discussed is not particularly advisable.

Oh dear. I guess I was not clear and inadvertently caused more confusion than 
usual. I wrote, "Roberto, do you want to imitate the discussion for a vote…." 
That is to say, not have a vote, but yet to have discussion that would be 
productive and result in a vote. I actually did not mean to suggest we should 
leap to a vote. As my language I thought had conveyed, I want to hit the "Let’s 
Think About This" button and then press the "Let's Act As A Community."


> 
> How about a [PROPOSE] or a [DISCUSS] thread.  If you look for a lazy 
> consensus, please allow for the fact that this is a 3-day Holiday weekend in 
> the United States.

Sure. A discussion that could lead to vote, in the end. I think the most 
important point I was actually trying to convey to Roberto is that there is no 
project lead or chair and if he deems the issue here important, then he is 
entitled to initiate the process the would lead in the end to action. 

Louis
> 
> - Dennis
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Louis Suárez-Potts [mailto:lui...@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Friday, September 4, 2015 18:20
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: ODF Plugfest: participation and leaflets
> 
> Roberto, do you want to initiate the discussion for a vote by the community 
> including the binding PMC members? I would prefer to keep it all public and 
> just have the PMC members indicate at vote their status.
> 
> But go ahead and let’s get the issue a) clarified and b) framed in such a way 
> that we can act on it.
> 
> louis
> 
> 
>> On 04 Sep 15, at 10:04, Roberto Galoppini <roberto.galopp...@gmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Basil,
>> 
>> Nice to catch up again. I want to clarify that here I'm expressing only my
>> opinion, we do need the PMC to establish if we want - as a community - to
>> sponsor the English version.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> 2015-09-04 14:31 GMT+02:00 Basil Cousins <ba...@openforumeurope.org>:
>> 
>>> Hi Roberto,
>>> 
>>> Great to be in touch.  I will ask Graham Taylor to raise an invoice for
>>> £100+VAT to cover the English Version.
>>> Can you let us have the address to be put on the invoice?
>>> 
>>> Shal we use the same logo as in the London version for Apache Open Office
>>> or is there a more recent one?
>>> 
>>> Basil
>>> 
>>> Basil
>>> 
>>> On 4 September 2015 at 12:38, Roberto Galoppini <
>>> roberto.galopp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 2015-09-04 5:06 GMT+02:00 Louis Suárez-Potts <lui...@gmail.com>:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> Comments inline.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 03 Sep 15, at 16:24, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> As we discussed some weeks ago, the next ODF Plugfest will be held in
>>>>> The Hague, Netherlands, mid-September:
>>>>>> http://plugfest.opendocumentformat.org/2015-thehague/programme/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> There are three issues that require attention in a very short time.
>>>>> Deadline is 8 September when not otherwise specified.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 1) Is anyone going in the end? We discussed this at length. I've never
>>>>> considered going since it overlaps with another event I'm scheduled to
>>>>> attend. Dennis and Roberto were both mentioned (and Dennis later clarified
>>>>> he is busy in the US). Of course if someone goes we can still discuss to
>>>>> allocate a budget from our events fund.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> When I made plans to go I didn't know about much about my calendar of
>>>> business meetings. As of now I can't commit to that trip, unfortunately.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> The event somewhat overlaps with a personal engagement but that may be
>>>>> negotiable. It depends on how much subsidy we have to support this very
>>>>> late trip—of mine, I mean. I’d be coming from Toronto, Canada. A quick
>>>>> price check via Orbitz reveals that for a flight via the dodgy Air Transat
>>>>> the cost (R/T) would be about 740 U

Re: AOO -> LO or MS O

2015-09-03 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 03 Sep 15, at 09:54, Rich Bowen  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 09/03/2015 08:33 AM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
>> "After LibreOffice came out, Oracle released one version of Oracle Open
>> Office before deciding that the project wasn’t worth the effort
>> .
>> It laid off the programmers and gave the code and trademarks to the Apache
>> Software Foundation, under Apache’s liberal open source license."
>> 
>> That's one version of events. Another version of events is this.
>> http://pages.citebite.com/e7v0f3m9sder
>> 
>> "Shuttleworth has a fairly serious disagreement with how the
>> OpenOffice.org/LibreOffice split came about. He said that Sun made a $100
>> million "gift" to the community when it opened up the OpenOffice code. But
>> a "radical faction" made the lives of the OpenOffice developers "hell" by
>> refusing to contribute code under the Sun agreement. That eventually led to
>> the split, but furthermore led Oracle to finally decide to stop OpenOffice
>> development and lay off 100 employees."
>> 
>> That's different from "deciding it was not worth the effort".
>> 
>> Why the FUD on a dev list, anyway?
> 
> It's not FUD. It's a link to an article.
> 
> What would be awesome is if someone would write a counterpoint, which is 
> non-confrontational, non-rageful, non-hateful, and non-reactionary, but just 
> calmly presenting the reasons why someone might want to stay on OpenOffice.

Write to the Guardian? I would do it, would love to do it, and clear up issues. 
But I’m one of the *last* people who could do it, as I was so involved in the 
project, from its inception to … now.

Besides, Mark S is not entirely bending history. There was a contingent, led by 
a very talented developer formerly employed by Novell and still associated with 
LibreOffice, who *did* make the lives of the Sun/Hamburg devs—or at least their 
boss, who was also mine—at times unpleasant. And one of the bones of contention 
was Sun’s widely criticised copyright assignment policy, which it did modify 
over the years. But that policy did have real consequences, despite Sun’s 
choosing to deprecate them. Whether the IP policy is the primary cause of the 
ultimate split—that would be a simplification and evaluating it would take more 
words than would stun an ox, if printed. But the policy did little to warm the 
hearts and soothe the nerves of those who felt that for all the license 
asserted, OOo tested the limits of what constituted open source development. 
(In contrast, AOO really is open source de jure and de facto.)

The history of the radical faction, btw is scripted online and accessible via 
the Internet Archives, if one wishes to look for Go-ooo and the blog entries of 
the primary developer working on Go-ooo.
> 
> Refuting the article on this list, where we all already know the story, is a 
> good start, but if you could turn it into an article that's less political, 
> more practical (features, community, timelines, and so on), that would 
> actually help our cause. The person asking the original question doesn't care 
> about politics, hurt feelings, and "radical factions", I guarantee. They want 
> to know which product is better for them, now, and in the long term.

Your last point is the interesting one. These ancient corporate battles and 
community disputations have left a torn legacy that has done exactly what any 
competitor of OOo would want: Divide and Conquer. The user is left uncertain. 
If I were counselling any user, would I point to AOO for its… what? support of 
users? UI? Templates? updates? Please. We’ve sputtered on about an incremental 
release now for over a year and meanwhile, LO is at 5.0.1, which I just 
downloaded. Numbers are arbitrary tokens, they mean little, we all know. But 
they look great.

Louis

> 
> Thanks.
> 
> -- 
> Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org


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



Re: AOO -> LO or MS O

2015-09-03 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 03 Sep 15, at 12:33, Kay Schenk <kay.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 09/03/2015 07:22 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
>> 
>>> On 03 Sep 15, at 09:54, Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 09/03/2015 08:33 AM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
>>>> "After LibreOffice came out, Oracle released one version of
>>>> Oracle Open Office before deciding that the project wasn’t worth
>>>> the effort 
>>>> <http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2011/04/oracle-gives-up-on-ooo-after-community-forks-the-project/>.
>>>> 
>>>> 
> It laid off the programmers and gave the code and trademarks to the Apache
>>>> Software Foundation, under Apache’s liberal open source
>>>> license."
>>>> 
>>>> That's one version of events. Another version of events is this. 
>>>> http://pages.citebite.com/e7v0f3m9sder
>>>> 
>>>> "Shuttleworth has a fairly serious disagreement with how the 
>>>> OpenOffice.org/LibreOffice split came about. He said that Sun
>>>> made a $100 million "gift" to the community when it opened up the
>>>> OpenOffice code. But a "radical faction" made the lives of the
>>>> OpenOffice developers "hell" by refusing to contribute code under
>>>> the Sun agreement. That eventually led to the split, but
>>>> furthermore led Oracle to finally decide to stop OpenOffice 
>>>> development and lay off 100 employees."
>>>> 
>>>> That's different from "deciding it was not worth the effort".
>>>> 
>>>> Why the FUD on a dev list, anyway?
>>> 
>>> It's not FUD. It's a link to an article.
>>> 
>>> What would be awesome is if someone would write a counterpoint,
>>> which is non-confrontational, non-rageful, non-hateful, and
>>> non-reactionary, but just calmly presenting the reasons why someone
>>> might want to stay on OpenOffice.
>> 
>> Write to the Guardian? I would do it, would love to do it, and clear
>> up issues. But I’m one of the *last* people who could do it, as I was
>> so involved in the project, from its inception to … now.
> 
> I would think this would make you one of the best people to do it!
 :-)
But I like to believe I’m unbiased, and school myself in ways that hide from 
myself me. And I’ld like to think that letters to the editor, esp. to the 
Guardian, which I rather admire, ought to be impartial. (Note, impartial is not 
the same as unbiased.) I’m partial.

But I also have another problem. This one is a particularly deep one. It has to 
do with the value of AOO for *users* if not *developers*. 

Bluntly: What is the value of AOO to users? What claim do we have over LO to 
*users*? 

I’ve been trying out LO now for some time, comparing it to AOO, looking at its 
UI, seeing what templates, etc. they have that we don’t. Frankly, both our 
ecosystems are wanting. They once were better, they once certainly promised 
more, they now languish. 

But if I’m a naive user, or even a company wanting support, what options do we 
offer? And say that I, as a company, want some special features. What 
extensions outreach do we have? What are we doing to make the community 
interesting? 

My challenges are not coming from a bad mood. It really has to do with looking 
at it from a user’s perspective, from that of someone who just wants to write, 
say, or have a spreadsheet. Once, we had good answers, good promotions. I think 
we still could have these. But perhaps our efforts could be better spent 
devising ways to collaborate with LO and give users the best experience we can 
put together. 

As to the realities of collaboration, including personalities and license? Yes. 
I know. I was wounded by the TdF and felt betrayed; nor do I relish the 
continued journalistic bias against us, nor the etceteras that one could add. 
But I think this rather something to put aside. 

Or do others on this list have a compelling reason to favour AOO over LO *for 
the user*? 

If so, what is it?

Louis

PS BTW my own tartly bent version of the world is framed by the question, Who 
benefits from LO, esp. in Linux? A query which could also be sentenced as, 
Besides Ubuntu (Canonical) what other Linux desktop and now enterprise distros 
are there that have anything like the same popularity? RH? Implicitly then, 
collaborating with LO/TDF, putting aside animus, favours those entities. Is 
that a problem? 


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



Re: AOO -> LO or MS O

2015-09-03 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 03 Sep 15, at 15:05, Roberto Galoppini  wrote:
> 
> 2015-09-03 17:48 GMT+02:00 Dennis E. Hamilton :
> 
>> There are users who will find the political drama compelling.  There is
>> nothing to be done about that.  It does not make the product better and it
>> distracts those who want to find ways to serve the broad community no
>> matter what code base is being worked on.
>> 
>> The asymmetrical situation around licenses is a factor, although what
>> matters more to users is how that shows up in what they have in their hands
>> to use.
>> 
>> I found the greatest value in the linked article to be about the fairly
>> balanced view of the three productivity-suite options, assuming that the
>> reader is on a platform where all are available.
>> 
>> It seems to me that the greatest concern to this community is the
>> practical experience users are and will have and how this project can serve
>> those concerns, especially with regard to assured usability of present
>> documents and also the skills that have been developed in working with them.
>> 
>> - Dennis
>> 
>> PS: On the interoperable-use challenge lurking in the article,
>> 
>> The historical business was too long and not so meaningful to user needs
>> compared to the -- important for us -- slow but steady divergence of the
>> two OpenOffice.org descendants not so much in features and release cadence
>> but core functions around format conversion/interchange.  That divergence
>> is eroding common support for the ODF format and OOXML interchange (i.e.,
>> functioning in a world where Microsoft Office documents cannot be
>> ignored).  Incompatibilities at that level impede interoperable
>> multi-product and cross-platform use where that is important.
>> 
> 
> I believe this is an issue that is underestimated at the moment. Few Public
> Administrations - or more likely smart sales people pointing them in that
> direction - are already taking advantage of that to justify their decisions
> to go back to MSFT.
> 
> The whole OOo ecosystem is at risk because of the present situation, and I
> believe we should make an effort to figure out if someone from our
> community could join the upcoming ODF Plugfest and talk to the people. If
> we can't fix the overall asymmetry of ODF-Support we are at big risk.
> 

Roberto, I tend to agree with you, though I’m a little less concerned about the 
significance of ODF and more about the loss of a commitment to open formats 
capable of expressing current and future needs. 

But to the point Are you volunteering to attend? And when is the plugest?

> Roberto
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> One of the greatest appeals of the OpenOffice.org family is the presence
>> of consistent cross-platform support not available anywhere else (yet) in
>> conjunction with the ODF format.  This appeals to civil authorities and
>> institutions not just for economy under actual user conditions (which may
>> or may not be achievable as promised in a particular situation).
>> 
>> The free ODF/OOXML-supporting products matter for durable preservation and
>> interchange of documents, especially those employed in public services,
>> without *requiring* use of commercial software as institutions move to
>> delivery of services and coordination with the public by digital means.
>> Substitutability has been promoted to those organizations as a safeguard
>> for adoption of these products.
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Rich Bowen [mailto:rbo...@rcbowen.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, September 3, 2015 06:54
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: AOO -> LO or MS O
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 09/03/2015 08:33 AM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
>>> "After LibreOffice came out, Oracle released one version of Oracle Open
>>> Office before deciding that the project wasn’t worth the effort
>>> <
>> http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2011/04/oracle-gives-up-on-ooo-after-community-forks-the-project/
>>> .
>>> It laid off the programmers and gave the code and trademarks to the
>> Apache
>>> Software Foundation, under Apache’s liberal open source license."
>>> 
>>> That's one version of events. Another version of events is this.
>>> http://pages.citebite.com/e7v0f3m9sder
>>> 
>>> "Shuttleworth has a fairly serious disagreement with how the
>>> OpenOffice.org/LibreOffice split came about. He said that Sun made a $100
>>> million "gift" to the community when it opened up the OpenOffice code.
>> But
>>> a "radical faction" made the lives of the OpenOffice developers "hell" by
>>> refusing to contribute code under the Sun agreement. That eventually led
>> to
>>> the split, but furthermore led Oracle to finally decide to stop
>> OpenOffice
>>> development and lay off 100 employees."
>>> 
>>> That's different from "deciding it was not worth the effort".
>>> 
>>> Why the FUD on a dev list, anyway?
>> 
>> It's not FUD. It's a link to an article.
>> 
>> What would be awesome is if someone would write a counterpoint, 

Re: AOO -> LO or MS O

2015-09-03 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

> On 03 Sep 15, at 15:13, Rob Weir  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Rich Bowen  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On 09/03/2015 08:33 AM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
>>> 
>>> "After LibreOffice came out, Oracle released one version of Oracle Open
>>> Office before deciding that the project wasn’t worth the effort
>>> 
>>> .
>>> It laid off the programmers and gave the code and trademarks to the Apache
>>> Software Foundation, under Apache’s liberal open source license."
>>> 
>>> That's one version of events. Another version of events is this.
>>> http://pages.citebite.com/e7v0f3m9sder
>>> 
>>> "Shuttleworth has a fairly serious disagreement with how the
>>> OpenOffice.org/LibreOffice split came about. He said that Sun made a $100
>>> million "gift" to the community when it opened up the OpenOffice code. But
>>> a "radical faction" made the lives of the OpenOffice developers "hell" by
>>> refusing to contribute code under the Sun agreement. That eventually led
>>> to
>>> the split, but furthermore led Oracle to finally decide to stop OpenOffice
>>> development and lay off 100 employees."
>>> 
>>> That's different from "deciding it was not worth the effort".
>>> 
>>> Why the FUD on a dev list, anyway?
>> 
>> 
>> It's not FUD. It's a link to an article.
>> 
>> What would be awesome is if someone would write a counterpoint, which is
>> non-confrontational, non-rageful, non-hateful, and non-reactionary, but just
>> calmly presenting the reasons why someone might want to stay on OpenOffice.
>> 
> 
> We did a survey on this question back in 2013.  

2013 was ages ago.


> The question was:
> "You have a choice of several open source office suites. Why do you
> use OpenOffice rather than alternatives like LibreOffice or Office?"

Does KOffice even exist? Is it not Calligra? These data points are also a 
little murky. Many do obtain AOO and LO by downloading it. Others, say those 
using Ubuntu or Red Hat installations, or from public sector installations are 
less able to choose as individuals. The relevant executive makes the decision. 
Do we know what they are looking for?

Even if we do not know, or cannot guess, the journalists of the tech world seem 
united to love LO and do the nasty with AOO.

louis
> 
> The results were:
> 
> Features (47%)
> Quality (22%)
> Compatibility/Interoperability (22%)
> Reputation/Familiarity (9%)
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -Rob
> 
> 
>> Refuting the article on this list, where we all already know the story, is a
>> good start, but if you could turn it into an article that's less political,
>> more practical (features, community, timelines, and so on), that would
>> actually help our cause. The person asking the original question doesn't
>> care about politics, hurt feelings, and "radical factions", I guarantee.
>> They want to know which product is better for them, now, and in the long
>> term.
>> 
>> Thanks.
>> 
>> --
>> Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
>> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> 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: Wrongful information on the Wikipedia

2015-09-03 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi Max,

> On 03 Sep 15, at 16:31, Max Merbald  wrote:
> 
> Hi there,
> 
> the Engish Wikipedia claims that AOO is dormant. I can't see where they have 
> the information from. The sources they use don't say so. I think it's 
> definitely bad for OpenOffice when people think no more is done about it. The 
> problem is also that LibreOffice has just published its version 5.0 and is 
> getting ahead of us.

thanks for the alert.

Wikipedia is composed by a crowd of editors, and you can change the entry to 
reflect the facts.

So can anyone on this list. Becoming an editor at Wikipedia is not arduous.

Louis
> 
> Max
> 
> 
> -
> 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: Ian Lynch (ingotian) passed away

2015-09-03 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Andrea, et al.,

> On 03 Sep 15, at 18:01, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
> 
> I was astonished to learn, a couple days ago, that Ian Lynch passed away. 
> Many of you were probably closer to him and already got the news (Ian passed 
> away three months ago) but I don't recall reading it on the OpenOffice lists.

I was a friend of Ian’s but not closer; this comes as a brutal shock. Still, I 
thank you for informing us. Truly, I am stunned and upset.

> 
> I had never met Ian, but I knew him as a key contributor in the Education 
> sector. He was also an OpenOffice committer and PMC Member; his Apache id was 
> "ingotian".

Ian and I had our differences but those were of long ago. More recently, I 
wanted rather a lot to work with him and possibly vice versa. Circumstances put 
that off—

Ian was also formerly a competitive weight lifter and had about him a boundless 
and infectious energy. All the more to find this news so very shocking.
> 
> I hope that someone who knew him better will volunteer and write a couple 
> paragraphs for the OpenOffice blog in his memory.

I would love to. I suspect, though, that JZA might have volunteer? He worked 
with Ian, I believe. 


> 
> See http://www.opensourceconsortium.org/ian-lynch/ for more details.

Thanks, Andrea.

Louis
> 
> 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



Re: ODF Plugfest: participation and leaflets

2015-09-03 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi all,
Comments inline. 


> On 03 Sep 15, at 16:24, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
> 
> As we discussed some weeks ago, the next ODF Plugfest will be held in The 
> Hague, Netherlands, mid-September:
> http://plugfest.opendocumentformat.org/2015-thehague/programme/
> 
> There are three issues that require attention in a very short time. Deadline 
> is 8 September when not otherwise specified.
> 
> 1) Is anyone going in the end? We discussed this at length. I've never 
> considered going since it overlaps with another event I'm scheduled to 
> attend. Dennis and Roberto were both mentioned (and Dennis later clarified he 
> is busy in the US). Of course if someone goes we can still discuss to 
> allocate a budget from our events fund.

The event somewhat overlaps with a personal engagement but that may be 
negotiable. It depends on how much subsidy we have to support this very late 
trip—of mine, I mean. I’d be coming from Toronto, Canada. A quick price check 
via Orbitz reveals that for a flight via the dodgy Air Transat the cost (R/T) 
would be about 740 USD. Include an Airbnb room—don’t know how much that would 
be but probably not that much, though still, for three days, at leasts 150 USD, 
and probably more. (I’m guessing the Hague is costly.) Besides Air Transat, the 
average price for airfare to AMS is about 1300 USD; to the Hague (Rotterdam) 
500 USD more or so. I’m guessing a train trip from AMS is cheaper.

I’ve been to several of these events, including, I think, the initiating one. I 
know ODF fairly well, was on the Oasis TCs, etc. (I quit them a couple of years 
ago.) The drawback for me going is I’m not developing ODF or for ODF and though 
I can certainly represent AOO’s continued interest in furthering usage of ODF, 
not to mention other Apache projects’ ODF work, to some extent I’ll be mostly 
competent at relaying speech. 


> 
> 2) I was contacted (for no special reason; I've never attended a Plugfest) by 
> Basil Cousins of Openforum Europe, who gave me permission to forward his 
> request here, about updating a leaflet for the next ODF Plugfest. The 2014 
> version is here:
> http://openforumeurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/OFE-COIS-DFD-ODF-Open-Document-Principles-for-Government-Technology-March-2015.pdf
> and there is also an infographic available at 
> http://www.openforumeurope.org/library/odf-toolkit-2/
> Can you please suggest content updates to this leaflet? Basil in is CC. We 
> can discuss updates on this list and then one of us, ideally someone who 
> attends the event, can send the final comments to Basil. The part needing 
> more attention is the Applications Choices section on page 5.

I can look at it, too. But others, here, can surely weigh in. I think we have 
talent to enhance this, no?

> 
> 3) For this leaflet they also ask for a contribution for printing. One can 
> support printing the English version (addressed to UK government), the Dutch 
> version (addressed to Dutch government) or both. The contribution is 100 GBP 
> (so about 135 EUR or 150 USD) for each edition. If you feel it would be 
> useful, I assume that the fund for events and merchandising could be used to 
> support this. Please state if you propose that we allocate budget and, in 
> case it's a yes, if you'd rather contribute to the English version or both 
> versions.

I think it would be money well spent. 

Note. This ODF Plugfest brings together some rather important players form the 
UK, which is supposedly tending toward it. Independent of any particular 
implementation’s concerns or desires, it is, as Roberto G. pointed out, 
important that there be *real* solid interest in working with the government to 
satisfy their mandate. 


> 
> Regards,
>  Andrea.
> 
-best
louis

> -
> 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: Limiting Trademark Policy Discussion (was RE: [REPORT] PMC 2015-07 Private-List ...)

2015-08-30 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi,

 On 29 Aug 15, at 21:13, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
 
 As me from my soapbox:
 
 Any proposal for reworking trademark policies would naturally grandfather 
 prior arrangements. My hope is that any rework of policies would be more and 
 not less generous than current reality.
 
 I think that the project should have an open source code test for Powered By 
 that applies to all. The rights to use are clear for all. The obligations 
 spelled out. Benefits given equally.

Easier said than done. I had written a longer reply on this issue but that can 
wait.

 
 We should (re)acknowledge what (re)based on Apache OpenOffice requires 
 whatever that really is.

Yep.
 
 Once we have a proposal that the community likes we can go through any type 
 of confirmation or clearance the Brand committee requires.

Indeed.
 
 I expect that this discussion should proceed carefully and not rush into set 
 form but instead collect ideas focusing on different parts. There must be an 
 opportunity to heal rifts with respect for all.
 
 Are you open to that discussion?
 
 Are you open to any and all to that discussion?
 
 This process is not against any group, but for all.

yes. I need to underscore one thing I think Dave is doing here. He’s humanising 
the process, opening it up. Undoubtedly this will lead to some confusion but it 
won’t be serious and it won’t fatally commit or tarnish Apache. It will 
actually be good, should it occur. And it will also lead, I believe, to 
interested and interesting discussion, which is hugely important and whose very 
existence implies trust.


 
 Regards,
 Dave

best,
louis
 
 Sent from my iPhone
 
 On Aug 29, 2015, at 5:26 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton orc...@apache.org wrote:
 
 From the Chair,
 
 I don't know, off-hand, what the proportion of discussion of Trademark 
 Policy is in the PMC private discussion activity so far this year.
 
 However, a discussion of trademark policy, as such, especially with real 
 and fictional examples, is inappropriate on this list if it is about 
 trademark enforcement.  Trademark enforcement, when material to an issue 
 before the PMC, is a private duty of the PMC.  There are ways to reduce the 
 discussion to essentials there, however.
 
 Let me illustrate what I mean by this.  Let's say the Apache OpenOffice PMC 
 has offered arrangements, ratified VP Brand Management, by which a third 
 party can employ AOO marks as part of a Powered by Apache OpenOffice 
 labeling.  The PMC establishes the conditions under which that arrangement 
 is available to individual parties and may propose custom arrangements based 
 on the circumstances.  That might be useful to describe and clarify here.  
 
 On the other hand, proposal of conditions under which third parties might be 
 *required* to enter into such an arrangement is entirely different, even 
 hypothetically.  As far as I know that is inconsistent with the ASF view of 
 how its mission is accomplished and its being a good citizen in the world of 
 open-source activities.  The ASF is by nature not litigious and resolves 
 concerns about inappropriate use of its marks by other means. I can't 
 imagine it attempting to compel use of any of its marks.
 
 IMPORTANT. Trademark protection, infringement, and remedies are serious 
 legal matters and they are not for inexpert discussion on public mailing 
 lists.  Suspicions of infringement and any acting on those suspicions in 
 public pronouncements are unwelcome.  Even disguised accounts of specific 
 situations relevant to this project are inappropriate.  And if not relevant 
 to this project, they don't belong here either.
 
 To abbreviate the need for custom PMC discussions on cases of alleged 
 trademark infringement, I have posted a policy applicable to how the AOO PMC 
 shall deal with any allegations of infringement and prospective curing of 
 such infringements at
 http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/pmc/Policies/Trademark-Infringement-Allegations-2015-08.txt.
   
 
 Questions, comments, and suggestions about that text are welcome.
 
 - Dennis
 
 BACKGROUND INFORMATION
 
 At the Apache Software Foundation, the Board delegates the determination and 
 resolution of trademark matters to the Vice President, Brand Management.  
 All external engagement with respect to trademarks is handled discretely 
 within the PMC and then always reviewed by, and possibly acted upon, by VP 
 Brand Management and only VP Brand Management.
 
 Individual projects are expected to be vigilant about how marks are used and 
 also allowed in the domain of the project.  The Apache OpenOffice PMC 
 conducts such activities.  The web site page at 
 http://openoffice.apache.org/trademarks.html is sufficient information for 
 those who have concerns for use of or infringing use of Apache OpenOffice 
 marks.  
 
 There are non-specific topical discussions on the use of marks and the 
 naming of software distributions based on code from ASF projects, such as 
 recent 

Re: 2015-08-24 Future Board Reports

2015-08-24 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Dennis,

 On 24 Aug 15, at 21:26, Dennis E. Hamilton orc...@apache.org wrote:
 
 I am changing the practice of development and submission of Reports to the 
 Board.
 
 Technically, Reports to the Board are an accountability of the PMC Chair to 
 the ASF Board of Directors.  It is one of the matters that is an obligation 
 of the Chair and it is to the Board and only the Board.
 
 Clearly, the PMC holds the responsibility for the project and will contribute 
 and be consulted.  However, the direct accountability to the Board is the 
 Chair's alone.
 
 Until further notice, the AOO Report to the Board will be developed by the 
 Chair privately with the PMC and will not be made or discussed in public 
 before its submission and acceptance by the Board.  Subsequent to that 
 acceptance and its publication by the Board, typically a month later, the 
 final version will also be made available for the information of the full 
 Apache OpenOffice community and as part of the project's historical materials.
 
 This change does not diminish in any manner the participation of the overall 
 community as reflected here at dev@ oo.a.o and as represented by the PMC.  
 All deliberations and discussion that do not require confidentiality for some 
 reason (mainly personnel matters and private requests) will be carried out 
 here.  
 
 I expect working in public to increase greatly, not to diminish, and you will 
 all have earlier awareness of substantive developments. 
 
 Because there had been a different practice for previous Board Reports, I 
 wanted you to know what would change rather than leaving a question about 
 what is happening with the future reports.
 
 - Dennis 
 

Thanks for the explanation on process. But I ask an intentionally naïve 
question. What is contained in the Report to the Board? 

Best,
Louis


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



Re: [VOTE] Dennis Hamilton as new AOO Chair.

2015-08-16 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
+1

 
 Please vote
[ X]  +1, I want Dennis Hamilton as new Chair

-louis



 [ ] +0, I do not care if Dennis Hamilton becomes new Chair
 [ ] -1, I am against Dennis Hamilton becomes new chair
 (out of curtesy, please add another suggestion).
 
 Have fun voting.
 rgds
 jan i.


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



Re: [DISCUSS] Would you like to be the new chair of AOO ?

2015-08-03 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 31 Jul 15, at 17:40, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Rob Weir r...@robweir.com wrote:
 
 On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Roberto Galoppini
 roberto.galopp...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi all,
 
 I would like to nominate Dennis Hamilton (orcmid), for a number of
 reasons
 we already discussed here, and more important to say because of his very
 positive attitude towards collaboration within the PMC.
 
 He proved to be an excellent mediator and advisor to the group, always
 respectful of the Apache Way and willing to help.
 
 
 +1.
 
 I think Dennis would be a great choice, if he is willing.   I've known
 him for almost a decade now, from his volunteer work on the ODF
 standard and with ODF interoperability.   He was one of the few true
 volunteer members of the ODF TC, not working for any of the large
 commercial vendors, but gained the respect of all with his technical
 knowledge and experience, but also his willingness to work with all.
 He's a gentleman, something we don't see much anymore.   I met him
 once in Seattle at an ODF Plugfest and he made me appreciate the
 importance of thanking public bus drivers.  My mentioning all this
 will surely embarrass Dennis a little, but that's the kind of guy he
 is, and I want to make sure you know that.
 
 Regards,
 
 -Rob
 
 
 and my +1 for Dennis Hamilton as chair
 
 I think Dennis would be an excellent choice.
 
 For what it's worth, he was also one of the original endorsers (well I
 don't know the proper term is here) for bringing OpenOffice into the ASF:
 http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenOfficeProposal
 
 I think this says a lot about his interest and enthusiasm for OpenOffice

+1 nomination for DH, too. 

Note, DH also ran for Chair last time we went through this. And given the 
abundance of reminders by Rich and others as to what a chair is and is not and 
given also that DH has been involved with Apache since …? (ages)…  As well as 
active with ODF (in numerous loci, despite his claims to be slightly less 
engaged), and also Corinthia….

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



Re: [DISCUSS] RE: [DISCUSS] Calendar for New chair of AOO

2015-08-03 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 03 Aug 15, at 14:25, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:
 
 On 3 August 2015 at 19:59, Rich Bowen rbo...@rcbowen.com wrote:
 
 
 
 On 08/03/2015 12:48 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
 
 It seems to me that so far we have only one candidate.
 Given the actual situation I'd prefer us to consider the option to speed
 this up.
 
 We have many things to do, ranging from the Digital signing to go out with
 a new release, if we can close this we could probably focus on technical
 matters only.
 
 Does anyone have a problem to speed up this process?
 
 
 
 A big +1 from me, although I'm neither a committer nor a PMC member, I am
 a director, and would love to see AOO move past this road block, and
 potential source of controversy, and on to doing what the project was
 chartered to do.
 
 +1 from me, provided the PMC is in agreement on it.
 
 Please remember the original date was 16 August, so there might be
 candidates out there waiting (just like Dennis was not nominated the first
 day).
 
 In case the PMC decides to close for more candidates, I suggest a 72 hour
 (+weekend if needed) lazy consensus, and then I can make the needed
 resolution to board,
 we might even make it to the August board meeting.
 
 rgds
 jan i.

+1 to sooner over later. 
 
 
 
 --Rich
 
 
 
 
 Roberto
 
 2015-08-03 2:07 GMT+02:00 Dennis E. Hamilton orc...@apache.org:
 
 Let me correct my clumsy wording.  Here's another try.
 
I think a full week of discussion with all known candidates
can occur by having the discussion end on August 16, when
nominations close, or 7 days after the last accepted-/self-
nomination, whichever is later.
 
 Another way to say this is
 
Discussion will end 7 days after the last accepted-/self-
Nomination, and no earlier than August 16.
 
 Since August 16 is already on the books, that would not change, but we
 might find some slack post-August 16.
 
 
  - Dennis
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org]
 Sent: Sunday, August 2, 2015 15:27
 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
 Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] RE: [DISCUSS] Calendar for New chair of AOO
 
 Good point concerning closing nominations with time remaining for
 discussion of the candidates prior to any [VOTE].  Perhaps that can just
 be
 7 days from the last accepted-/self-nomination or August 16, whichever is
 later.
 
 I think it is prudent to find some slack in the process, in case there is
 anything unexpected.
 
  - Dennis
 
 -Original Message-
 From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org]
 Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 15:38
 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
 Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] RE: [DISCUSS] Calendar for New chair of AOO
 
 On Thursday, July 30, 2015, Dennis E. Hamilton orc...@apache.org
 wrote:
 
 It looks like two mileposts are the same, with August 16 (17 days from
 now) including Discuss.
 
 
 they are only partly the same. new candidates ends august 16th, giving
 the
 PMC tine to discuss.
 
 
 I suggest that the Discussion ends August 23 be removed.
 
 
 If you do that candidates entering the last days have hardly time to be
 discussed.
 
 
 
 I suggest that we can then have Voting ends backed up to August 28, 12
 days from August 16.
 
 ok with me, if there is PMC consensus.
 
 
 [ ... ]
 
 
 -
 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
 
 
 
 
 
 --
 Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
 http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
 
 
 -
 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



open source on mobile [WAS: Re: Apache open office on Anroid

2015-04-21 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hm. I think the issue below is serious. And one we can address. But do others 
think that way or believe otherwise?

louis
 On 20 Apr 2015, at 13:25, Louis Suárez-Potts lui...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 
 On 20 Apr 2015, at 13:06, Guy Waterval waterval@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Or have you not noticed that there are
 precious few native (as opposed to virtualised) open-source productivity
 tools to be found ready for the enterprise?
 
 to rephrase: productivity software, especially for enterprise, is 
 overwhelmingly dominated by proprietary apps sold by very large multinational 
 corporations. The apps available are often free, as in beer but not free as 
 in speech. They are not open source. It does not matter if the operating 
 system is Android or iOS or whatever, though there are some differences, at 
 least in the marginal OSs, which represent a minute fraction of the total 
 used.
 
 What this means is that as tablets (however imagined) are brought into the 
 enterprise (public or private sector), open source is almost entirely absent. 
 Yes, many apps use open source languages but so what? The UX model promoted 
 by the smart, mobile device shuts out user intervention, with some exception, 
 and there seems to be nothing organised that I can see that’s trying to 
 change this arrangement and make it easier to create, distribute and even 
 promote open source productivity apps on mobile devices.
 
 Yes, I am aware that tablets are falling out of popularity, but I also am 
 aware that the tablet as imagined by Apple and incarnated in the iPad, was 
 designed and is still envisioned as a consumer entertainment device, not as a 
 work device (though that is changing) and that efforts to insinuate the 
 tablet form factor into enterprise, as Microsoft has tried, have not 
 succeeded. However, the mobile device is succeeding in areas where investment 
 capital is less visible and it is likely to be the preferred mode for the 
 billions that will be coming fresh to school, work, and other areas where 
 computing devices are de rigeur (now or soon). And these users, in Africa, 
 Latin America, and  the rest of the world, rich or poor, will be using… 
 proprietary software.
 
 So, although the situation on the desktop (and by this one means also the 
 laptop, of course; one refers here to the UX not hardware) is generally not 
 bad for open source, that’s not so for the mobile UX. I doubt very much that 
 Ubuntu or Moz. will put a dent into hard proprietary wave. What would, 
 however, would be mobile apps that can work smoothly with existing desktop 
 productivity software installations. Like Corinthia.
 
 best
 louis



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


Re: open source on mobile [WAS: Re: Apache open office on Anroid

2015-04-21 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 21 Apr 2015, at 17:37, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:
 
 On Tuesday, April 21, 2015, Louis Suárez-Potts lui...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Hm. I think the issue below is serious. And one we can address. But do
 others think that way or believe otherwise?
 
 
 Not sure how we can really address this, considering our challenges making
 a new desktop release.
 

Thanks, Jan. Well, just by stating what you said is a start. Stating that we 
have limits here, in AOO, and that to pursue other ways of cracking this 
problem is okay and ought to be endorsed is a good next step. We’ve done this 
unofficially; but why not have a page that identifies not just derivatives but 
avenues of exploration and discovery, with the point of identity being ODF 
support (and license).


 Rgds
 jan i
 
 
 louis
 On 20 Apr 2015, at 13:25, Louis Suárez-Potts lui...@gmail.com
 javascript:; wrote:
 
 
 On 20 Apr 2015, at 13:06, Guy Waterval waterval@gmail.com
 javascript:; wrote:
 
 Or have you not noticed that there are
 precious few native (as opposed to virtualised) open-source
 productivity
 tools to be found ready for the enterprise?
 
 to rephrase: productivity software, especially for enterprise, is
 overwhelmingly dominated by proprietary apps sold by very large
 multinational corporations. The apps available are often free, as in beer
 but not free as in speech. They are not open source. It does not matter if
 the operating system is Android or iOS or whatever, though there are some
 differences, at least in the marginal OSs, which represent a minute
 fraction of the total used.
 
 What this means is that as tablets (however imagined) are brought into
 the enterprise (public or private sector), open source is almost entirely
 absent. Yes, many apps use open source languages but so what? The UX model
 promoted by the smart, mobile device shuts out user intervention, with some
 exception, and there seems to be nothing organised that I can see that’s
 trying to change this arrangement and make it easier to create, distribute
 and even promote open source productivity apps on mobile devices.
 
 Yes, I am aware that tablets are falling out of popularity, but I also
 am aware that the tablet as imagined by Apple and incarnated in the iPad,
 was designed and is still envisioned as a consumer entertainment device,
 not as a work device (though that is changing) and that efforts to
 insinuate the tablet form factor into enterprise, as Microsoft has tried,
 have not succeeded. However, the mobile device is succeeding in areas where
 investment capital is less visible and it is likely to be the preferred
 mode for the billions that will be coming fresh to school, work, and other
 areas where computing devices are de rigeur (now or soon). And these users,
 in Africa, Latin America, and  the rest of the world, rich or poor, will be
 using… proprietary software.
 
 So, although the situation on the desktop (and by this one means also
 the laptop, of course; one refers here to the UX not hardware) is generally
 not bad for open source, that’s not so for the mobile UX. I doubt very much
 that Ubuntu or Moz. will put a dent into hard proprietary wave. What would,
 however, would be mobile apps that can work smoothly with existing desktop
 productivity software installations. Like Corinthia.
 
 best
 louis
 
 
 
 --
 Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


Re: Apache open office on Anroid

2015-04-20 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 20 Apr 2015, at 13:06, Guy Waterval waterval@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Or have you not noticed that there are
 precious few native (as opposed to virtualised) open-source productivity
 tools to be found ready for the enterprise?

to rephrase: productivity software, especially for enterprise, is 
overwhelmingly dominated by proprietary apps sold by very large multinational 
corporations. The apps available are often free, as in beer but not free as 
in speech. They are not open source. It does not matter if the operating system 
is Android or iOS or whatever, though there are some differences, at least in 
the marginal OSs, which represent a minute fraction of the total used.

What this means is that as tablets (however imagined) are brought into the 
enterprise (public or private sector), open source is almost entirely absent. 
Yes, many apps use open source languages but so what? The UX model promoted by 
the smart, mobile device shuts out user intervention, with some exception, and 
there seems to be nothing organised that I can see that’s trying to change this 
arrangement and make it easier to create, distribute and even promote open 
source productivity apps on mobile devices.

Yes, I am aware that tablets are falling out of popularity, but I also am aware 
that the tablet as imagined by Apple and incarnated in the iPad, was designed 
and is still envisioned as a consumer entertainment device, not as a work 
device (though that is changing) and that efforts to insinuate the tablet form 
factor into enterprise, as Microsoft has tried, have not succeeded. However, 
the mobile device is succeeding in areas where investment capital is less 
visible and it is likely to be the preferred mode for the billions that will be 
coming fresh to school, work, and other areas where computing devices are de 
rigeur (now or soon). And these users, in Africa, Latin America, and  the rest 
of the world, rich or poor, will be using… proprietary software.

So, although the situation on the desktop (and by this one means also the 
laptop, of course; one refers here to the UX not hardware) is generally not bad 
for open source, that’s not so for the mobile UX. I doubt very much that Ubuntu 
or Moz. will put a dent into hard proprietary wave. What would, however, would 
be mobile apps that can work smoothly with existing desktop productivity 
software installations. Like Corinthia.

best
louis


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


Re: Apache open office on Anroid

2015-04-19 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi Guy,

 On 19 Apr 2015, at 04:19, Guy Waterval waterval@gmail.com wrote:
 
 

Snip

 
 
 Indeed. Actually, it also prompts me to reignite conversations with
 EuroOffice. That they working pragmatically is wonderful news indeed.
 
 
 To avoid any confusion, I'm not currently working for EuroOffice. I've
 contacted them only to obtain their agreement to make some
 advertising for them in Switzerland, because I'm thinking they bring also
 interesting things.
 Particularly, the collaboration they maintain with universities seems to me
 a productive approach.
 Doing so, you can develop, test and collect feedbacks at the same place.
 Of course, such a collaboration is certainly not easy to start, but it can
 be durable when established, which is an advantage.
 
 Regards
 --
 gw


Thanks for the clarification and am glad you’ve been able to work with them.. 
I’m also not employed by them. I do find their work and collaboration 
interesting, as well, and in particular their use of Calligra, which I’ve long 
touted as very interesting, indeed. (I tried to engage Inge for a project; my 
inducement was the interest value of it.) I am intrigued that they chose to use 
Calligra here, as opposed, say, to WebODF (which was made by some who used to 
be associated—not sure?--with KOffice, which forked, one tine being Calligra; 
it is now the dominant one, I believe). I had been considering WebODF as a 
means of providing a measure of ODF support on mobile devices, and that still 
may materialise (if I get on it) but the Calligra instance is interesting. I’d 
love to learn more, on-list or off-list. I hope others might find you 
explanation of interest.

You might also (ahem) consider looking at Corinthia, which although is quite 
different from Calligra and EuroOffice (the subject at hand), nevertheless 
resonates with the pragmatic approach demonstrated by EuroOffice. My interest 
here is not to fragment AOO but rather to expand our horizons and to make it so 
that all users can really and truly be free to use open standards on the 
devices they bring to work or that are foisted upon them.

And, implicitly, to undo stealth vendor lock-in of the sort we are seeing now 
in mobiles for enterprise. Or have you not noticed that there are precious few 
native (as opposed to virtualised) open-source productivity tools to be found 
ready for the enterprise?

-louis


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


Re: Apache open office on Anroid

2015-04-18 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 18 Apr 2015, at 05:46, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:
 
 On Saturday, April 18, 2015, Guy Waterval waterval@gmail.com wrote:
 
 2015-04-18 10:08 GMT+02:00 Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org
 javascript:;:
 
 On 17/04/2015 Guy Waterval wrote:
 
 
 
 http://www.multiracio.com/index.php?lang=enstyle=euroofficepage=eo_android
 
 EuroOffice for Android is based on Calligra code.
 
 
 Thanks. Well, then it's clearly not an OpenOffice derivative and my
 question of whether to list it (the Android one, I mean) does not hold
 any
 longer.
 
 
 No problem. The purpose of my post was solely informative.
 
 
 thanks information is always nice to get.
 

Indeed. Actually, it also prompts me to reignite conversations with EuroOffice. 
That they working pragmatically is wonderful news indeed.

Louis


 rgds
 jan i
 
 
 Regards
 --
 gw
 
 
 
 
 
 
 --
 Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


Re: Apache open office on Anroid

2015-04-17 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 17 Apr 2015, at 05:45, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
 
 Guy Waterval wrote:
 EuroOffice for Android is a possibility
 http://www.multiracio.com/index.php?lang=enstyle=euroofficepage=eo_android
 
 Is this based on the OpenOffice code? Should it be added to the porting page 
 http://www.openoffice.org/porting/ (provided they want to be listed there, of 
 course)? Did anybody try it?

Isn’t EuroOffice just OpenOffice rebranded (maybe now, LO?)? Based on would 
seem an ambitious description. If you recall, MultiRacio of Hungary, the makers 
and distributors of EuroOffice, have had correspondence with OpenOffice (and 
previously, OOo) since 2007, at least. They presented at the Barcelona OOo 
Conference back in 2007, where my goal was to persuade them to become positive 
members of the community. They in fact positively contributed and were 
prominent in the last OOoCon, the one held in Budapest. EuroOffice has 
contributed templates and, I think, extensions to the repository, and the 
latest on this subject was, in fact, from 24 May 2013, when Kázmér Koleszár 
wrote to express frustration with being unable to post updates to the 
extensions his company had already posted there. (Roberto Galoppini replied 
positively on this matter.)

The site for MultiRacio has 2014, suggesting it’s up-to-date, more or less, but 
I would be astonished if they have a version for Android, though it’s also 
plausible they are working with LO on this. Easy enough just to ask Kázmér or 
Banai Miklós.

If the desire is to have a working open source editor for text and other 
documents, then I would strongly suggest that people look to Corinthia Project, 
in Apache Incubator, as that stands the best chance of actually producing 
something that works and can work regardless of specific platform or 
environment.



 
 Regards,
  Andrea.


Best,
Louis


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


Re: Apache open office on Anroid

2015-04-17 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 17 Apr 2015, at 14:49, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
 
 Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
 On 17 Apr 2015, at 05:45, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
 Guy Waterval wrote:
 EuroOffice for Android is a possibility
 http://www.multiracio.com/index.php?lang=enstyle=euroofficepage=eo_android
 
 Is this based on the OpenOffice code?
 Isn’t EuroOffice just OpenOffice rebranded ...?
 
 Maybe. But note that I was referring to the Android app, which may or may not 
 share code with EuroOffice (and which, by the way, I never tested).
 
 Based on would seem an ambitious description.
 
 There is no policy (or need for one), but if they see themselves as an 
 OpenOffice derivative, and want to be listed, and have a product -the Android 
 app, I mean- that works to an acceptable standard of quality, I would 
 consider it natural to add them to the page listing the OpenOffice ports and 
 distributions.

I’ll let you have the last word :-) But I’m not disagreeing with you; rather, 
I’m suggesting that a better tree to bark at would be Corinthia.


 
 Regards,
  Andrea.

louis


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


Re: Apache open office on Anroid

2015-04-17 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
On 17 April 2015 at 17:53, Guy Waterval waterval@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi Louis,

 2015-04-17 22:26 GMT+02:00 Louis Suárez-Potts lui...@gmail.com:


  On 17 Apr 2015, at 14:49, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
 
  Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
  On 17 Apr 2015, at 05:45, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
  Guy Waterval wrote:
  EuroOffice for Android is a possibility
 
 http://www.multiracio.com/index.php?lang=enstyle=euroofficepage=eo_android
 
  Is this based on the OpenOffice code?
  Isn’t EuroOffice just OpenOffice rebranded ...?


 Some examples :

 - EuroOffice can export to .docx, .xslx, .pptx.
 - The EuroOffice Adaptive Interface extension provides users with a
 dinamycal menusystem to EuroOffice. By changing the size of the menu item
 according to the frequency it was used it makes the menu system more
 transparent. (copy from
 http://www.multiracio.com/index.php?lang=enstyle=euroofficepage=eo_ext_adaptiveinterface
 )
 OK, their extensions are proprietary, but I think they make also some
 development on the AOO code.

 Regards
 --
 gw

Well, good. But why do you think I was suggesting they don't? The
point I was making was that as a product based on (or extending, say)
OO , they are not really to be looked at for an Android-ready OO app.
Please recall that I worked hard to bring EuroOffice into OOo and
honour their contributions to the ecosystem. I'm not faulting them.
I'm rather suggesting that for any code that would work well on
mobiles, we do better to look at elsewhere. I suggest Corinthia.

louis

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



Re: Board report proposal, please comment before April 5.

2015-04-06 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 06 Apr 2015, at 02:09, jonathon toki.kant...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Whilst the positive present tense is the least likely to be
 misunderstood, it also is the format that minimizes the probability of
 negative consequences, if things are not rectified.

Agreed.
I’m also sympathetic to Simon’s point, viz., that issuing a blandishment is 
disingenuous at best.

I should think that the problems facing AOO can (and likely will) affect any 
derived or downstream product.

-louis



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


Re: IMPORTANT: Board report second version.

2015-04-05 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 05 Apr 2015, at 07:24, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:
 
 HI.
 
 I am starting a new thread where we can hopefully concentrate on making
 a final board report.
 

Thanks.

 Just to sum up, I have replaced the original report in the board agenda,
 with
 a dummy report. The original board report sits untouched in
 
 https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/2015+Apr
 
 Whatever the community finds consensus about should go in there (I will
 only have very limited time to make edits, because I am already overloaded),
 and tthe 12th (or maybe 22th, if the board meeting is postponed) I will
 take
 the content reformat it, and submit it for board approval.
 
 For once I can sit back and relax, because I feel the report is a good
 compromise,
 made by many people.
 

relax? :-)


 As a note to the PMC, I will drop the private, unless the PMC ask me to
 include
 something.
 
 Let us stop bashing each other, and get some work done !!!
 rgds
 jan I.


-louis


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


Re: [DISCUSS] Java 8 and AOO

2015-03-18 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 18 Mar 2015, at 19:35, Larry Gusaas larry.gus...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 On 2015-03-18, 4:46 PM Kay Schenk wrote:
 On 03/18/2015 09:29 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
 Larry, that's great.  I saw that in a screen shot that showed both of
 them installed.
 
 Please add that link to Bugzilla issue 126130.  If you don't have an
 account there, let me know and I will do it.
 OK, I see Larry has done this.
 
 I took a cursory look at Ariels's Comment 7 also.
 It would help if we knew what particular functions of AOO failed without
 the use of Java 6.
 
 Some further clarification.
 Issue 126130 is specific to Macs.
 AOO does not require Java 6. It will work with newer versions, however, AOO 
 will not find newer versions unless Java 6 is installed. This is a bug in AOO 
 brought about after Apple quit building and providing their own version of 
 Java.

Thanks, Larry. That’s interesting to know. I do have Java 6 also installed 
(along with 8, update 31), and have not had issues, as mentioned, with my 
10.10.3 (not 10.3.3, as I had mistyped).

Until a fix is put in, can I suggest that we put the sentence you wrote above 
in an FAQ and in the panel on Java in the preferences?

-louis

 
 
 Many months ago, I tried to get, through additional java flags, what
 problems any  of our java code might be causing for java 7 specifically.
 Some methods we are using are deprecated, but I didn't interpret these
 as show stoppers. However, I will upgrade to Java 8, and run through
 this scenario again to see what comes out.
 
 Thanks for all the comments.
 
 
 
 --
 _
 
 Larry I. Gusaas
 Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
 Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
 An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs. 
 - Edgard Varese
 
 
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


Re: [DISCUSS] Java 8 and AOO

2015-03-17 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 17 Mar 2015, at 20:41, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
 
 The problems I've seen reported are apparently all on MacOS.  Something about 
 needing a legacy Java 6 to work and there is no way for the user to 
 accomplish that, apparently.
 
 Are there others?
 
 Do you think the message is from AOO instead of the OS?
 
 There is also a crasher in Base, apparently, but not certain it is the same 
 situation.
 
 {None of this represents deep knowledge on my part.}

FWIW, I use 4.1.1 (dev build, UK English) and Java 8 update 31. I have not 
experienced any problems with the Java or with the application. I’m also 
running Yosemite 10.3.3, a dev build. That said, nearly all of my use of 
OpenOffice is in text, presentation, Calc, not Base, at least not in any 
interesting way.

I can walk through the issues described and see what happens….


louis


 
 - Dennis
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 15:58
 To: OOo Apache
 Subject: [DISCUSS] Java 8 and AOO
 
 We've had a few reports of issues with Java 8 and AOO, especially with Base.
 
 Can anyone currently using Java 8 with AOO confirm this?
 Current Java requirements are here:
 
 http://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/source/sys_reqs_aoo41.html
 --
 -
 MzK
 
 “What is the point of being alive if you don't
 at least  try to do something remarkable?”
   -- John Green, An Abundance of Katherines
 
 -
 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: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


Re: New reporting tool for PMC, and a mail list overview.

2015-03-08 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 08-03-2015, at 15:14, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:
 
 For those who do not follow some of the foundation mailing lists.


Jan, what mail lists would you recommend interested members follow?

louis


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail


Re: PMC FAQ update

2015-03-05 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 05-03-2015, at 06:49, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
 
 On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:03 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:
 
 On 5 March 2015 at 11:42, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
 
 On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 10:27 AM, Dave Barton d...@tasit.net wrote:
 
 
 On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 10:02 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
 I just updated the PMC FAQ page on the project website.
 
 I see this page has now been updated and the names of all the list
 moderators have been removed. Is there some new (unlinked) location
 where that information can be found? If not, should we add the
 moderator
 names to the individual list information on the mailing lists page:
 https://openoffice.apache.org/mailing-lists.html ?
 
 
 I also note that the [commit for this change][1] refers to a discussion
 of
 the rationale for the change - can anyone point me to the discussion
 please?
 
 
 Some of that discussion happened (partly wrongly) on private@
 
 Basically some of us (including myself) does not want to have our names
 published where it is not really needed or beneficial.
 
 
 Obviously I wasn't party to the private discussion, but that seems an odd
 decision in a community that's so transparent in its intent an
 implementation. I suggest the lists of moderators be made available
 somewhere because:
 
   - The identities of the list moderators seem very hard to determine by
   any other means
   - This mode of contribution gets little enough recognition as it is, and
   the people contributing this way should be recognised.
 
 Since we have and owner@ to every list, there are no need to publish the
 individual names.
 
 
 There is a private@ list but we still publish the names of the PMC
 members...
 
 S.

I agree with Simon.

-louis




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



Re: [VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair

2015-02-05 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 30-01-2015, at 13:52, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
 
 Who of the two candidates do you prefer to replace Andrea Pescetti as the 
 OpenOffice project PMC Chair?

[ X] Dennis E. Hamilton (orcmid)

Binding.
Louis


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



Re: [DISCUSS] Inappropriate Compliance Costs

2015-02-03 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 02-02-2015, at 22:41, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
 
 On 3 Feb 2015 03:29, Louis Suárez-Potts lui...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Simon,
 
 This is OT.
 
 What is? I am participating in a discussion of the page referred to
 legal-discuss by someone else. My last contribution was a
 question/suggestion in response to Andrea. As far as I can remember,
 nothing I have posted so far has been unrelated to that topic.
 
 S.


Hold on… I  meant that my comment was OT, not yours.

louis



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



Re: [DISCUSS] Inappropriate Compliance Costs

2015-02-02 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Simon,

This is OT.

 On 02-02-2015, at 12:39, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
 
 
snip


 S.

Out of curiosity, why do you continue to support LibreOffice? After all, you 
visibly contribute to this project in at least a couple of areas. I haven’t 
checked, but I wouldn’t be surprised if you were also a member of the Apache 
Software Foundation. As you know, Apache OpenOffice is now, more than ever, 
driven by a community where no one entity imposes its will by dint of coding 
force or license or any other tactic. And as you surely also know, the 
continuing division between Apache OpenOffice and LO hardly seems to benefit 
the actual users of either, nor the legacy users of OOo. I can’t imagine that 
contributors to either project favour the continuation of the split.

Personally, I would like to end the division and collaborate where feasible. 

Best,

louis


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



Re: [DISCUSS] Inappropriate Compliance Costs

2015-01-30 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 30-01-2015, at 15:36, Dennis E. Hamilton orc...@apache.org wrote:
 
 Pedro and Jürgen,
 
 It is important to be concerned about false contrasts and comparisons.

+1 
 
 

snip


 
 It is more important, to me, that there be clarity about what the AOO 
 licensing conditions are and how easy they are to satisfy at essentially no 
 cost.  Comparative cost-benefit is much larger than that single factor. AOO 
 site and resources could be more helpful in determining how to migrate 
 successfully, though.  That's something where we have an opportunity to act 
 as a contribution to the public interest.

Agreed.

 
 The business about copy-left versus permissive licenses is evidently what 
 attracted the attention of the legal-discuss list here at the ASF.  I had not 
 known what the actual discussion was at 
 http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201501.mbox/browser.
  The conclusion later in that thread led to the footnote on the current 
 version of the page at http://www.openoffice.org/why/why_compliance.html.  
 (Another list I need to re-subscribe to.)  A still unanswered question from 
 the list is about whose voice this statement is made in.  The footnote says 
 it is not the voice of the ASF.

You seem to be disingenuous here, Dennis :-) Seems evident to me that speaking 
voice is AOO’s, not Apache’s. Which raises the question, how much rope does an 
Apache project have in attitudinal and tonal if not legal issues? Presumably, 
from the reaction so far witnessed, when the tone could affect business 
operations.
 
 It is a matter of firm policy that the ASF does not have anything to say 
 about other (open-source) licenses except with regard to how they are 
 honored, where accepted, in ASF Apache Projects.  The only ASF compliance 
 concern is with the Apache License version 2.0 and the ASF conditions on how 
 the releases and distributions produced by Apache projects honor all 
 governing licenses.  That is more appropriately presented in material 
 addressed to ASF Project developers and potential contributors.  The only 
 advice to adapters of software from ASF Projects is that it is important to 
 observe the licenses that apply.  And that interested parties should look 
 elsewhere for legal advice and assurances.


Okay—this is more or less what I hinted at, anyway. Out of curiosity, do we 
know why Bradley has taken to finding us so objectionable? I know he finds the 
ICLA, any CLA, a foul bargain for the contributor, and that BSD-style licenses 
reek of sulfur and cloak the corruption of freedom’s community with false gold. 
Or something like that. I’m as opposed to neoliberalism and love a David 
Graeber-style anarchism as the next hyper-educated guy, but I even more like 
practical solutions, i.e., those that work in the world. I also like Bradley, 
insofar as I have spoken to him in narrow circumstances, but would be curious 
if he’s also railed against, say, Mozilla, or Ubuntu, or any other slightly 
fallen angel.

 
 -Original Message-
 From: Pedro Giffuni [mailto:p...@apache.org] 
 Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 09:03
 To: OOo Apache
 Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Inappropriate Compliance Costs
 
 [ ... ]
 
 I actually don't care about the discussion: I think both permissive
 and copyleft licenses have their advantages and disadvantages for
 certain groups. IANAL and I am in the group that doesn't read
 licenses anyways :).
 
 I honestly don't think having a compliance costs page will make
 a difference but if it saves some (few) people from learning such
 things through a legal process, I guess that can't do any harm.
 
 Regards,
 
 Pedro.
 
 [1] http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2011/06/01/open-office.html
 [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ItFjEG3LaA
 
 -
 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: PMC Chair nominations

2015-01-30 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi,

 On 30-01-2015, at 12:47, Marcus marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote:
 
 Am 01/29/2015 03:56 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
 Reminder: the nomination deadline expires in a couple hours. See below
 for details. I won't start a vote immediately since Marcus is the only
 one who gave feedback and I want to avoid embarrassing situation if I
 missed a mail or the mailing list had a hiccup.
 
 So: so far I see the same two nominees we had 3 days ago, i.e., Dennis
 and Jan. Nobody else joined. If I missed something please let me know.
 If there are no changes or objections, I plan to start the vote tomorrow
 (Friday) morning European time.
 
 Regards,
 Andrea.
 
 On 26/01/2015 Andrea Pescetti wrote:
 Just a note in a dedicated thread to say that nominations for a new PMC
 Chair are to be considered open for three more days, to give others
 (Dennis and Jan already nominated themselves) the opportunity to run.
 
 I don't remember if Louis has declinded or agreed to be again a chair 
 candidate. So, maybe we have 3.

If nominated, and then elected, sure, what the heck. :-) 

Louis
 
 Marcus
 
 
 
 Please consider that this comes after 26 days of discussions. So I
 strongly recommend that you nominate yourself or that you get explicit
 permission from your nominee, otherwise the risk of wasting time is high.
 
 Deadline: in 72 hours (so around 16.30 UTC on Thursday 29 January).
 
 -
 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: PMC Chair nominations

2015-01-30 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 30-01-2015, at 19:04, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
 
 On 31/01/2015 Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
 On 30-01-2015, at 12:47, Marcus wrote:
 On 26/01/2015 Andrea Pescetti wrote:
 Just a note in a dedicated thread to say that nominations for a new PMC
 Chair are to be considered open for three more days, to give others
 (Dennis and Jan already nominated themselves) the opportunity to run.
 I don't remember if Louis has declinded or agreed to be again a chair 
 candidate.
 
 I explicitly wrote that anybody who was running, besides Dennis and Jan, had 
 3 days (after the 26 days we had already spent in discussions) to 
 self-nominate or be nominated by someone else who had preliminary checked the 
 candidate's availability.
 
 I explicitly named Marcus, Rob, Kay, Juergen and Louis as people who had been 
 nominated in the previous round.
 
 None of them, except Marcus, wrote back.
 
 I sent another reminder 24 hours to the deadline.
 
 None of them wrote back. All of them wrote to the list during those 3 days.
 
 I waited 24 hours after the deadline, in case there were e-mails stuck in 
 moderation for whatever reason.
 
 None of them wrote back.
 
 Now the nominations phase is over and we are voting. This discussion lasted 
 one entire month.
 
 If nominated, and then elected, sure, what the heck. :-)
 
 I take this as a joke... but, anyway, we are voting.

And you take it rightly. It is a joke. I’m not running, only the two named are, 
and it’s too late for me, anyway, as it is for anyone else.




 
 Regards,
  Andrea.

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



Re: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL

2015-01-26 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 26 Jan 2015, at 03:42, Fernando Cassia fcas...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 8:16 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts lui...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
 * One conceivable drawback is that Kivy also uses Kivy Language, for
 creating sophisticated user interfaces[,] though it does not seem to be
 required for creating naive UIs. Kivy is in Python and their conference
 presentations seem to be mostly at PyCons. One might wonder about the use
 of Python for something claiming speed as a virtue.
 
 
 Ouch.
 
 FC

:-)
They get around the speed issue associated with a language like Python by 
pointing out that nearly all graphical tasks invoked by the script won’t be 
managed by it, but actually, via Cython, via the C compiler; and also by the 
GPU, which they task. I think that part is good and promising.

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



Re: [NOMINATION] Dennis Hamilton for Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair

2015-01-26 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 25 Jan 2015, at 19:48, Dennis E. Hamilton orc...@apache.org wrote:
 
 It's my birthday and it just seemed a good idea to move the needle on 
 Priority #1.  I'm rather uncomfortable about self-nomination yet I figure the 
 conversations and discussion are of value.
 
 I hereby nominate myself as the replacement for Andrea Pescetti as Apache 
 OpenOffice PMC Chair.

Good. I second your nomination, if that’s at all relevant. (If not, I just 
cheer it.)

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



Re: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL

2015-01-25 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Dennis,

 On 22 Jan 2015, at 23:05, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
 
 I just ran into a great little project, Kivy.  
 
 I am not making a serious proposal about a GUI framework, although Kivy is 
 interesting in that regard.
 
 What I find more appealing is the project organization and the quality of the 
 documentation.
 
 The project repository is on GitHub, of course: 
 https://github.com/kivy/kivy.  
 
 To get some sense of it I looked into the doc/ folder there.  First 
 impression: All open-source documentation should be this good.  Go here: 
 http://kivy.org/docs/.  Try out the architectural overview that is 
 mentioned in the introduction.  The next page on the events and properties 
 has a juicy diagram too.
 
 I have no idea how or whether this is similar to VCL.  I'm just admiring Kivy 
 with no particular context in mind.  

Thanks for pointing us to this project. (Actually, thanks, too, at least from 
me, and very sincerely—a phrase that normally suggests its obverse—for posting 
your rumination on AOO in the world, which I'll be not-quite-savaging shortly. 
Actually, not savaging it at all. :-) )
 

A few points on this Kivy….

* What it is, from GitHub: 

quote


Innovative User Interfaces Made Easy.

Kivy is a Python framework for the development of multi-touch enabled media 
rich applications. The aim is to allow for quick and easy interaction design 
and rapid prototyping whilst making your code reusable and deployable.

Kivy is written in Python and Cython, based on OpenGL ES 2, supports various 
input devices and has an extensive widget library. With the same codebase, you 
can target Windows, OSX, Linux, Android and iOS. All our widgets are built with 
multitouch support.

Kivy is MIT licensed, actively developed by a great community and is supported 
by many projects managed by the Kivy organisation.

/quote

* The docs are indeed remarkably good. But so is the architecture of the 
project and I must assume the code itself that does things. There are several 
good things in Kivy that I wish we had more clearly laid out on OpenOffice. 
These include philosophy, architecture, and other useful abstractions. In 
addition to the docs page you cite, there’s also O’Reilly; see: 
http://shop.oreilly.com/product/9781783281596.do


* I’m particularly taken with the philosophy page 
(http://kivy.org/docs/philosophy.html#philosophy), as it explains the raison 
d’être of the project. And it’s not just marketing churn. (A similar, 
persuasive claim is made with the Meteor project, in its assertion of utility 
over Angular JS, which remains overwhelmingly popular.)

* I can’t weigh in on whether it would be a good replacement for VCL or even an 
alternative. The claims made by Kivy, however, suggest that its use would open 
opportunities.

* One conceivable drawback is that Kivy also uses Kivy Language, for creating 
sophisticated user interfaces[,] though it does not seem to be required for 
creating naive UIs. Kivy is in Python and their conference presentations seem 
to be mostly at PyCons. One might wonder about the use of Python for something 
claiming speed as a virtue. They answer that worry in their Project FAQ. See 
http://kivy.org/docs/faq.html#why-do-you-use-python-isn-t-it-slow

* Kivy is still new. It doesn’t seem to have a Wikipedia entry (Ye Gods!)—nor 
does it seem to have a separate foundation supporting activity; Google Groups 
and GitHub seem to do the job. There also does not seem to be any major 
sponsor. Actually, from these points one could draw the line suggesting a 
nearly perfect open source project, at least in the international, 
direct-democratic/meritocratic and kind of friendly sense. But nothing this 
side of the Eden is perfect, so I’m probably missing something. :-)

* Did you contact the Kivy Project? The website is at http://kivy.org/#home . 

* Finally, one thing I discovered earlier was that fun projects that could be 
useful but need not be are excellent ways to include more contributors.

Cheers,
louis




 - Dennis
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Louis Suárez-Potts [mailto:lui...@gmail.com] 
 Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:54
 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; Dennis E. Hamilton
 Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL
 
 [ ... ]
 
 orcmid
   I'm just using this to stay on the thread.
 /orcmid
 
 
 -
 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: [CODE] keyboard shortcut definitions

2015-01-22 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Kay,

 On 22 Jan 2015, at 17:58, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Does anyone know where I can find information on where actual keyboard
 shortcut definitions -- the actual escape sequences -- are defined for
 use in OpenOffice. I found an old thread on where the menus are defined
 -- the *.xcu files -- but the not the actual ascii sequence assignments.
 
 -- 
 -
 MzK
 
 There's a bit of magic in everything,
  and some loss to even things out.
-- Lou Reed
 

Probably these data are out of date. If so, I'm sure that someone more up to 
date and with more current brain cells will supply the correct information. At 
any rate….

* 
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Config/Configuration_Management
* https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Framework/Article/Accelerators_Configuration
and my fave, 
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Framework/Article/OpenOffice.org_3.x_Commands

These are to a degree (I hope) somewhat superseded with the 4.x code. 
What I did—and I'm sure you did this better—is just enter a natural language 
search in the AOO wikis. I also briefly looked through my old files from 
earlier CVS and SVN checkouts.

louis




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



Re: [CANCEL] Re: [VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair

2015-01-21 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 21 Jan 2015, at 02:38, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
 
 On 15/01/2015 Andrea Pescetti wrote:
 Do you approve that, in his capacity as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair,
 Andrea Pescetti submits a resolution to the Board asking to be replaced
 by Louis Suárez-Potts as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair?
 [ ] +1 Yes
 [ ]  0 Abstain
 [ ] -1 No
 
 This vote is canceled, after discussion with Louis. It is clear that we as a 
 community can't have consensus on this matter, and computing the tally would 
 be useless.
 
 I'll take one or two days to explore other options before coming back here 
 with proposals.
 

Andrea, Can I suggest that such explorations be public, on this list? I think 
the less we use private communications, of whatever sort, the better we become 
at including the community. (More precisely: At forming a community.)

 Regards,
  Andrea.

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



Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair

2015-01-20 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Briefly, 
 On 20 Jan 2015, at 05:42, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 My view is more positive. Louis has at least one thing in his favour - long
 term experience. Also I think he has a clear track record of commitment to
 the project in difficult times. I have had differences with him in the
 past, but I think that is just part of any pluralist system. I don't
 particularly want to be in a situation where everyone has to agree with
 everyone. What matters is matching experience and expertise to the job and
 the evidence is he knows this job is different from the previous community
 manager job he had with Sun. For a start he isn't getting paid to do it
 now.
 

Thanks, Ian. Note, I stopped disagreeing with Ian a decade ago. :-) And, in 
fact, I am rather impressed with the success of his efforts and his great 
optimism. And, yeah, my participation with AOO is now and likely will be for 
the foreseeable future as a volunteer. I get no money out of the time I spend 
boring the readers of this.

But I really need to underscore what we are voting on (or for) here. Strictly 
defined, this chair position is basically an admin role, and that, as part of 
its admin function, it does routine Apache things: reports, most obviously, but 
also infra stuff, as well as ensuring the execution of AOO's policies, and so 
on. It also—and this is probably more important—the speaker to Apache for AOO. 
(That itself does not mean much. But AOO remains a bit of an enigma, as it is 
so enduser focused.) Most importantly, it's not a leadership position. There 
is no project lead. To imagine it otherwise is to be mistaken. (It is in part 
for this reason I surmise that Andrea has always stated that what he does—and 
the PMC, too—as representing the community, not leading it.)

I can see why a longstanding (and former colleague) developer like Juergen 
would feel that the past I carry (as does he, as do we all) would affect the 
Chair's effectiveness. But that would presume that the role is anything other 
than that stipulated, which would mean it presumes that the PMC has implicitly 
already granted enhanced status to the chair. /laugh/

To restate, I think we need an admin to do admin and Apache things. More 
personally, I also think we need to reach out to developers and their companies 
and government offices; and to see about collaboration, if possible and perhaps 
in only narrow ways, with TDF and LO. I find it insane that the division 
persists. But that's not at issue here.

I would have been delighted to have seen a fresh face from the PMC roster stand 
for election. But …? Most on it, most who have voted so far, are holdovers, 
like me, from OOo, or comparative newbies like Rob and Dennis, who have long 
been involved in ODF issues. The absence of new people casting binding votes 
leads me to wonder: What could we do to find new contributors we'd be willing 
to make PMC members? What are we doing now? Even more, what are doing to extend 
the ecosystem? Outside of the work Ian and Alexandro are doing—what?

louis

PS I had earlier written that Jan and I differed in our take on what the chair 
position was about. Jan chided me on this point privately. But we have no 
differences in reading the description of the role. Our only difference lies in 
how we would like to leverage the role. He has better connections within Apache 
than I do, and that's important. I have better connections with many of the 
sectors using OpenOffice outside of Apache, and with the remnants of the 
ecosystem that existed for OOo, and my idea was to leverage the position of 
chair to promote AOO among those hundreds of millions (or a handful)—and to 
frame promote as meaning as much to get new developers as to get new users. 
But, of course, that's entirely up to the PMC to enable.

PPS, no doubt, Jan will again privately chide me for misrepresenting his views. 
:-)

 On 20 January 2015 at 09:32, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 On 20/01/15 00:29, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
 
 On 19 Jan 2015, at 13:32, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 I am probably seeming very disagreeable here.
 Nope. You'll have to try harder :-)
 
 More seriously, you point to a flaw that was not evident on an abstract
 level but was in practice. I had an IM conversation with Andrea over the
 weekend, where I proposed that I withdraw my nomination, as having several
 -1 obviously damaged the ideal of consensus. An objection to my doing that
 now is that it's not clear what would be gained. Andrea and others believe
 that the election process has proceeded as it ought to have, with enough
 time allowed for discussion and then vote. But you argue the contrary, and
 it seems that a couple of others share your views.
 
 I have no problems withdrawing my candidacy and asking for new round.
 But I do want to point out a couple of things. 1. The chair role is not at
 all like that of OpenOffice.org, itself a kind of blur. This role is far
 more precisely

Re: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL

2015-01-20 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Yuri,

 On 20 Jan 2015, at 09:55, Yuri Dario mc6...@mclink.it wrote:
 
 Hi,
 
 Have you looked at this enough to be satisfied the VCL maps to QT well 
 enough for what AOO does?
 
 no, but since QT is a complete SDK for writing apps, I suppose it does
 everything AOO needs.
 
 So my question may be useless, and certainly based on ignorance: Is there 
 any sort of lifecycle management that has to be 
 handled between VCL and QT and will this be resolvable (using UNO or 
 whatever for that purpose)?
 
 sorry, my QT experience is very limited.
 
 PS: Thanks for bringing your expertise with OS/2 on behalf of AOO too.
 
 thank you :-))
 

Indeed, thanks. But let me get this straight. The Qt license, which for us 
would be LGPL, is not an obstacle? (I know you described a possible usage that 
did not seem to transgress license. But we should need to be rather careful 
here.)

thanks
louis




 
 -- 
 Bye,
 
   Yuri Dario
 
 
 
 -
 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



Apache Community List

2015-01-20 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Among the good things Apache offers are the general mail lists. I follow 
several, and the dev [at} community list has lately been of particular 
interest. A thread that bears tracing relates to the development of the content 
for A Maturity Model for Apache Projects. More generally, it's also immensely 
useful and instructive to examine the process by which the model has been cast.

-louis

[0] Initial post in thread: http://goo.gl/HjoE0r
[1] https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ApacheProjectMaturityModel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL

2015-01-20 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi,

 On 20 Jan 2015, at 12:53, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 
 
 On 01/20/2015 07:05 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
 Yuri,
 
 On 20 Jan 2015, at 09:55, Yuri Dario mc6...@mclink.it wrote:
 
 Hi,
 
 Have you looked at this enough to be satisfied the VCL maps to QT
 well enough for what AOO does?
 
 no, but since QT is a complete SDK for writing apps, I suppose it
 does everything AOO needs.
 
 So my question may be useless, and certainly based on ignorance:
 Is there any sort of lifecycle management that has to be handled
 between VCL and QT and will this be resolvable (using UNO or
 whatever for that purpose)?
 
 sorry, my QT experience is very limited.
 
 PS: Thanks for bringing your expertise with OS/2 on behalf of AOO
 too.
 
 thank you :-))
 
 
 Indeed, thanks. But let me get this straight. The Qt license, which
 for us would be LGPL, is not an obstacle? (I know you described a
 possible usage that did not seem to transgress license. But we should
 need to be rather careful here.)
 
 thanks louis
 
 The QT license info is here:
 
 http://doc.qt.io/qt-5/licensing.html#licenses-used-in-qt
 
 Quite a collection! Of these, for the QT core, I believe the BSD-style
 are acceptable to the ASF but, the MIT -- not! :(
 
 So...depending on what we used, we'd need to discuss with Apache Legal.

Yes. I had gone over that page, too…. and it seemed inconclusive, ie, I'm not a 
lawyer.

What we want to do… up to what developers want, no? Personally, I think if it 
makes sense to pursue this avenue, and it's also kind of interesting, and a 
challenge, and could also bring in other developers and contributors, then why 
not? This would especially be so if a Qt application (whatever that would mean 
in this context) could also then allow for a smooth transition between mobiles 
and desktops. (Corinthia is of course working on related technology, but from a 
different angle.)

I think to move ahead on this we just… do it? And ask Apache legal for guidance?

louis
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -- Bye,
 
 Yuri Dario
 
 
 
 -
 
 
 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
 
 
 -- 
 -
 MzK
 
 There's a bit of magic in everything,
  and some loss to even things out.
-- Lou Reed
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org


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



Re: [VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair

2015-01-20 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi all,

 On 20 Jan 2015, at 15:37, Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Voting Yes (binding).
 
 Louis definitely has the passion.
 
 Whomever takes the reins, the project has much to improve. A re-energized
 PMC and community is critical.

Thanks, Don.

I feel I should speak of myself in the 3rd person. :-) More seriously… let's 
presume that a new election will be held, if not really soon then sooner than 
later. The question, then, is what do we want for the chair to do? Recall, the 
chair must operate within certain constraints we've agreed to as an Apache 
project. But the PMC is able, indeed basically (t)asked, to act as something 
more than, uhm, electrons, and *do*.

(Note, I was more or less raised in cooperatives and led one when I hadn't yet 
started to shave, back as a frosh @ UC Berkeley. I was schooled in the idea 
that any position of responsibility, especially executive, necessarily 
obligated its holder to routine work, of the sort that kept the whole thing, of 
which he was a part going. I still believe it and though I, like many others, 
seek to find ways *not* to do the boring stuff, still, you know, it's kind of 
fun and I do it. And, for all my complaints, it's also simply satisfying. So, I 
like thinking that one very likely unpopular way of looking at the PMC—and not 
just ours—is through the lens of a cooperative. In our case, for those of us 
who, like me, can code as well as he can sing, that can mean anything from 
mentoring to marketing and all the alphabetical letters in-between and around.)

cheers,
Louis
 
 On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 7:00 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org
 wrote:
 
 On 31 December 2014 I wrote to this list that I would be available to
 resign from the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair position as soon as a successor
 could be elected. We had nominations and long discussions and in the end we
 have one candidate available to be the next OpenOffice PMC Chair: Louis
 Suárez-Potts. It's now time to vote.
 
 Do you approve that, in his capacity as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair,
 Andrea Pescetti submits a resolution to the Board asking to be replaced by
 Louis Suárez-Potts as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair?
 [X] +1 Yes
 [ ]  0 Abstain
 [ ] -1 No
 
 Vote opens now and it will last one week (and a few hours), until 22
 January 2015 10:00 AM GMT, to give all community members the opportunity to
 participate. If vote passes, the resolution will be submitted to the Board
 in time for the February meeting (18 February 2015).
 
 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



Attend Conservancy Supporter Night on Friday before FOSDEM 2015! - Software Freedom Conservancy

2015-01-20 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
https://sfconservancy.org/news/2015/jan/20/supporter-night-2015/

The SF Conservancy event listed above is bound to attract interesting people. 
If you are in the area—I'm talking Fosdem—try to find yourself there!

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



Re: [VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair

2015-01-20 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 20 Jan 2015, at 14:41, V Stuart Foote vstuart.fo...@utsa.edu wrote:
 
 Andrea Pescetti-2 wrote
 Do you approve that, in his capacity as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair, 
 Andrea Pescetti submits a resolution to the Board asking to be replaced 
 by Louis Suárez-Potts as the Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair?
 [ ] +1 Yes
 [ ]  0 Abstain
 [ ] -1 No
 
 -1 No (non-binding)
 
 with apologies to Louis (who no doubt can fill the administrative role as
 PMC Chair) and to Andrea (for our stringing him along), but it seems there
 really should be additional vetting of other candidates, including perhaps
 their views of where the PMC is taking (needs to take) the project--rather
 than an unopposed and rushed VOTE.
 
 Sorry.
 
 

Don't be sorry. I agree with you. We clearly ought to have had more discussion 
prior to voting. But on the bright side… this vote, the weirdness of it (what, 
just one candidate, and haven't we seen him before?), all this led to more 
engagement and, I hope, I really hope, yet more the next round. 

louis
 
 --
 View this message in context: 
 http://openoffice.2283327.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-New-Apache-OpenOffice-PMC-Chair-tp4670988p4671193.html
 Sent from the Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
 


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



Re: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL

2015-01-20 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 20 Jan 2015, at 14:28, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
 
 Louis asks about a dependency on LGPL.
 
 -- replying below to --
 From: Louis Suárez-Potts [mailto:lui...@gmail.com] 
 Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 07:05
 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
 Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL
 
 [ ... ]
 
 Indeed, thanks. But let me get this straight. The Qt license, which for us 
 would be LGPL, is not an obstacle? (I know you described a possible usage 
 that did not seem to transgress license. But we should need to be rather 
 careful here.)
 
 orcmid
   Yuri had intentionally stayed away from the license question and 
   simply described his impression of Qt in terms of technology.
 However, I do believe that having Qt in place of VCL would be 
   very serious (although allowing Qt under VCL as an *option* is different).  
 
   I believe the governing conditions in the Apache Project Maturity Model 
   (https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ApacheProjectMaturityModel) are CD20, 
   CD30, and especially LC20.
  Going to Qt would be more than a requirement for using the compiled 
   code, it would also be a requirement for being able to compile the code.
   In the case of writing aids that are made available with AOO binaries 
   (or as extensions), there is no dependency concerning licensed material 
   at the AOO source-code level.  The license accompanies the extension, 
   but the extension's usage at the AOO level is indifferent and the 
   extensions are replaceable.  Recall the project was very careful about
   that.


Yes. That was what I had in mind regarding Qt for extensions. Ie, for add on 
applications that essentially operated after AOO compiled. 
 
   Relying on Qt, even as a redistributable shared library obtained from the 
   Qt project, makes it not possible to build AOO without that dependency, 
   and it would permeate the APIs and source-code architecture everywhere.  
   Apart from the effort required to do that, I think that is a serious 
   intrusion of an LGPL dependency into the entire project.  

That was my impression.
 
   I think there is an open question about sliding Qt under VCL as simply a 
   platform adaptation.

Exactly.

  My question to Yuri was about what he knew concerning 
   lifecycle management in handling that.  I believe that remains to be 
   explored.  That might be someone's itch to scratch, but I don't think it 
   should distract the project at this point.  I think there are many other 
   pressing matters that require someone with both an itch and the means to 
   scratch it.

Okay.
 
   I also think there is some sort of confusion of Qt with respect to Webkit.
   I am not certain what that is.  However, to the degree one is interested
   in moving toward light-weight GUIs that take advantage of the HTML5, CSS,
   and JavaScript support on devices and the cloud, there seem to be more 
   direct avenues that one might consider for AOO, although I for one am
   completely ignorant of what that would disrupt in the current AOO 
   architecture and source-code structures.

I for one would suggest that those of us wanting to use WebKit for building 
interesting apps consider Corinthia ;-)


 
   Squirrel !;).
 /orcmid
 
 
Thanks, Dennis
Louis

PS nothing stops one from building AOO on Qt *outside* of Apache, of course, 
but then why? (Besides driving the LO crowd crazy with confusion.)
 
 
 -
 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: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair

2015-01-19 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 19 Jan 2015, at 13:32, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 I am probably seeming very disagreeable here.
Nope. You'll have to try harder :-) 

More seriously, you point to a flaw that was not evident on an abstract level 
but was in practice. I had an IM conversation with Andrea over the weekend, 
where I proposed that I withdraw my nomination, as having several -1 obviously 
damaged the ideal of consensus. An objection to my doing that now is that it's 
not clear what would be gained. Andrea and others believe that the election 
process has proceeded as it ought to have, with enough time allowed for 
discussion and then vote. But you argue the contrary, and it seems that a 
couple of others share your views.

I have no problems withdrawing my candidacy and asking for new round. But I do 
want to point out a couple of things. 1. The chair role is not at all like that 
of OpenOffice.org, itself a kind of blur. This role is far more precisely 
defined and is an admin role. It actually rather resembles some of what I did 
while at CollabNet, and that included a lot of issue cleaning, tracking, infra 
stuff, permissions management, and so on. That I see some value beyond this is 
my take on it; as you know, Jan, for instance, has another. 2. I thought that 
the PMC could be reevaluated, though I'm by no means sure in what way, exactly. 
But I don't need to be; others have good ideas, I believe, or at least ideas 
that could be aired. I thought, and I think I was not alone in in this, that 
any re-doing of the PMC, however, should logically proceed *after* the 
election, as the candidate is elected by the binding votes of those making up 
the existing PMC. The sequence I envisioned was: A. Election; B. PMC 
re-evaluation; C. New election if need be or is desired. There is no absolute 
set term for the chair. 

Finally, I also felt that Andrea wanted to step down and do it before February. 
But as he's recently underscored, he's not working on a deadline, just a 
desire. 

All that said, if we do want to go with a new round, starting from scratch, 
then suggest a sequence and timing. Personally, it might be cleaner—and also 
save time, in the end, to wait out this round, and if it failed as an election, 
*then* start afresh. In this event, then we'd start with the new process next 
week, I'd guess. 

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



Re: buildbot notification issues, output page, etc

2015-01-16 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi

 On 16 Jan 2015, at 16:32, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote:
 
 Hi Kay,
 
 On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 09:37:18AM -0800, Kay Schenk wrote:
 * We seem to again have lost notification from from buildbot on our builds.
 
 * The buildbot page for OpenOffice currently has some issues --
 see : http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/
 even though the buildbots have run
 
 Before I contact infra, does anyone know anything about this?
 
 Did you take any action on this?  Last message is from 12 Dec.  The
 buildbots have been failing for 3 days, and it seems nobody noticed
 this. http://ci.apache.org/builders/openoffice-linux32-nightly
 
… along these lines, back in November of lsat year, Raphael Bircher raised the 
idea of setting up a buildbot for Mac OS X. After some discussion, Andrea met 
with Infra and posted the minutes. These indicated that the Mac buildbot needed 
just for Andrew Rist to finish setup then talk to Infra.

I'm not nagging; just curious if it's been done and I missed it on these pages:

http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/
http://goo.gl/5WLLCg (the Waterfall Grid)


Thanks,
louis





 
 

 Regards
 -- 
 Ariel Constenla-Haile
 La Plata, Argentina


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



Re: Report 01 - scams and fraud openoffice.org/ko‏

2015-01-16 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
 On 16 Jan 2015, at 16:57, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
 
 Zemma Yun wrote:
 I am a Mac OS user. I am sending this email because I want to report
 Korean language website www.openoffice.org/ko
 
 Thanks for your report (and to Dennis for investigating). This is now fixed. 
 I confirm that the Korean pages at
 http://www.openoffice.org/ko
 were pointing to a domain openoffice DOT or DOT kr that is currently 
 apparently abandoned and redirecting to a spam site.
 
 Our website is translated by volunteers. If you can help us translating the 
 pages into Korean, you would be welcome to do so! Please contact us following 
 the information that you will find at the current version of the 
 http://www.openoffice.org/ko page.
 
 Regards,
  Andrea.

OpenOffice had, once, a strong Korean localisation and promotion team. That was 
a while ago. However, Korean steps toward open source and open document formats 
have continued. I just don't know if the same people are involved, but I can 
find out. Most of my contacts were in developer communities but also in the 
government and sponsored associations.

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



PMC FAQs

2015-01-16 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi
I was going through the site pages and came across the PMC FAQ. It seems out of 
date…—?

http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html

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



Re: [OT] The Forking of OpenOffice.org

2015-01-16 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
On 16 January 2015 at 21:53, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org
wrote:

 I'm sorry, the TDF did not do that.  Sun Microsystems did that and
 Oracle's eventual response was probably inevitable.


​Indeed. More could be said on this matter but in many ways the writing was
on the wall when Oracle acquired Sun. We all knew it.  I doubt that Oracle
could have done very much, at least given the resources it wanted to expend
and the nature of the developer community. So much had to be done, on so
many levels. (OOo was not alone in suffering a strategic neglect within
Sun; but it was particularly jarring for us, given the size and cultural
importance of the effort. And to be fair, in the last couple of years, Sun
really did seem to be trying to take open source seriously, and this was
evident with its Java efforts, for instance.)

At this point, I'd much rather see about talking to TDF and LO and seeing
where effective collaboration could be made. I'm pragmatic. I look to the
resources we—all of OpenOffice and LO—have and consider that, surely, there
must be some areas where license permits neutral collaboration.

Oh, as to Dennis' point about the ODF not being the MSFT killer— despite
rhetoric to the contrary, I actually believed and also stated that ODF
offered a kind of potential that Microsoft's focus on the office space
did not. ODF, as I saw it, could move beyond the claustrophobia of MSFT's
Office because it was not beholden to any given vendor. And it could find
its way in public spaces and in schools and in areas that we had not really
thought about, all because it was not pegged to a notion of the market that
any one vendor would identify.

louis

PS A note on context. Dennis and I served on the Oasis ODF TCs (all of
them) for several years. I did not renew my Oasis membership last year but
have been reconsidering that.


Re: Nominations for a new PMC Chair

2015-01-14 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Hi,

 On 14 Jan 2015, at 07:17, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
 
 On 14/01/2015 jan i wrote:
 I decline my nomination for personal reasons and are not voteable.
 
 Copy-pasting the same remark I sent on this list about the other four, I 
 respect your choices and your reasons not to run, but I would like to 
 acknowledge you (and all nominees, and a couple more people) as key people 
 to the continued success of the project.

Actually, I just wrote to Jan privately and asked him to reconsider his 
resignation, as I believed the conditions he had put on his candidacy were 
difficult and that it would be better to go through the ritual of democracy, 
first. 
 
 And looking at the future: Louis, as the only remaining candidate at this 
 stage, do you confirm you are still a candidate, i.e., that you haven't 
 changed your mind? Sorry for the odd question, but we've seen lots of 
 surprises so far and before checking procedural issues for this unusual 
 one-candidate-only election I prefer to verify that we still have a candidate.

I actually have not changed my mind, though I should hope that Jan has or will; 
or if he does not, that others might wish to enter the election. 

My reason for wanting to move ahead is that I do not see what is being gained 
by delay or by these surprises *before* the election. The chair role is mostly 
an admin role; as Rob pointed out, it doesn’t magically change anything 
regarding the resources we have to draw upon. That’s up to us. So I’d much, 
much rather get on with the job of marshalling resources *as a community* and 
be done with this election. If we want another election, then let’s have 
another one; I personally have no issues with that.


 
 Regards,
  Andrea.

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


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



Re: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL

2015-01-14 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 14 Jan 2015, at 12:27, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
 
 The TL;DR: I don't think there is a reasonable way to depend on Qt in AOO.
 
 I also don't think that depending on Qt, were it feasible, would satisfy the 
 concern that started this thread concerning the difficulty of maintaining 
 [with] VCL.  It might just move the pea to a more-difficult third-party 
 dependency, after requiring a mammoth cut-over to a new GUI framework.

Agreed.
The sole benefit, besides pleasing some, would be to bring in new developers 
and plausibly more companies. But I doubt the cost of switching would be paid 
by the influx of contributors and I would expect that if we do want to engage 
in a new, and probably ruthless refactoring, that we should look elsewhere.

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



Re: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL

2015-01-14 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 14 Jan 2015, at 12:46, Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote:
 
 On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 09:27:53 -0800
 Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
 
 Maintaining the independently-developed VCL GUI framework is an 
 important concern.  (Then there's UNO as a cross-platform COM
 derivative.)
 
 The problem with much of the complexity of AOO, it seems to me,
 is that it is difficult to find improvements that can be 
 achieved with progressions of small changes that have every-
 think still working each step of the way. Combined with the 
 level of expertise required to know what changes are safe 
 and consistent with the architecture of AOO, there is a big
 challenge for identifying any major moves.
 
 It would be great to know what insights there are for
 cultivating and sustaining the necessary expertise and 
 maybe simplifying the learning curve and entrance
 requirements.  Maybe just keep doing more of what is
 already being done in this area?
 
 
 Changing a GUI framework as discussed here is a major task - fraught with 
 difficulty and hidden gotchas.  It would be better to put the effort going 
 into two areas: bug-fixing - there are many little bugs to be fixed; 
 secondly, improvement in the functionality.  Here is not the place to start a 
 debate on what needs to be changed/improved, but we should bear in mind that 
 bells and whistles always attract users.  If we let competitive products 
 outdistance us, we lose our share of the user base.

What “competitive products” do you mean? LibreOffice? Microsoft Office? 

Or perhaps you mean Calligra, which actually went through an intense 
refactoring (successful, too) several years ago. (Calligra is nice, but does 
not work with Mac OS X very well at all and is not maintained. Plans exist, but 
I get the feeling it’s like fusion power.)

More to the point, and trying to be realistic…. OpenOffice is right now on 
maintenance mode, as far as I can tell. We will issue a 4.1.2 and probably 
further micro releases addressing bugs, midges, and gnats. But we’re not 
slaying dragons nor otherwise attempting ambitious projects. And it’s not a 
matter of bells and whistles—of glitter to appeal to fools who can’t otherwise 
see the gold. It’s rather matter of creating a product that the millions who 
are going to be using open source productivity applications can actually use on 
the platforms and environments they are given or buy. These will continue to be 
desktops (including laptops) but also mobile devices. That is: the future is 
not like the past and to pretend it is and will continue to so seems to me 
problematical.

Yet any transition is bound to demand resources we can’t pull out of thin air. 
Note, this has always been the argument for the status quo here. (It was also 
coupled to the one you raised, earlier.) This obdurance is one reason I helped 
establish the new project Corinthia, which is a new thing altogether. But I 
also still believe that OpenOffice has a future and that investigating ways in 
which we can make OpenOffice not only easier to work on but to use would serve 
us—the overall community—well.

louis



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



Re: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL

2015-01-13 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 13 Jan 2015, at 23:04, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
 
 I think the licensing situation is very clear.
 
 There are two licensing arrangements.
 
 The free license is standard GPL3/LGPL3.  
 
 There is a commercial license for proprietary, closed source work.  That 
 license has to be purchased and there are flavors of it, such as Indie 
 Mobile, Professional, Enterprise, Device Creation, Cloud Services, etc.  
 These do not qualify as open-source licenses.
 
 Here's the fee structure along with the license flavors: 
 http://www.qt.io/download/.
 
 - Dennis
 
 PS: I thought there was a LGPL case where you could run QT as a DLL 
 underneath an application, but I don't see how that can work with an ASF 
 Project for a number of reasons.  I also don't see anything about that 
 featured in the current materials (although Wikipedia points to the Digia QT 
 LGPL Exception, which is at the bottom of this page:
 http://doc.qt.io/qt-5/lgpl.html#digia-qt-lgpl-exception-version-1-1.
   Some of the gyrations may be related to how QT was spun into and out of 
 Nokia.  According to my email archives, I apparently stopped paying attention 
 to it at the end of 2011.  I may also may be thinking of a different project 
 with regard to using a pre-built DLL and LIB.
 
 

I think Dennis summarised the point well, However, some more:

I had the impression that ASL 2 was compatible with (L)GPL3--but there is some 
salt here, and it also depends on what you want to infer by “compatible”. Where 
work would be done on the product using Qt licensed under LGPL or GPL is one 
issue, and the scope of the work is another. In this case, given the nature of 
the VCL, the result would probably also be licensed under Qt’s license.

However, that does not mean that add-ons, plug-ins, and other such enhancements 
couldn’t be made using Qt and hosted off-site. And, yes, we’ve had this very 
discussion before, many times before, *many* times. (And also hosted extensions 
off-site, with varying licenses, to the annoyance of the FSF.)

Originally, the issue preventing use of Qt with OOo was that it forbade free 
commercial application. Sun didn’t like that as it loved StarOffice. But then 
Sun sank, OpenOffice got Apache’d and Qt’s license changed (wonder why) and 
went as Dennis describes it: open and also proprietary. 

There are some Apache projects that do use Qt, and Qt itself does use ASL2 for 
some modules. But I think that replacing the longstanding VCL with the popular 
favourite Qt is not exactly feasible and that there are likely easier 
alternatives, if we want to change. Is it worth investigating again? I mean not 
just to reconsider Qt but also VCL. 

But back to Qt: hope springs eternal, and Qt remains popular, whatever its 
license and other flaws. I don’t just mean that the Digia exception should give 
us hope—though why not? Establishing useful compatibility with Apache and for 
Apache, as well as for users of Qt independent of Apache, would dramatically 
expand the tool’s usage, I’d guess.

Qt’s pages are fairly good, and probably better than my interpretations. 
Stackoverflow is also good. See: 

louis

 
 -Original Message-
 From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] 
 Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 15:46
 To: OOo Apache
 Subject: [DISCUSS] Qt as a replacement for VCL
 
 Something I started thinking about and ta da...it's been proposed before --
 
 http://markmail.org/message/gjvwudqnzejlzynz
 
 In my mind, we could use some assistance in the maintenance of the
 toolkit for our UI instead of continuing to do it ourselves. This said,
 I know next to nothing about QT and from what I've seen, the licensing
 is pretty complicated and might not work for the ASF --
 
 http://doc.qt.io/qt-5/licensing.html#licenses-used-in-qt
 
 Main web site -- http://qt-project.org/
 
 Thoughts?
 
 -- 
 -
 MzK
 
 There's a bit of magic in everything,
  and some loss to even things out.
-- Lou Reed
 
 -
 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: Easy Hacks

2015-01-13 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Thanks, Andrea…

 On 13 Jan 2015, at 17:34, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
 
 Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
 what do we have for OpenOffice?
 
 It's at http://openoffice.apache.org/orientation/intro-development.html, 
 section Finding Easy Tasks. We have two predefined queries (you find the 
 links there) for Easy and Simple tasks.
 
 We encourage new developers to check with the list before starting their 
 work, since the queries use values from Bugzilla that may not always be 
 up-to-date (I mean: Easy tasks may include issues that are not that easy or 
 that still need some discussion).
 

Of course—contributing is usually a discursive process. But thanks for the 
link. I’ll pass this on to the list.

It would be kind of interesting (and also cool) to test out some of the easy 
hacks on more or less unsophisticated students or other (captive, I guess) 
audiences. Just for fun. :-)


 Regards,
  Andrea.

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



Re: issue 60552: embedding live web-pages (floating frame?) into impress slides

2015-01-13 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
Alex,

 On 13 Jan 2015, at 17:03, Alexander Di Marco a...@cs.toronto.edu wrote:
 
 See Below
 Hi Rob
 
 I noticed this has not been worked on since 2013. Out of curiosity, what
 would be required (from a development standpoint) to implement this.
 
 Thanks
 
 Alex
 
It’s always a pleasure to see someone from Toronto—and even more so that you 
work out of the Bahen Centre of UoT, quite close to where I am, in Yorkville. 
This is a public list, so I tend to be shy about posting my contact 
information, but I’d be happy to be meet up with you and talk about OpenOffice, 
if you have the time.

Cheers,
Louis
 
 
 Alex DiMarco
 
 www.cdf.toronto.edu
 Bahen Centre
 40 St. George Street, Room 3224
 Toronto, Ontario
 M5S 2E4
 office: 416-946-8862
 cell: 416-459-0447


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



Easy Hacks

2015-01-13 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
There’s a discussion on a FOSS list, initiated (this time) by Stefano Z. of 
Debian, about compiling a cross-project list of “easy hacks”. What’s easy is in 
the eye of the beholder, to be sure, but also in the gaze of the community. 
We’ve periodically come up with some things that inexperienced members can try 
doing—and these need not be coding hacks. Some projects—probably the 
majority—start their new members off by encouraging them (or mandating) to do 
work on bus, outstanding issues, etc. But even for these, there are levels of 
difficulty.

The compilation could be located any number of places, even at OpenHatch.org. 
Stefano started off the discussion with a short list (see below) and more has 
been added to it. But what do we have for OpenOffice? (You’ll not that Stefano 
includes LibreOffice.)

Best
Louis




- Debian's newcomer bugs:
 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=newcomer

- Django's easy tickets
 https://code.djangoproject.com/query?status=!closedeasy=1

- Fedora's easy fix
 http://fedoraproject.org/easyfix/

- GNOME's gnome-love bugs:
 https://wiki.gnome.org/GnomeLove/FindingTasks

- LibreOffice's easy hacks:
 https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Easy_Hacks

- Mediawiki's annoying little bugs
 http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Annoying_little_bugs

- Mozilla's BugsAhoy
 https://wiki.mozilla.org/BugsAhoy

- OpenStack's low hanging fruits:
 
https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack/+bugs?orderby=-importancesearch=Searchfield.status:list=NEWfield.status:list=CONFIRMEDfield.status:list=TRIAGEDfield.tag=low-hanging-fruit

- Python's easy issues
 
http://bugs.python.org/issue?status=1@sort=-activity@columns=id,activity,title,creator,status@dispname=Easy%20issues@startwith=0@group=prioritykeywords=6@action=search@filter=@pagesize=50

- Ubuntu's bitesize bugs:
 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.tag=bitesize

- VLC's easy bugs
 
https://trac.videolan.org/vlc/query?status=newstatus=assignedstatus=reopeneddifficulty=easyorder=priority`

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



Re: Nominations for a new PMC Chair

2015-01-13 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 13 Jan 2015, at 18:15, Marcus marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote:
 
 Don't wait for the (old|new) chair to take action. ;-) Start now yourself 
 with stating your problems and attempts you have already done. Then we can 
 reply to this.


Yes! 

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



Re: Nominations for a new PMC Chair

2015-01-12 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts
 On 12 Jan 2015, at 14:02, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
 
 On 11/01/2015 Marcus wrote:
 IMHO this PMC is more quite
 than others inside Apache projects. So, I wouldn't see this as a sign
 that they won't follow you. Only direct talkings can help to judge this.
 
 It is important that the PMC understands that, according to both candidates, 
 the way the OpenOffice PMC operated so far will have to change. This is not 
 necessarily linked to the fact that we will have a new PMC Chair, but both 
 candidates want to see a different PMC. I want it too! But it's just 
 appropriate that the new PMC Chair will drive this purely internal change. 
 And we all (the whole community, I mean) must be sure to have understood this 
 in advance.
 
 Let me take a risk and try to summarize what either candidate would like to 
 see changed, from their mails. And then let them expand on my summary and 
 amend it as needed. It is very important that things are clear, so I think we 
 can take the time to clarify it before voting.
 
 Louis is saying that the PMC Chair should use his authority to grow the 
 project. He sees the Chair role as enabling others (rather than working in 
 isolation or being a lead): work efficiently and collaboratively to realise 
 our visions of Apache OpenOffice's future. We also need to focus on marketing 
 efforts toward companies and government agencies who are already using (or 
 considering to use)  OpenOffice. Let me add, while it doesn't seem 
 revolutionary, this view of the PMC implies quite a change: OpenOffice so far 
 depended more on the patience and the efforts of several individuals rather 
 than being a concerted action.
 
 Jan is saying that his main effort would be to push hard for action and 
 changes, stop talking (as a community) and start doing. He thinks the whole 
 OpenOffice ecosystem, including derivatives, is facing a lack of resources 
 that requires changes in attitude. We, as OpenOffice, need to show results 
 fast, including a 2-months restructuring of the PMC where we ask everybody to 
 either confirm that he/she is still interested in driving the project 
 forward, or leave the PMC. He came to the point of writing that it's useless 
 that he runs unless the PMC understands these guidelines.
 
 So, please Louis and Jan do correct me if I summarized your intentions in a 
 wrong way, and others please make sure you are aware of what is going to 
 change with this vote (other than the obvious replacement of the PMC Chair). 
 And then I'll call the vote when we are all informed enough! And thanks again 
 to both Louis and Jan for bringing a fresh perspective, I haven't 
 acknowledged you explicitly for it but I agree with Marcus that while we are 
 quiet we do read and think. Anyway, it's better to be sure that we are ready 
 to vote.
 
 Regards,
  Andrea.

Andrea, this is an accurate and better-than-the-original summary. Thanks.

I’m hoping we can have discussions on the points Jan and I have raised—as well 
as any others the community finds interesting. 

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



Re: Nominations for a new PMC Chair

2015-01-12 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 12 Jan 2015, at 17:02, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
 
 
 
 So, what about to let both try to realize this as kind of dual chair?
 
 Since the Chair at Apache is more ceremonial than THE lead in the best case 
 then there should be nothing to preclude both Jan and Louis from scratching 
 their itch and leading regardless of whom is the Chair.

The point I made earlier was that the “chair” title confers a kind of authority 
that we here in Apache land might find to be beside the point but others won’t. 
It’s not that I or anyone else, I imagine, would claim that 
chair equals lead. It doesn’t. But that the chair would be, in addition to the 
regular and normal admin role, a figure for the expansion and development of 
the project. 

Of course, the community could create such roles—Marketing Leads, say. Done 
that before, and it works fine. But I’m also keen—and I think others are, 
too—in keeping to a minimum bureaucratic structures. (Not because I dislike 
bureaucracy—I don’t, in theory, as a means of resolving differences—but because 
titles and roles tend to calcify, and that I don’t think anyone likes.) 
 
 Asking inactive PMC to go emeritus can be done in any case. The merit does 
 not expire and if willing to be active one can be restored.

Right. I was going over the PMC list 
(http://people.apache.org/committers-by-project.html#openoffice-pmc) and then 
relating those listed to participation (however defined) in the project. I’m 
terrible at engaging actively in the lists but equally terrible at boring 
people at every possible opportunity about the plusses and minuses of 
OpenOffice and the ODF, and now Corinthia (endless fun). So I give everyone 
lots of benefit of a doubt, if I missed their engagement. But I was curious why 
some members have dropped off—or slowed their engagement. A fair question, no? 
 
 I have respect for both. Let the debate continue.
 
 Regards,
 Dave.
 
 
 
 Marcus
 
 
 ———

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



Re: Nominations for a new PMC Chair

2015-01-12 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 12 Jan 2015, at 18:00, Marcus marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote:
 
 Am 01/12/2015 11:22 PM, schrieb Louis Suárez-Potts:
 
 On 12 Jan 2015, at 17:02, Dave Fisherdave2w...@comcast.net  wrote:
 
 Asking inactive PMC to go emeritus can be done in any case. The merit does 
 not expire and if willing to be active one can be restored.
 
 Right. I was going over the PMC list 
 (http://people.apache.org/committers-by-project.html#openoffice-pmc) and 
 then relating those listed to participation (however defined) in the 
 project. I’m terrible at engaging actively in the lists but equally terrible 
 at boring people at every possible opportunity about the plusses and minuses 
 of OpenOffice and the ODF, and now Corinthia (endless fun). So I give 
 everyone lots of benefit of a doubt, if I missed their engagement. But I was 
 curious why some members have dropped off—or slowed their engagement. A fair 
 question, no?
 
 sure, but please let us separate both things. Changing the list of PMC 
 members is different from voting for a new chair.

Indeed. I think that one can only make changes to the PMC roster *after* an 
election for the chair of the current PMC :-)


 
 Marcus

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



Re: Nominations for a new PMC Chair

2015-01-12 Thread Louis Suárez-Potts

 On 12 Jan 2015, at 18:20, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:
 
 Remark, whoever ends up getting elected (maybe we should really open up for
 new nominations), I will continue to work as usual.

Likewise I’ll work as … well, actually, as more than usual. :-)

Also: we make what we do with what we get and what we want, and that is as true 
for being Chair of the PMC as anything else.

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



  1   2   3   >