Re: A free project does not need distorting propaganda

Hi! On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 9:38 PM Jörg Schmidt wrote: > > Any claim that a continuous code base down to StarWriter for DOS could > exist is technically and factually absurd, because there is no technical > continuation of the DOS code base of Starwriter and also the code base at > the

Re: A free project does not need distorting propaganda

Hi! On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 8:46 PM Jörg Schmidt wrote: > Hello, > > to my dismay I read, from a PMC member, on users...@openoffice.apache.org > that they are trying to mix up our free OpenOffice with the former > proprietary StarWriter. Obviously purely for the sake of show and obviously >

Re: [discussion] use of https://downloads.apache.org/ as a download page

On Sun, May 2, 2021 at 11:38 AM Peter Kovacs wrote: > > So what do you think? Should we promote the alternate link with this > release more publicly maybe on Forums and go for a transition to a > different download policy? > Nice work, Peter. It's clearly preferable to have downloads under

Re: [Consensus Building] What we should do now (was: [lazy consensus] ... Big Sur)

On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 1:13 PM Peter Kovacs wrote: > > On 28.12.20 13:17, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > Playing devil's advocate here: does it make sense to actually post a blog > > article about this and then, maybe a week later, have the article > > moot with the actual release? > > Yes I think it

Re: Writer and .docx

On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 12:26 PM Joost Andrae wrote: > regarding the documentliberation stuff: > I know some of those filters for a longer time. AFAIK these where > implementations from one of the Novell guys (Fridrich Strba as far as I > remember; see http://fridrich.blogspot.com/ ) > Yes, DLP

Re: Writer and .docx

Hi Joost! On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 11:49 AM Joost Andrae wrote: > Hi Simon, > > it's an honor to me to see a sign of life of you here. Welcome ! > I've been a relatively active member here from the beginning! Instead of user picking here to get users leave from AOO to LO a > developer could

Re: Writer and .docx

Hi! As Peter said, it seems unlikely this branch of OpenOffice.org will be enhanced with the ability to write .DOCX format. However, another branch has added this capability and offers all the other convenient options you mention as well. You can get it from our "sister" community at

Re: How to join Docs team

On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 5:32 PM Jörg Schmidt wrote: > Hello, > > > From: bmcs [mailto:b...@apache.org] > > Authors to ODF Authors. The idea being that it would be one of the few > > shared areas where AOO and LO could work cooperatively > > together > > I don't believe that at that time, after

Re: Fwd: Re: Are you still looking for excellent English speaker volunteers for OpenOffice ?

On Sat, Nov 30, 2019 at 8:55 AM M. A. Hook wrote: > > as M$ is taking over > LibreOffice and already has their program dependent upon some of > Windows' parts. > This is not a true statement and I'd encourage you not to repeat it. S.

Re: PMC Chair

Hi Peter - Thanks for the update and also for your service as PMC Chair all this time! You definitely deserve a break! (FWIW, I asked not as a criticism but because previous chair rotations were discussed here (as far as I remember!) and I wondered why this one was done privately.) Cheers,

Re: PMC Chair

On Thu, 21 Nov 2019, 21:48 Patricia Shanahan, wrote: > One of the resolutions passed at the last board meeting was: > > "Change the Apache OpenOffice Project Chair (Jim Jagielski, VP)" > > Jim, > > I don't know whether congratulation or commiseration is more > appropriate, so you get whichever

Re: FOSDEM dinner invitation

would be nice. > > https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Events/2018/FOSDEM#Social_Dinner < > https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Events/2018/FOSDEM#Social_Dinner> > > Gav… > > > > On 23 Jan 2018, at 4:07 am, Simon Phipps <si...@webmink.com> wrote: > >

Re: FOSDEM dinner invitation

Just a reminder that everyone on this list is invited for dinner at FOSDEM as below. Cheers! On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 12:38 PM, Simon Phipps <si...@webmink.com> wrote: > Dear AOO developers, > > The board of directors of The Document Foundation have asked me to extend > their

FOSDEM dinner invitation

Dear AOO developers, The board of directors of The Document Foundation have asked me to extend their invitation to join the LibreOffice developers for an informal dinner on the Saturday evening at FOSDEM (February 3rd, 8pm) in Brussels. If you would like to attend, please add your name and

Re: Bugzilla

Jörg On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Jörg Schmidt wrote: > > Today the TDF is not independent, but depends on several companies, > instead of one. These companies may also be very community-friendly, but > again there is dependency and this dependency is actively

Re: Old AOO referencing in Google

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 9:29 PM, Marcus wrote: > > > the 404 is now gone. But so is the usable table of downloads, which is completely lost. I believe that is an unwelcome step backwards. S.

Re: Old AOO referencing in Google

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 8:04 PM, Hagar Delest wrote: > Le 10/05/2017 à 23:21, Marcus a écrit : > > I've deleted the webpage that is mentioned in the result page the user has >> posted in the screenshot. As soon as Google is re-indexing our website I >> expect that this

Re: Old AOO referencing in Google

On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Marcus wrote: > Or choose the item "Older releases" if you need a way older version. Then > you can get it - by clicking on the Archive link - from our archive. > Except you just deleted the page that the dropdown points to for v3.4.1 -

Re: Old AOO referencing in Google

On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:21 PM, Marcus wrote: > > However, it doesn't matter. There is no reason to provide download pages > to offer outdated versions - based on w.oo.o. Of course we cannot influence > what others are offering on their webpages. > I disagree. I and

Templates Site "Access Denied"

Hi all, There have been a large number of reports on the Users mailing list of people getting Access Denied messages when they attempt to access any of the templates at http://templates.openoffice.org/ or http://templates.services.openoffice.org/. This situation has been previously reported here

Re: Community building: give our User a chance to contribute!

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Jörg Schmidt wrote: > > > From: toki [mailto:toki.kant...@gmail.com] > > > * GoOo: The fork that wasn't. > > Oh, that was a fork! A fork against OpenOffice. > In fact Go-OO was started by Ximian in 2003, long before Novell bought them, as

Re: future of OpenOffice

Hi Dave, all. On 12 Jan 2017 22:50, "Dave Fisher" wrote: Please correct the specific non Apache licenses if I get them wrong. As far as I know the sequence of events is: OpenOffice.org was originally dual licensed under LGPLv2 and SISSL (OSI approved but now retired).

Re: Request for Nofollow or Removal of Links to My Site at Openoffice

On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > We do need to get control of templates.openoffice.org, either direct > control or a SourceForge contact to whom we can pass this sort of request. More than that, the site looks like it has more than just the OP using it

Re: Independent Entity to Develop and Further AOO

On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 11:44 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton < dennis.hamil...@acm.org> wrote: > > > > -Original Message- > > From: toki [mailto:toki.kant...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 11:30 > > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org > > Subject: Re: Independent Entity to Develop and

John McCreesh

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

Re: [QUESTION] Usability of Non-Optional Java Dependencies

to Patricia. Java developers are > > particularly welcome at this stage! > > > > Just IMHO, the C++ side of AOO is either under-control or > > too-ugly-to care-about, so we would do good focus more on the > > Java parts, which are also somewhat ugly but still promising. > [ ... ] > > >

Re: Remembering Ian Lynch in 4.1.2 announcement

/memorials/ian_lynch.html > > Regards, > Andrea. > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > -- *Simon Phipps* http://webmink.com *Office:* +1 (41

Re: 2015-08-24 Future Board Reports

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 4:26 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton orc...@apache.org wrote: 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

Re: ODF 1.2 and AOO ?

On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 11:06 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: I thought ODF 1.2 was relative old, but I might be wrong. While it was approved as an OASIS standard in 2011, it only became an official and approved ISO standard in mid-June. More at

Re: July board report.

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 12:51 PM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: Hi. It is again time to make a board report, you can find my proposal at https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/2015+July comments and changes are welcome. Should the fact CVE-2015-1774 is still unresolved in the

Re: July board report.

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 1:38 PM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: On 30 June 2015 at 13:54, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 12:51 PM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: Hi. It is again time to make a board report, you can find my proposal at https

Re: CVE-2015-1774 (was: July board report)

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: THE TL;DR: I agree. The extensive lag to availability of 4.1.2 is far more pertinent at the level of the Board Report. The existence of CVE-2015-1774 does not change that and should not overshadow it. I

Re: Download Stats

On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: Note: as discussed several times on this list, replacing this with a link to the SourceForge statistics is wrong, since the scripts do the right thing in terms of accounting for all downloads and reducing duplicates

Re: Download Stats

On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote: On Fri, 26 Jun 2015 15:25:01 +0100 Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote: Hi Rory, On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote: Just to note that the OO download statistics haven't been

Re: Download Stats

Hi Rory, On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote: Just to note that the OO download statistics haven't been updated in a long time. Which ones are you referring to? The ones at http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/stats/timeline or

Re: Download Stats

On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 7:28 PM, Marcus marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 06/26/2015 06:27 PM, schrieb Simon Phipps: On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Rory O'Farrellofarr...@iol.ie wrote: On Fri, 26 Jun 2015 15:25:01 +0100 Simon Phippssi...@webmink.com wrote: Hi Rory, On Fri, Jun 26

Re: Download Stats

On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 7:52 PM, Marcus marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 06/26/2015 08:33 PM, schrieb Simon Phipps: On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 7:28 PM, Marcusmarcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 06/26/2015 06:27 PM, schrieb Simon Phipps: On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Rory O'Farrellofarr

Re: Enquiry

Dear Naomi, Following Internet norms, my reply to your message is below. On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 5:00 PM, Naomi naomiobine...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Hi there, I googled my name to find that your company has saved my messages to two mail archives without my consent. Could you please remove my

Re: CVE-2015-1774: OpenOffice HWP Filter Remote Execution and DoS Vulnerability

working with VeriSign iDefense Labs. -- *Simon Phipps* http://webmink.com *Office:* +1 (415) 683-7660 *or* +44 (238) 098 7027 *Mobile*: +44 774 776 2816 *or Telegram https://telegram.me/webmink*

Re: CVE-2015-1774: OpenOffice HWP Filter Remote Execution and DoS Vulnerability

On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: Simon Phipps wrote: Given this problem is not fixed in the current download, should the project suspend downloads until it can be addressed? This looks like a very extreme measure to take. The severity

Re: Apache open office on Anroid

On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 6:50 PM, Nguyễn Đình Văn dinhva...@gmail.com wrote: Dear all, I have 2 question, please ask me: 1. Can [Apache open office] view office on Android? There's no work in progress on this at Apache, but there are two related serious activities. * A direct port of AOO to

Re: Re: How to achieve online editing?

It's likely that your best approach will involve using CMIS, which is the interface standard most CMS offer. While there has been some experimental work done with CMIS in AOO, it's fully implemented in LibreOffice and there are reports on the web of interaction with a variety of CMS. Try searching

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

On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Gavin McDonald ga...@16degrees.com.au wrote: I suggested (that is the word suggested; and yes it was me!) that some sentences be reworded slightly - to say the same thing, but in a more positive light, in such a way as that it might actually encourage more

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

On 5 Apr 2015 02:05, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: I can replace the report with a short note stating the I (as chair) have removed it, because the community need more time to discuss the content. That seems crazy, given the long review window and the absence of criticism on this list. The

Re: Breach of confidentiality

You will want to refer to http://openoffice.apache.org/mailing-lists.html before you make the personal choice to send any further messages to this public, archived mailing list. S. (I am just a member of the public who subscribes to the list along with around 450 other subscribers and public

Re: community communication versus private PMC communication, WAS: PMC FAQ update

On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: You are suggesting a usage pattern of the private list that is far beyond reality. I am not. I am pointing out there is no way for me to know, and that the strong reactions to Dave's original (modest reasonable)

Re: community communication versus private PMC communication, WAS: PMC FAQ update

On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: I'll ask one more time. What action is expected here on dev@ to impact how the PMC uses private@ ? I don't think there is any action that can be taken on dev@ beyond pointing out to others here that, when one

Re: PMC FAQ update

On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: On 06/03/2015 Dave Barton wrote: OK! One last attempt to clarify and resolve a trivial issue, that has become clouded in misunderstanding and mistranslated into some kind of bike-shedding subject. ...and

Re: PMC FAQ update

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

Re: PMC FAQ update

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

Re: Some old OOo SVN dumps, of use to anyone?

On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Marcus marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: IMHO this is an invaluable source of our history that we shouldn't loose. I agree with this -- it's history for every derivative of OO.o, not just AOO. Please save it at a location where it cannot be deleted by accident.

Re: PMC FAQ update

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. Please let us know if there are further changes to the persons listed as e-mail moderators, wiki admins, or anything else. I'm pretty sure there are others - I

Re: website security certificate

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 6:26 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: On Thursday, February 19, 2015, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: The connection to this web site is not fully secure because it contains unencrypted elements (such as images). Perhaps

Re: Proposal to change or remove a web page that seems to cause unfruitful discussions.

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote: ​Why not just take it down, and re-publish it when there is a more agreeable content on it. That sounds smart to me, +1. I note that on legal-discuss Jim [called the page][1] misrepresentation - maybe he has comments

Re: website security certificate

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 6:01 PM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: On Thursday, February 19, 2015, Keith N. McKenna keith.mcke...@comcast.net wrote: jan i wrote: On 19 February 2015 at 14:14, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com javascript:; wrote: On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 6:26 AM, jan i j

Re: [VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair

On 30/01/2015 Andrea Pescetti wrote: Who of the two candidates do you prefer to replace Andrea Pescetti as the OpenOffice project PMC Chair? [X] Jan Iversen (jani) S.

Re: [DISCUSS] Inappropriate Compliance Costs

On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: On 30/01/2015 Rob Weir wrote: 1) Companies that use commercially licensed software are exposed to compliance risk that can be mitigated with time and expense. 2) Companies that use copyleft software are also exposed

Re: [DISCUSS] Inappropriate Compliance Costs

On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Rob Weir r...@robweir.com wrote: On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote: On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: The page provides relevant information in a bad way (tone and wording

Re: [DISCUSS] Inappropriate Compliance Costs

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

Re: Open Document Editors Devroom at FOSDEM 15, Brussels, 31 Jan 2015

On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 8:01 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: We had to reject a interesting submission about community metrics in the past since FOSDEM is not the place for it. Conveniently, Biturgia is running an EU edition of its FLOSS Metrics event adjacent to FOSDEM:

Re: [PROPOSAL] Rejecting Quick Office Pro messages

On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote: I just spoke with the owner of the Apple developer account for the app. He tells me it had been used by a subcontractor, that it was unrelated to his real business (online TV) and that he would immediately remove the app

Re: [PROPOSAL] Rejecting Quick Office Pro messages

On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 11:23 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: I think we should be contacting Quick Office Pro about changing their support information if we haven't already. I just spoke with the owner of the Apple developer account for the app. He tells me it had been used by a

Re: [PROPOSAL] Rejecting Quick Office Pro messages

On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Rob Weir r...@robweir.com wrote: Is there a way we could handle it even earlier, at the Apache server level? Detect the incoming link based on the referrer as ones coming from the offending website and then redirect that to a custom webpage where we explain

Re: [PROPOSAL] Rejecting Quick Office Pro messages

On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 1:34 AM, Rob Weir r...@robweir.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote: On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Rob Weir r...@robweir.com wrote: Is there a way we could handle it even earlier, at the Apache server level? Detect