[tdf-discuss] Problem with linking external sheets in CALC
I have linked to file1.ods another file2.xls sheet named RATES and have a lot of formulas using the RATES cells. Now the name RATES in the file2.xls changed to SHEET1 and the links are broken (caused by exporting data in xls format from some other application). There is a way to change the filename but not the sheetname. I solved it by this complicated way: 1) rename the file file1.ods to file1.zip 2) unzip file1.zip to the folder file1 3) manualy edit the content.xml file in the folder file1: - find the proper xlink tag and change RATES into SHEET1 4) zip the folder to FILE1.zip 5) rename FILE1.zip to FILE1.ods When linking the file for the very 1st time and more sheets are found in the linked file, the system asks which sheet is to be linked. This should be asked when changing the name of the linked file, too. Is there any faster way how to update these broken links? Or could someone to make a sugestion to the developers to fix it - my English is not good enough to explain the problem better :) -- OBUTEX spol. s r.o. Ing. Jiří Hladůvka Zlatovská 22 911 05 Trenčín EU Slovakia -- mailto:ad...@obutex.com http://www.obutex.com -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Foundation Fundraising
Hello, I am copying a few lists on this, so all teams are informed. *Please* do continue discussion *solely* on the appropriate lists, e.g. website for website related tasks, design for design related tasks and so on, do *not* Cc all the lists when replying. :-) Introduction At the moment, The Document Foundation [1] is no legal entity by itself, but the German non-profit association OpenOffice.org Deutschland e.V. [2], despite its name, is holding the legal assets, accepts donations, and pays for the infrastructure and other things. The fact that the Foundation has not been set-up at first place was on purpose, to leave doors to potential contributors open and allow everyone to participate in shaping it. One of the results of this Community process are our Bylaws [3], which will also serve as basis for the Foundation's statutes. During the last weeks, the Steering Committee [4] of The Document Foundation evaluated various options for setting up the legal entity. In a public Steering Committee Phone Conference [5], the following decision was made: * The Foundation should be established in Germany in the form of a Stiftung. o Foundations have quite a good tradition in Germany, and the benefits in terms of taxes and credibility are high. In addition, the German model provides a high security and stability, as the Foundation's statutes cannot be changed, or at least not in major parts. o In contrast, a German association would be much easier to set-up, but the majority of the members can easily change the statutes. This is something we want to avoid, in order to provide safety and stability for our users and the whole Community. o The drawback of a Germany-based Foundation is that we need at least 50.000 € for the capital stock, ideally it is even 100.000 €. That money can not be used for daily work, but needs to stay in the stock. This is required for the safety of a Germany-based model. * The Steering Committee set itself a deadline for getting the required funds, which will be end of March 2011. If, by that date, we do not have enough Funds in donations, or confirmations by sponsors, the Foundation then can not not be set-up in Germany, but we will rather go for a legal entity in the United Kingdom. o A legal entity in the UK is not as desirable as in Germany, as in the latter one we have many active members, the roots of the product originally lie here, a lot of support from corporations and governmental bodies is expected. In addition, a German Stiftung is generally perceived as something very trustworthy and stable. o However, if by the end of March 2011, we will not succeed with a Germany-based model, it is unlikely that we will manage it later on, so that deadline is fixed. Fundraising In order to achieve our goal, we need to start a fundraising. Perception of The Document Foundation and LibreOffice has been very well, we received lots of supportive words from private end-users, corporations and governmental entities, however, donations in terms of money [6] came in mostly by private users. This has various reasons: * Getting support in terms of resources from corporations is much easier than getting money. * Many corporations do not want to invest in the capital stock, but rather in the daily business. However, without a capital stock, a Germany-based Foundation is not possible. This is somehow a chicken-and-egg-problem. * We did not start an actual fundraising up to now, except a call for donations. Within the next days, we plan to start a public fundraising, targeted at corporations, governmental entities, as well as private users, in order to collect the needed funds. After this very long introduction, serving that we're all at the same page, I'm coming to the point. :-) I have set up a dedicated wiki page for collecting ideas at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Foundation_Fundraising#Ideas and would like to encourage all of you to add and contribute ideas. As the deadline is approaching quickly, we need to start acting soon in order to get things up and running, and any help is very much welcome. In order to have efforts coordinated, please do *not* start working on your own without asking on the lists. We all have been through tough discussions regarding these issues the last weeks, so this one should work more coordinated. :-) If you have an idea, and you can actually work on it, add your name to the wiki. After we decided which fundraising actions to take, we then can start working on it and also involve the press. Again, in order to have the best press coverage, we need to work coordinated. Thanks a lot to all of you for your help in this next important step of our journey! Florian [1] http://www.documentfoundation.org [2] http://www.ooodev.org [3] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/CommunityBylaws [4]
Re: [tdf-discuss] Reporting Ubuntu bugs in LO - PPA or Official LO - Clarification needed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11-02-04 11:05 AM, emarkay wrote: Reporting Ubuntu bugs ... via: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugReport As this is a multiplatform program, I can understand that the main user of it (Ubuntu) is to have a separate bug system. Thus, the first question is: What if a Ubuntu-reported bug also affects Windows version, for example, or vice versa; what's the link to ensure both (or all relevant OS platform issues) are addressed? If an Ubuntu-specific bug is also present in other platforms, it should be reported upstream (at freedesktop.org's bugzilla). Reporting Ubuntu-only bugs upstream also helps expose them to other platforms in order to determine if they are present or not. I also view it as a trail where others may end up finding your report and confirming / rejecting it. Some of this is from personal experience, some from online docs and readings. The current maintainers may have more / better details about this. I wrote a short note to Björn so he looks at it and comment back. Second, and most important, LO is standard issue now in Ubuntu Natty, which is still in Beta at this time. There is no Official Ubuntu LO support for the current release (Maverick), nor the prior LTS (Long Term Support) release, Lucid, nor prior active Ubuntu releases. There is, however a PPA that is supported by the Document Foundation; thus while not blessed by the Ubuntu authorities, is tested there by some official LO developers, and is as good as we'll get for Lucid and Maverick users who want to migrate to LO. The PPA is as official as it gets and currently Canonical has staff maintaining it (at least 2): https://launchpad.net/~libreoffice/+members#active As I understand it this PPA is a staging area which has the same packages you find in Ubuntu 11.04 (so, in development) and it's also built for Maverick and Lucid. It's convenient to use and lets you easily remove LibO if you decide to do so. The chances of this getting into the main repository for Maverick are most probably none - it's only there for convenience and no official support (in terms of commercial support by Canonical) may be offered for that. For Ubuntu 10.04 LTS I believe it's the same situation, but LTS releases sometimes get some exceptions. Firefox is a notable one where current releases of FF were rolled back into older stable Ubuntu versions. I lack the time to gather references but it should be easy to trace back such exceptions. I am not sure the PPA was put together initially by TDF but regardless, you now have Canonical staff looking into it, and Debian has LibO packages in the experimental repository, which to me means everything is in place to have an official release on time for Ubuntu 11.04. If you're planning any migration from OOo to LibO, your best path (IMO) would be to focus on Ubuntu 12.04 LTS and perhaps have trials using the PPA in 10.04 LTS before that. You'll think it's a long shot until you sit and try it :) It does take some time to make such changes. Of course in any *production environment* migration considerations, the only authority to speak on what is supported commercially or not on Ubuntu by them is Canonical - just call and ask, as you would for any other product you want to use before doing so. And no, this doesn't stop anyone else from offering such support and go ahead with migration before 11.04 is out anyways. But why do that when the release is 2 months away (other than wanting to stay at 10.04 LTS for its life duration..). So, the final question is, do Lucid and Maverick Ubuntu users submit bug reports to the Ubuntu Launchpad, even though there is no development or support for those 'Ubuntus', or to the Bugzilla location? Yes, they should file bugs there. I consider it even better if they take the time to file bugs upstream too but not everyone knows how to do so and it may end up being considered noise - plus Ubuntu users normally are fast on the problem = bug path. Forums and QA such as Shapado may help alleviate that. I hope I also cleared up the there is no development. So far Debian packages and the PPA as I have observed them are keeping up tightly to the current releases so there should be no need to install .debs directly. Bernhard commented on this elsewhere, and said as he sees it, The Ubuntu paragraph on the wiki page describes how to handle Ubuntu *specific* bugs. This makes sense, but again doesn't differentiate between the official and the PPA. There fact there is a paragraph there is highlighting that difference. If you installed manually .debs, you shouldn't. If you report an Ubuntu bug and you installed .deb manually, you'll probably be asked to install using the PPA to remain consistent. However it is noted that Filing a bug report at FreeDesktop.org as described above is also useful as such upstream reports can then be checked (and possibly tested and fixed) for other LibreOffice versions. He suggested
Re: [tdf-discuss] Reporting Ubuntu bugs in LO - PPA or Official LO - Clarification needed
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 10:16:34AM -0500, Fabian Rodriguez wrote: I am not sure the PPA was put together initially by TDF but regardless, Nope. you now have Canonical staff looking into it, and Debian has LibO packages in the experimental repository, which to me means everything is http://packages.qa.debian.org/libr/libreoffice/news/20110207T152001Z.html :-) Grüße/Regards, René -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Foundation Fundraising
On Feb 7, 2011, at 9:19 AM, drew wrote: Firstly I'd say - slow down a bit - let this idea percolate a bit. _If_ kickstarter is something of interest then the way to go would be IMO to have German nationals open an account in a US bank, and that can be done. Kickstarter looks like the strongest, but other options exist as well. For example, http://www.chipin.com/ is one I've seen used in the past. -Ben Benjamin Horst bho...@mac.com 646-464-2314 (Eastern) www.solidoffice.com -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Foundation Fundraising
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 02/07/2011 01:27 PM, drew wrote: A requirement to have to have a US bank account in order to receive funds is not the same thing as saying the money must be dispersed in the US only, is it? No. A couple of things to do, before setting up the business account: * Make sure that you really want to have a business presence in the state that the bank that handles the account is located in. * Decide what currency you want the account to be denominated in. (I don't know how that affects Amazon Processing.) ( I don't know how FDIC works for non US-Dollar denominated accounts.) * Verify that the bank is financially sound. (The Federal Reserve Bank is on track to close more financial institutions this year, than in the previous two years, combined.) ### If the target is 100.000 €, then it should be a minimum of US$250,000. (This is to cover currency exchange fees, and the decline in the value of the US Dollar.) Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. I am not an accountant. jonathon -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEbBAEBAgAGBQJNUDd6AAoJEERA7YuLpVrVSWkH+LQz0jPNQzYFhSyXNwrKXWHM 0IR1bvAt7Q8nn29O8fzV5syT/bwPqrR8HhWn3ReMvqLgVHyT3KvTL5VTo/U03hvy z5Qnlor5iq5lVBJCIyMtbMBSBUdFNGrUcNRdORz8d9E/HP473lYogy7iQCLG7VD/ NMcDLgQrbGWZWKTPSRVuwk3zs3d56JsUWriEvawSrXvd9EOzGeBJfU8/4VlYtMv4 /WPEc/2y9vatiRfQdvNJ3vwgSkJAKRiYJ26FcXFvjdwKsE5UVva2cSr/KoHEY8EG ZKkpTbW1+Qu08oh/RFa6GgNHCvfkH8pDLkE988VaL1RigWclFs03yDfFthU0BQ== =69RV -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
