date:20110601


On 31/05/11 13:03, Chr. Rossmanith wrote:

Hi,

more duplicate code cleanup.

Class SfxObjectShell has two nearly identical methods: ImportFrom and 
InsertFrom. The latter has a few lines of code more, so I've removed 
InsertFrom (which was added to the code base later than ImportFrom), 
added a boolean parameter to ImportFrom and adjusted the few calls to 
those methods. And InsertFrom is not virtual like ImportFrom. Please 
review the attached patches. I'll commit them if I get an ok.
looks good to me, please commit it to master ( or I will commit it later 
after I get a build /me unfortunately accidently did a make clean on his 
master build )


thanks
Noel
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] [PUSHED[ [PATCH] fix for fdo#37761: Keyboard navigation broken in tools - options


On 31/05/11 18:03, André Schnabel wrote:

Hi,

we came across a minor accessability issue at the German discuss list. 
But the fix is so easy that even I could do it.


It's just to remove one line that breaks the keyboard navigation in 
the options dialog and has no sense at all. Christoph Noack confirmed 
tha change for UX at bugzilla.


Patch is contributed under LGPLv3+/MPL.

Nice patch, nice bug report, thanks a million, pushed to 3.4

Noel
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] Unify DLLPOSTFIX values

2011-06-01 Thread Bjoern Michaelsen

Hi Francois,

On Wed, 1 Jun 2011 08:59:04 +0200
Francois Tigeot ftig...@wolfpond.org wrote:

 The attached patch gets rid of many definitions of DLLPOSTFIX. With
 this change, shared library file names will be the same on all
 platforms.

Is the patch complete? It ends (fetched via gmane) with:
 CSC*=$(FLIPCMD) csc
-- 
1.7.4.1

and a patch -p1 says:
patch unexpectedly ends in middle of line

Best,

Bjoern

-- 
https://launchpad.net/~bjoern-michaelsen


___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] Duplicate code: join ImportFrom and InsertFrom

2011-06-01 Thread Christina Rossmanith

Yesterday everything built fine. Then I did a ./g pull -r which caused the 
build to fail. As soon as I have a successfull build again I'll push everything 
which has queued up until now  :-)

Christina

 Original-Nachricht 
 Datum: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 10:16:54 +0100
 Von: Noel Power nopo...@novell.com
 An: Chr. Rossmanith chrrossman...@gmx.de
 CC: libreoffice@lists.freedesktop.org
 Betreff: Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] Duplicate code: join ImportFrom and
 InsertFrom

 On 31/05/11 13:03, Chr. Rossmanith wrote:
  Hi,
 
  more duplicate code cleanup.
 
  Class SfxObjectShell has two nearly identical methods: ImportFrom and 
  InsertFrom. The latter has a few lines of code more, so I've removed 
  InsertFrom (which was added to the code base later than ImportFrom), 
  added a boolean parameter to ImportFrom and adjusted the few calls to 
  those methods. And InsertFrom is not virtual like ImportFrom. Please 
  review the attached patches. I'll commit them if I get an ok.
 looks good to me, please commit it to master ( or I will commit it later 
 after I get a build /me unfortunately accidently did a make clean on his 
 master build )
 
 thanks
 Noel
 ___
 LibreOffice mailing list
 LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
 http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

-- 
Christina Rossmanith

Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir
belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] fix for fdo#37761: Keyboard navigation broken in tools - options

2011-06-01 Thread Michael Meeks


On Tue, 2011-05-31 at 19:03 +0200, André Schnabel wrote:
 we came across a minor accessability issue at the German discuss list.
 But the fix is so easy that even I could do it.

Whoot ! :-) you rock ...

Thanks !,

Michael.

-- 
 michael.me...@novell.com  , Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot


___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] [PUSHED] Patch for Bug 34786: [EasyHack]Editing: Sentence movement function broken


On 01/06/11 06:34, jeffrey chang wrote:

Sorry here is the patch.

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 1:18 PM, jeffrey chang jeffdch...@gmail.com 
mailto:jeffdch...@gmail.com wrote:


Hi,

I am new to the LibreOffice community. I know that 34786 has been
posted for awhile, but no one seems to have claimed the bug and
the error was still reproducible in writer so I decided to take up
the bug as my first EasyHack. I seemed to have fixed the problem
of deleting to the beginning of the sentence by making a simple
change in wrtsh4.cxx (See Patch). After re-making sw and testing
in writer the problem seems fixed. The patch is on LO version
3.4.0.2 because one of the recent masters that I pulled was unstable

Great work, patch looks  fine to me and works as expected, pushed to 3.4 
branch. look forward to your next patch


thanks alot

Noel
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice] [PATCH] fix for fdo#36519 (was: about bug fdo 36519 ...)

2011-06-01 Thread Jean-Baptiste Faure

Le 30/05/2011 09:23, Cedric Bosdonnat a écrit :
 On Sun, 2011-05-29 at 11:40 +0200, Jean-Baptiste Faure wrote:
 It works if I add a break statement when UIName is found :

 for(int nProp = 0; nProp  rProperties.getLength(); nProp++)
 {
 if(!pProperties[nProp].Name.compareToAscii(UIName))
 {
 pProperties[nProp].Value = sRet;
 +break;
 }

 If UIName is found first then the loop terminates. Is it a good method
 to fix the problem ?
 
 A algorithm teacher would tell you it's ugly... Do we want to possibly
 use the two other fallbacks? In that case you would need to set some
 priority between the two remaining properties that are looked for. But
 may by just greping through the filters definitions you'll find out that
 it's pointless ;)
 
 Thanks for your investigations on that bug.
 
Hi,

Well, after having discussed with Cédric, it is not so ugly.
Here is the patch: it adds the break statement and removes the third
case Flags which has nothing to do with the aim of the function find
the human readable name of the filter.

Best regards
JBF

-- 
Seuls des formats ouverts peuvent assurer la pérennité de vos documents.
From 4fa64ee71ba7ce969a00b662e85202a69fbda98b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jean-Baptiste Faure jbf.fa...@orange.fr
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 13:14:49 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] fix for bug fdo 36519

Use human readable format name instead of internal filter names in Load/save options UI
---
 cui/source/options/optsave.cxx |9 +
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/cui/source/options/optsave.cxx b/cui/source/options/optsave.cxx
index c0719b4..c0dd83a 100644
--- a/cui/source/options/optsave.cxx
+++ b/cui/source/options/optsave.cxx
@@ -558,20 +558,13 @@ IMPL_LINK( SfxSaveTabPage, AutoClickHdl_Impl, CheckBox *, pBox )
 OUString lcl_ExtracUIName(const SequencePropertyValue rProperties)
 {
 OUString sRet;
-sal_Int32 nFlags;
 const PropertyValue* pProperties = rProperties.getConstArray();
 for(int nProp = 0; nProp  rProperties.getLength(); nProp++)
 {
 if(!pProperties[nProp].Name.compareToAscii(UIName))
 {
 pProperties[nProp].Value = sRet;
-}
-else if(!pProperties[nProp].Name.compareToAscii(Flags))
-{
-if ( pProperties[nProp].Value = nFlags )
-{
-nFlags = 0x100;
-}
+break;
 }
 else if(!pProperties[nProp].Name.compareToAscii(Name))
 {
-- 
1.7.0.4

___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] [PUSHED] Patch for Bug 34786: [EasyHack]Editing: Sentence movement function broken


On 01/06/11 12:05, Noel Power wrote:
On 01/06/11 06:34, jeffrey chang wrote: 

[...]
Sorry here is the patch.k, patch looks  fine to me and works as 
expected, pushed to 3.4 branch. look forward to your next patch


thanks alot

oh and can you please confirm the patch is contributed under LGPLv3+/MPL.?
thanks again,
Noel
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice] [ANN] List for collaboration around user experience topics created

2011-06-01 Thread Thorsten Behrens

Hi folks,

with the design team (and the UX people, as part of that), and the
hackers mostly working on separate lists, we thought it would be
helpful to provide a low-traffic, easy-to-post-to third list, where
interested parties of either side can meet - the list 

 * is unmoderated, i.e. you can post without subscribing
 * does not change Reply-To, so you're free to use that according to
   your needs
 * draft list topic: Meeting ground for hackers and UX experts -
   get advise here for user experience questions

It would be great if people working on UI-relevant hacks could give
a quick shout there - and conversely, it would be cool if a few UX
experts could monitor that list, funnel the question to the design
list  get back with some actionable results.

The list address is: libreoffice-ux-adv...@lists.freedesktop.org

(see also
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise)

Cheers,

-- Thorsten


pgpXjqj8qlExm.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] restore Korean comments in hwpfilter (were corrupted to just ???? instead of being translated)

2011-06-01 Thread Korrawit Pruegsanusak

Hello Christian, all,
Many thanks for your explanation!

Best Regards,
--
Korrawit Pruegsanusak
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice] [Bug 35673] LibreOffice 3.4 most annoying bugs

2011-06-01 Thread bugzilla-daemon

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35673

Rainer Bielefeld libreoff...@bielefeldundbuss.de changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends on||37799

--- Comment #131 from Rainer Bielefeld libreoff...@bielefeldundbuss.de 
2011-06-01 07:35:19 PDT ---
I nominate Bug 37799 - Crash when Break (remove) DDE link to CALC. I believe
Such DDE links are frequently used (at least I do that), and a crash there is
not a bagatelle.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] gdk-pixbuf compile error

2011-06-01 Thread Christian Lohmaier

Hi *,

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 7:59 AM, Joseph Powers jpower...@cox.net wrote:
 [problem with gdk-pixbuf on Mac]

Sure that it isn't just a problem with mixing linking against SDK and
linking against the system?

The modules that librsvg did now pull in to the build don't properly
link against the SDK, so while it might find the system lib during
compile, later on the SDK one is used or the other way round. Maybe
that's the cause of the problems.

ciao
Christian
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice] [PUSHED] Re: Update: Brazilian portuguese spelling dictionary hyphenation

2011-06-01 Thread Caolán McNamara

On Fri, 2011-05-27 at 14:56 -0300, Olivier Hallot wrote:
 Hi
 I have updated the spelling dictionary for Brazilian Portuguese
 
 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37671
 
 Thanks for pushing it
 
 Credits to Raimundo Moura raimundo dot smoura at gmail dot com

I see timar pushed this on Monday to master anyway.

C.


___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] build problems with cppunit

2011-06-01 Thread Regina Henschel


Hi Michael,

Regina Henschel schrieb:
[..]


I have some further observation: I had tried a non-pro build. Today I
have deleted the --enable-dbgutil switch and started a new build. Now it
compiles xml2cmp without problems. Currently it is in hwpfilter. I can
tell you tomorrow, whether building was successful. I do not use -P
option to avoid any problems coming from parallelism, so compiling is slow.

Perhaps the problems have their reason in --enable-dbgutil ?


after a second run, because the file Microsoft.VC80.CRT.manifest was 
missing, building was successful. So it seems, that the error only 
occurs in a non-pro build. Is such a non-pro build possible for you? Do 
you us non-pro builds?


Kind regards
Regina
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] gdk-pixbuf compile error

2011-06-01 Thread Alexander Thurgood

Le 01/06/11 17:19, Christian Lohmaier a écrit :

Hi *,

 
 On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 7:59 AM, Joseph Powers jpower...@cox.net wrote:
 [problem with gdk-pixbuf on Mac]
 
 Sure that it isn't just a problem with mixing linking against SDK and
 linking against the system?
 
 The modules that librsvg did now pull in to the build don't properly
 link against the SDK, so while it might find the system lib during
 compile, later on the SDK one is used or the other way round. Maybe
 that's the cause of the problems.


Getting same problems here too, am seeing this in the build log :

io-png.c: In function 'png_simple_error_callback':
io-png.c:186: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
io-png.c: In function 'gdk_pixbuf__png_image_load':
io-png.c:290: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
io-png.c:344: warning: passing argument 5 of 'png_get_iCCP' from
incompatible pointer type
io-png.c: In function 'gdk_pixbuf__png_image_begin_load':
io-png.c:462: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
io-png.c: In function 'gdk_pixbuf__png_image_load_increment':
io-png.c:534: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
io-png.c: In function 'png_info_callback':
io-png.c:657: warning: format '%ld' expects type 'long int', but
argument 5 has type 'png_uint_32'
io-png.c:657: warning: format '%ld' expects type 'long int', but
argument 6 has type 'png_uint_32'
io-png.c:681: warning: passing argument 5 of 'png_get_iCCP' from
incompatible pointer type
io-png.c: In function 'png_error_callback':
io-png.c:772: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
io-png.c: In function 'real_save_png':
io-png.c:981: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
io-png.c:1009: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 5 of
'png_set_iCCP' differ in signedness
make[5]: *** [io-png.lo] Error 1
make[4]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[3]: *** [all] Error 2
make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: *** [all] Error 2
dmake:  Error code 2, while making
'./unxmacxi.pro/misc/build/so_built_so_gdk-pixbuf'


and this in gsf :

gsf-output-stdio.c: In function 'rename_wrapper':
gsf-output-stdio.c:98: warning: label 'unlink_and_retry' defined but not
used

Making all in tests
make[3]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
Making all in m4
make[3]: Nothing to be done for `all'.
Making all in thumbnailer
  CC main.o
Entering /Users/alex/DevHack/git/libo/codemaker/source/commonjava

Entering /Users/alex/DevHack/git/libo/offapi/com/sun/star/text

main.c:38:35: error: gdk-pixbuf/gdk-pixbuf.h: No such file or directory
main.c: In function 'call_convert':
main.c:71: error: 'GdkPixbuf' undeclared (first use in this function)
main.c:71: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
main.c:71: error: for each function it appears in.)
main.c:71: error: 'pixbuf' undeclared (first use in this function)
main.c:73: warning: implicit declaration of function
'gdk_pixbuf_new_from_file_at_scale'
main.c:73: warning: nested extern declaration of
'gdk_pixbuf_new_from_file_at_scale'
main.c:77: warning: implicit declaration of function 'gdk_pixbuf_save'
main.c:77: warning: nested extern declaration of 'gdk_pixbuf_save'
make[3]: *** [main.o] Error 1
make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: *** [all] Error 2
dmake:  Error code 2, while making
'./unxmacxi.pro/misc/build/so_built_so_libgsf'


libpackage2 :
and a million ld visibility warnings when compiling libpackage2


i18npool :
Entering /Users/alex/DevHack/git/libo/i18npool/source/breakiterator
dmake:  makefile.mk:  line 102:  Warning: -- More than one prerequisite
for %-target. Use :| ruleop or indirect prerequisites.


binfilter :
Compiling: binfilter/bf_sch/source/core/sch_chtmod2a.cxx
Compiling: binfilter/bf_sch/source/core/sch_chtmod3d.cxx
Undefined symbols:
  utl::ConfigItem::ConfigItem(rtl::OUString, short), referenced from:

binfilter::SvtModuleOptions_Impl::SvtModuleOptions_Impl(binfilter::SvtModuleOptions*)in
svt_moduleoptions.o
  binfilter::SvtLoadOptions_Impl::SvtLoadOptions_Impl()in svt_saveopt.o
  binfilter::SvtSaveOptions_Impl::SvtSaveOptions_Impl()in svt_saveopt.o
  binfilter::SvtSecurityOptions_Impl::SvtSecurityOptions_Impl()in
svt_securityoptions.o

binfilter::SvtLocalisationOptions_Impl::SvtLocalisationOptions_Impl()in
svt_localisationoptions.o

binfilter::SvtWorkingSetOptions_Impl::SvtWorkingSetOptions_Impl()in
svt_workingsetoptions.o
  binfilter::SvtInternalOptions_Impl::SvtInternalOptions_Impl()in
svt_internaloptions.o
  binfilter::SvtStartOptions_Impl::SvtStartOptions_Impl()in
svt_startoptions.o
  binfilter::SvtHistoryOptions_Impl::SvtHistoryOptions_Impl()in
svt_historyoptions.o
  binfilter::SvtInetOptions::Impl::Impl() in svt_inetoptions.o
  binfilter::SvtMenuOptions_Impl::SvtMenuOptions_Impl()in
svt_menuoptions.o

binfilter::SvtDynamicMenuOptions_Impl::SvtDynamicMenuOptions_Impl()in
svt_dynamicmenuoptions.o
  binfilter::SvtOptions3D_Impl::SvtOptions3D_Impl()in svt_options3d.o

Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH][PUSHED] fix for fdo#36519 (was: about bug fdo 36519 ...)

2011-06-01 Thread Cedric Bosdonnat

forgot to update the subject

On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 15:22 +0200, Cedric Bosdonnat wrote:
 Hi Jean-Baptiste,
 
 On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 13:30 +0200, Jean-Baptiste Faure wrote:
  Well, after having discussed with Cédric, it is not so ugly.
  Here is the patch: it adds the break statement and removes the third
  case Flags which has nothing to do with the aim of the function find
  the human readable name of the filter.
 
 Pushed to both master and 3.4 branches. Many thanks Jean-Baptiste for
 your first C++ patch in LibreOffice :)
 

-- 
Cédric Bosdonnat
LibreOffice hacker
http://documentfoundation.org
OOo Eclipse Integration developer
http://cedric.bosdonnat.free.fr

___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] gdk-pixbuf compile error

2011-06-01 Thread Joseph Powers

On Jun 1, 2011, at 8:19 AM, Christian Lohmaier wrote:

 Hi *,
 
 On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 7:59 AM, Joseph Powers jpower...@cox.net wrote:
 [problem with gdk-pixbuf on Mac]
 
 Sure that it isn't just a problem with mixing linking against SDK and
 linking against the system?
 
 The modules that librsvg did now pull in to the build don't properly
 link against the SDK, so while it might find the system lib during
 compile, later on the SDK one is used or the other way round. Maybe
 that's the cause of the problems.
 
 ciao
 Christian

I'm fairly sure it's not a link issue (at least not just a link issue):

libtool: compile:  /usr/bin/gcc-4.0 -std=gnu99 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. 
-DG_LOG_DOMAIN=\GdkPixbuf\ -DGDK_PIXBUF_COMPILATION -I.. -I.. -I../gdk-pixbuf 
-I../gdk-pixbuf 
-DGDK_PIXBUF_LOCALEDIR=\/Users/jpowers27/build/bootstrap/gdk-pixbuf/./unxmacxi.pro/misc/share/locale\
 
-DGDK_PIXBUF_LIBDIR=\/Users/jpowers27/build/bootstrap/gdk-pixbuf/./unxmacxi.pro/misc/lib\
 -DGDK_PIXBUF_BINARY_VERSION=\2.10.0\ 
-DGDK_PIXBUF_PREFIX=\/Users/jpowers27/build/bootstrap/gdk-pixbuf/./unxmacxi.pro/misc\
 -D_REENTRANT -I/usr/local/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/local/lib/glib-2.0/include 
-DGDK_PIXBUF_ENABLE_BACKEND 
-DPIXBUF_LIBDIR=\/Users/jpowers27/build/bootstrap/gdk-pixbuf/./unxmacxi.pro/misc/lib/gdk-pixbuf-2.0/2.10.0/loaders\
 -DBUILT_MODULES_DIR=\./.libs\ -isysroot /Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.4u.sdk 
-DG_DISABLE_SINGLE_INCLUDES -DGDK_PIXBUF_DISABLE_DEPRECATED 
-I/Users/jpowers27/build/bootstrap/solver/350/unxmacxi.pro/inc/external 
-I/Users/jpowers27/build/bootstrap/solver/350/unxmacxi.pro/inc/external/glib-2.0
 -I/Users/jpowers27/build/bootstrap/solver/350/unxmacxi.pro/inc/external/libpng 
-I/Users/jpowers27/build/bootstrap/solver/350/unxmacxi.pro/inc/external/libjpeg 
-Wall -MT io-png.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/io-png.Tpo -c io-png.c  -fno-common -DPIC 
-o .libs/io-png.o
io-png.c: In function 'png_simple_error_callback':
io-png.c:186: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
io-png.c: In function 'gdk_pixbuf__png_image_load':
io-png.c:290: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
io-png.c:344: warning: passing argument 5 of 'png_get_iCCP' from incompatible 
pointer type
io-png.c: In function 'gdk_pixbuf__png_image_begin_load':
io-png.c:462: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
io-png.c: In function 'gdk_pixbuf__png_image_load_increment':
io-png.c:534: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
io-png.c: In function 'png_info_callback':
io-png.c:657: warning: format '%ld' expects type 'long int', but argument 5 has 
type 'png_uint_32'
io-png.c:657: warning: format '%ld' expects type 'long int', but argument 6 has 
type 'png_uint_32'
io-png.c:681: warning: passing argument 5 of 'png_get_iCCP' from incompatible 
pointer type
io-png.c: In function 'png_error_callback':
io-png.c:772: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
io-png.c: In function 'real_save_png':
io-png.c:981: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
io-png.c:1009: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 5 of 'png_set_iCCP' 
differ in signedness
make[4]: *** [io-png.lo] Error 1
make[3]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[2]: *** [all] Error 2
make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make: *** [all] Error 2
dmake:  Error code 2, while making 
'./unxmacxi.pro/misc/build/so_built_so_gdk-pixbuf'

The above was generated after applying your patch:

LibreOffice (libs-extern-sys) lohmaier+LibreOffice * gdk-pixbuf/ 
(gdk-pixbuf-2.23.0.patch makefile.mk): compile gdk-pixbuf against SDK (Mac)

Joe P.___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] Unify DLLPOSTFIX values

2011-06-01 Thread Francois Tigeot

Hi Bjoern,

On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 11:46:01AM +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
 
 On Wed, 1 Jun 2011 08:59:04 +0200
 Francois Tigeot ftig...@wolfpond.org wrote:
 
  The attached patch gets rid of many definitions of DLLPOSTFIX. With
  this change, shared library file names will be the same on all
  platforms.
 
 Is the patch complete? It ends (fetched via gmane) with:
  CSC*=$(FLIPCMD) csc
 -- 
 1.7.4.1
 

Yes, it was generated with git format-patch

 and a patch -p1 says:
 patch unexpectedly ends in middle of line

Not good. patch -p1 works locally.

Get a non-corrupted copy here:
http://dl.wolfpond.org/0001-Unify-DLLPOSTFIX-value-on-all-platforms.patch

I may have done something bad, tho: master doesn't build.

To the committers: please do not push this patch. I'll get around to do it
when I'm sure it's okay.

-- 
Francois Tigeot
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice] FYI: Latest Oracle move wrt to OpenOffice.org

Oracle announce:

http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/statements-on-openofficeorg-contribution-to-apache-nasdaq-orcl-1521400.htm

IBM is very happy to be able to continue Symphony without having to
give code back... (they seems to rejoyce at being able to do selective
GPL: i.e what is yours is mine... but what is mine is yours only for
the peice I don't care about and would like you to maintain instead):
http://www.edbrill.com/ebrill/edbrill.nsf/dx/openoffice-moving-to-apache-good-news-for-the-desktop-productivity-market
The new project at Apache strengthens IBM's ability to continue to
offer our own distributions of productivity tools based on the
OpenOffice code base and make our own contributions to reinforce the
overall community. 

And IBM promise to contribute 'inovative' feature in the future:
We have done a bunch of innovative things and one-plusses on top of
the OO.o codebase, including accessibility work, the data pilot
engine, and Office 2007 file format compatibility. 

Of course 'innovative'(*) feature like Office 2007 compatibility and
Data Pilot engine are already today in libreoffice...

Norbert


(*) aka IBM notorious NIH syndrome:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_Invented_Here
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice] Report [GSoC] [helpfiles]

2011-06-01 Thread Timo

Hello everybody,

this is what I have done since the last report:
- Used HTML Help Compiler (HHC) to create a CHM-file.
- Implemented a bash script that installs HHC with wine. With this
script the HH-Compiler is platform independent. Bash and wine binaries
exist for many platforms.

These are the tasks for the future:
- Test the conversions to CHM with the real libreoffice help. That
computer will take long.
- Implement the conversion to html

At the moment I am stuck using mwlib to create docbook files. I can pass
the names of articles to mwlib´s executable. Those articles will be
converted. Either I need to find a quick way to select all articles or I
create an algorithm. The algorithm shall parse the xmldump and make a
list of all article names. At the moment I aim to search the mwlib code
and find a way.


Best wishes,

Timo



___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] FYI: Latest Oracle move wrt to OpenOffice.org

2011-06-01 Thread Tibby Lickle

It's like throwing out the baby with the bath water - they're just
throwing away so much experience. I certainly wouldn't want to be
facing something the size of LO/OOo without a team who've had to deal
with it before :)

I'm fairly new to LibreOffice and contributing to FOSS but the
community have been highly supportive of my questions and
cluelessness. I am fairly shy online and not very confident in my
coding skills but there is so much infrastructure geared toward
getting newbies to contribute that it has been pretty much painless to
just get straight into it despite the terrifying size of the project.

I think that in part it's the people and in part it's the way things
are being done. It seems a shame to waste an opportunity to integrate
with a community with these advantages.

Eilidh


On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com wrote:
 Oracle announce:

 http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/statements-on-openofficeorg-contribution-to-apache-nasdaq-orcl-1521400.htm

 IBM is very happy to be able to continue Symphony without having to
 give code back... (they seems to rejoyce at being able to do selective
 GPL: i.e what is yours is mine... but what is mine is yours only for
 the peice I don't care about and would like you to maintain instead):
 http://www.edbrill.com/ebrill/edbrill.nsf/dx/openoffice-moving-to-apache-good-news-for-the-desktop-productivity-market
 The new project at Apache strengthens IBM's ability to continue to
 offer our own distributions of productivity tools based on the
 OpenOffice code base and make our own contributions to reinforce the
 overall community. 

 And IBM promise to contribute 'inovative' feature in the future:
 We have done a bunch of innovative things and one-plusses on top of
 the OO.o codebase, including accessibility work, the data pilot
 engine, and Office 2007 file format compatibility. 

 Of course 'innovative'(*) feature like Office 2007 compatibility and
 Data Pilot engine are already today in libreoffice...

 Norbert


 (*) aka IBM notorious NIH syndrome:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_Invented_Here
 ___
 LibreOffice mailing list
 LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
 http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] build problems with cppunit

2011-06-01 Thread Tor Lillqvist

 after a second run, because the file Microsoft.VC80.CRT.manifest was 
 missing, building was successful. So it seems, that the error only 
 occurs in a non-pro build. Is such a non-pro build possible for you? Do 
 you us non-pro builds?

I tried once (on Windows) and I failed miserably to make any sense out of it...

--tml


___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice] OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal

2011-06-01 Thread Allen Pulsifer

See the thread titled OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal post on
June 1 by Luke Kowalski of Oracle

 

http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/threa
d

 

___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] Unify DLLPOSTFIX values

2011-06-01 Thread Francois Tigeot

On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 07:00:56PM +0200, Francois Tigeot wrote:
 
 To the committers: please do not push this patch. I'll get around to do it
 when I'm sure it's okay.

New and improved version available here:
http://dl.wolfpond.org/0001-Unify-DLLPOSTFIX-value-on-all-platforms.v2.patch

-- 
Francois Tigeot
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] build problems with cppunit

2011-06-01 Thread Michael Meeks


On Tue, 2011-05-31 at 19:24 +0200, Regina Henschel wrote:
 It is the way I'm used to do in OOo. For OOo I would have to install 
 something like TortoiseSVN, which slows down my computer noticeable.

Ah - that's a pain; I guess git under cygwin would take up some space,
but not provide any day-to-day slow-down.

  So  I did not use it. I do not work fast, and trying to be uptodate
 all time, is impossible to me. I only build three or four times a year.

That is (incidentally) quite a wise way to work :-) good for you -
focusing on the important stuff.

 Actual I try to get a LO build to transfer and test my spline solutions, 
 which work already in my DEV300m106 build.

Great stuff, looking forward to seeing it.

All the best,

Michael.

-- 
 michael.me...@novell.com  , Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot


___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] FYI: Latest Oracle move wrt to OpenOffice.org

2011-06-01 Thread BRM

Original Message

From: Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com
Oracle announce:

http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/statements-on-openofficeorg-contribution-to-apache-nasdaq-orcl-1521400.htm
m

IBM is very happy to be able to continue Symphony without having to
give code back... (they seems to rejoyce at being able to do selective
GPL: i.e what is yours is mine... but what is mine is yours only for
the peice I don't care about and would like you to maintain instead):
http://www.edbrill.com/ebrill/edbrill.nsf/dx/openoffice-moving-to-apache-good-news-for-the-desktop-productivity-market
t
The new project at Apache strengthens IBM's ability to continue to
offer our own distributions of productivity tools based on the
OpenOffice code base and make our own contributions to reinforce the
overall community.

FYI - LGPL/GPL does not _require_ that code be contributed back to the
_community_. Projects work best when that happens, but that is not a
requirement.
The _requirement_ is that the code be accessible to those that the project is
being distributed to - e.g. end-users.

In the case of IBM, a user of Symphony would have been able to ask for the code
and IBM would have had to provide it per LGPL/GPL if that were the license.
It does not mean that IBM would have had to contribute back to LibreOffice,
OpenOffice, or anyone else.

Ben

___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] FYI: Latest Oracle move wrt to OpenOffice.org

2011-06-01 Thread Michael Meeks

Hi Ben,

On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 12:37 -0700, BRM wrote:
 FYI - LGPL/GPL does not _require_ that code be contributed back to the 
 _community_. Projects work best when that happens, but that is not a 
 requirement.

True - on the other hand, if millions of people have the right to get
the source code (a mass market product). If a copy-left license is used
- it means the cheapest way to do that is to provide the source to
everyone. If no (C) assignment is required, then those changes can
trivially be merged, of course that is the LibreOffice structure.

But a fair point, it is conditioned to distribution :-) It is also the
case that the Apache license has no requirement to share changes with
anyone. Some argue that this lack of requirement encourages sharing, I
am very un-persuaded by that personally and historically around OO.o
this has clearly not been the case ;-)

Regards,

Michael.

-- 
 michael.me...@novell.com  , Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot


___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] FYI: Latest Oracle move wrt to OpenOffice.org

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 2:37 PM, BRM bm_witn...@yahoo.com wrote:
Original Message

From: Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com
Oracle announce:

http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/statements-on-openofficeorg-contribution-to-apache-nasdaq-orcl-1521400.htm
m

In the case of IBM, a user of Symphony would have been able to ask for the
code
and IBM would have had to provide it per LGPL/GPL if that were the license.
It does not mean that IBM would have had to contribute back to LibreOffice,
OpenOffice, or anyone else.

But that is _not_ the license, and with Apache License they would not
have to make it available at ALL to anybody... just as is the case
with their proprietary OO fork today.
Hence the Enthusiastic blog campaign that flourished from IBMers in
the minutes/hours following the public announcement of Oracle's intend
to dump OpenOffice.org in Apache's lap.

But that's fine, IBM is free to conduct their business they way they
want, as long as there is no doubt in anybody's mind that that latest
Oracle' move has nothing to do with 'unifying/strengthening the
'community', but everything to do with Oracle's contractual obligation
to IBM and IBM desire to continue their proprietary fork.

OpenOffice.org version 1.1.4 was dual licensed under both the GNU
Lesser General Public License and Sun's own SISSL, which allowed for
entities to change the code without releasing their changes.
Therefore, IBM does not have to release the source code of Symphony.
source: http://ibm-lotus-symphony.software.informer.com/wiki/

If anybody in unconvinced why copyright assignment or Apache-like
full-copyright-license-no-string-attached are evil the quote above
should settle that.

Norbert
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] FYI: Latest Oracle move wrt to OpenOffice.org

I think this is about licenses.
 
Under the Apache 2.0 license, I expect we will see contributions from IBM and 
others for whom reciprocal licenses are toxic.  
 
I recently noticed that the ODF Toolkit Java bits are Apache licensed already, 
so that is also helpful.
 
With regard to community, documentation efforts, and other activities, The 
Document Foundation is a better fit because of its focused approach.  I don't 
think of Apache as so oriented to desktop software end-user support, QA, etc.  
We'll find out.  With regard to experience in OO.o development, I don't know 
what Oracle's OO.o team, especially those in Germany, will be doing now.  The 
surfacing of IBM contributors will be helpful though.
 
There is no reason Apache fixes and contributions can't be merged into 
LibreOffice the same way that the OO.o changes can come to LibreOffice.  It is 
not so smooth, and if there is a serious fork that will be problematic.  
 
My concern is that this could be a one-way street.  there is no way LGPL 
LibreOffice updates can go into the Apache code (unless the MPL avenue works or 
we choose to dual license with the Apache license as well).
 
At the moment, I feel a bit conflicted, caught straddling between preference 
for user discussions and bug submissions here, and my established desire to  
develop and contribute code that is acceptable  to Apache-licensed projects.   
And hey, Subversion works for me.
 
- Dennis
 
PS: I notice that the proposal to create an Apache Incubator omits the risk of 
their being a fork and divided developer community.  There is this presumption: 
Both Oracle and ASF agree that the OpenOffice.org development community, 
previously fragmented, would re-unite under ASF to ensure a stable and long 
term future for OpenOffice.org.  ASF would enable corporate, non-profit, and 
volunteer stakeholders to contribute code in a collaborative fashion.  I agree 
with what ASF would enable, but I don't think it is in the power of ASF and 
Oracle to ensure re-uniting of the development community.  
 
-Original Message-
From: libreoffice-bounces+dennis.hamilton=acm@lists.freedesktop.org 
[mailto:libreoffice-bounces+dennis.hamilton=acm@lists.freedesktop.org] On 
Behalf Of Tibby Lickle
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 11:03
To: libreoffice@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Libreoffice] FYI: Latest Oracle move wrt to OpenOffice.org
 
It's like throwing out the baby with the bath water - they're just throwing 
away so much experience. I certainly wouldn't want to be facing something the 
size of LO/OOo without a team who've had to deal with it before :)
 
I'm fairly new to LibreOffice and contributing to FOSS but the community have 
been highly supportive of my questions and cluelessness. I am fairly shy online 
and not very confident in my coding skills but there is so much infrastructure 
geared toward getting newbies to contribute that it has been pretty much 
painless to just get straight into it despite the terrifying size of the 
project.
 
I think that in part it's the people and in part it's the way things are being 
done. It seems a shame to waste an opportunity to integrate with a community 
with these advantages.
 
Eilidh
 
 
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com wrote:
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2011-June/013126.html
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] FYI: Latest Oracle move wrt to OpenOffice.org

2011-06-01 Thread Sophie Gautier


Hi Norbert,

On 01/06/2011 23:07, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
[...]


But that is _not_ the license, and with Apache License they would not
have to make it available at ALL to anybody... just as is the case
with their proprietary OO fork today.
Hence the Enthusiastic blog campaign that flourished from IBMers in
the minutes/hours following the public announcement of Oracle's intend
to dump OpenOffice.org in Apache's lap.

But that's fine, IBM is free to conduct their business they way they
want, as long as there is no doubt in anybody's mind that that latest
Oracle' move has nothing to do with 'unifying/strengthening the
'community', but everything to do with Oracle's contractual obligation
to IBM and IBM desire to continue their proprietary fork.

+1


OpenOffice.org version 1.1.4 was dual licensed under both the GNU
Lesser General Public License and Sun's own SISSL, which allowed for
entities to change the code without releasing their changes.
Therefore, IBM does not have to release the source code of Symphony.
source: http://ibm-lotus-symphony.software.informer.com/wiki/

If anybody in unconvinced why copyright assignment or Apache-like
full-copyright-license-no-string-attached are evil the quote above
should settle that.


Thanks for this (makes me feel less alone ;) and I wish you could be 
heard by some medias...

Kind regards
Sophie
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice] Idea For Auto-Fill Integration in Calc

2011-06-01 Thread Luke Brumfield

Upon using MS Office at work, I was given a large Spreadsheet of people I have 
to call. I was given user ID numbers but no Phone Numbers and only a few 
emails. I looked to see if I could find an easy way to have those user ID's 
somehow be the key for getting phone numbers from my Outlook contacts. The 
tedious copying of an ID number (which will always give one result) into my 
address book 400 times then copying their phone number just to put it back into 
the spreadsheet could be much easier due to the uniforn nature of the contact 
field. I compare it to the way music files are tagged and read. The metadata 
for each song has an artist, title, album, etc but the filename doesn't have to 
be anything important.

 I wouldnt know where to start coding, but using a spreadsheet for contacts is 
a popular practice and more tools for autofilling would be useful.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] FYI: Latest Oracle move wrt to OpenOffice.org

2011-06-01 Thread BRM

- Original Message

From: Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com
To: BRM bm_witn...@yahoo.com
Cc: libreoffice@lists.freedesktop.org
Sent: Wed, June 1, 2011 4:07:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Libreoffice] FYI: Latest Oracle move wrt to OpenOffice.org

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 2:37 PM, BRM bm_witn...@yahoo.com wrote:
Original Message

From: Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com
Oracle announce:

http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/statements-on-openofficeorg-contribution-to-apache-nasdaq-orcl-1521400.htm
m
m

IBM is very happy to be able to continue Symphony without having to
give code back... (they seems to rejoyce at being able to do selective
GPL: i.e what is yours is mine... but what is mine is yours only for
the peice I don't care about and would like you to maintain instead):
http://www.edbrill.com/ebrill/edbrill.nsf/dx/openoffice-moving-to-apache-good-news-for-the-desktop-productivity-market
t
t
The new project at Apache strengthens IBM's ability to continue to
offer our own distributions of productivity tools based on the
OpenOffice code base and make our own contributions to reinforce the
overall community.

WRT OOo, never said it was there. just correcting the mistaken belief that GPL
always means sharing code with everyone - it doesn't.
A belief all too common in the GPL world.

From: Michael Meeks michael.me...@novell.com
True - on the other hand, if millions of people have the right to get
the source code (a mass market product). If a copy-left license is used
- it means the cheapest way to do that is to provide the source to
everyone. If no (C) assignment is required, then those changes can
trivially be merged, of course that is the LibreOffice structure.

As I said, projects work best when code is contributed back.
That said, there are many successful projects that are not GPL or LGPL that
don't have that requirement with very flourishing communities - many lead by
ASF.

From: Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com
In the case of IBM, a user of Symphony would have been able to ask for the
code
and IBM would have had to provide it per LGPL/GPL if that were the license.
It does not mean that IBM would have had to contribute back to LibreOffice,
OpenOffice, or anyone else.

If anybody in unconvinced why copyright assignment or Apache-like
full-copyright-license-no-string-attached are evil the quote above
should settle that.

And there are useful benefits to both approaches. Personally I am typically
more
likely to go GPL;
that said, I am getting ready to spear head a small project - to be added to a
major project - that will need to be able to
allow the major project to do something similar - they have a dual licensing
system, with both commercial and GPL licenses,
and my employer makes use of the commercial license. We generally do not modify
the that project, so nothing to contribute back normally any how, but
the commercial license lets us build our (proprietary) products on top of that
major project, and my little project will be very useful to me at work - a
major
improvement over what is currently provided.

Just saying, there's more than one way to skin the cat (as the old saying
goes),
and there are multiple reason for choosing difference licensing methods,
many of which are very valid reasons - not all of which lead to GPL/LGPL.

Ben

___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] FYI: Latest Oracle move wrt to OpenOffice.org

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 3:23 PM, BRM bm_witn...@yahoo.com wrote:


 Just saying, there's more than one way to skin the cat (as the old saying 
 goes),
 and there are multiple reason for choosing difference licensing methods,
 many of which are very valid reasons - not all of which lead to GPL/LGPL.

To be clear I'm not saying that IBM reason for acting the way they are
is not 'valid'.
I'm saying that this is not 'valid' for me and _my_ reasons to
participate, and, I suppose/hope(*), for most people that chose to
participate in LibreOffice.

Norbert

(*) Actually it is a bit more than wishful thinking. There has been
significant evidences of numerous people indicating this (LGPL/no CLA)
was indeed a motivating factor in their decision to join LibreOffice.
and clearly that was also in the mind of the core group that started it too.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] FYI: Latest Oracle move wrt to OpenOffice.org

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
 PS: I notice that the proposal to create an Apache Incubator omits the risk
 of their being a fork and divided developer community.  There is this
 presumption: Both Oracle and ASF agree that the OpenOffice.org development
 community, previously fragmented, would re-unite under ASF to ensure a
 stable and long term future for OpenOffice.org.  ASF would enable corporate,
 non-profit, and volunteer stakeholders to contribute code in a collaborative
 fashion.  I agree with what ASF would enable, but I don't think it is in
 the power of ASF and Oracle to ensure re-uniting of the development
 community.

That part (Both Oracle and ASF agree that the OpenOffice.org
development community, previously fragmented, would re-unite under
ASF)
is pure hand-waving, bordering on outright lie. All parties authoring
that text must know the situation very well, and therefore must know
that
Apache License is no more likely to fly than Oracle's Copyright Assignment did.
The 'best' (from IBM point of view and for Oracle's ego) that can
occurs is that IBM manage to lobby current company that have
paid-employee (Attachmate, RedHat, Canonical,..)
on LibreOffice to re-assign them to a future ApacheOffice, drying up
significantly libreoffice core devs and pushing the recent influx of
volonteers
to greener pasture... (and no, that won't necessarily mean them
flocking to Apache... I, for one, never contributed to OpenOffice
under Sun/Oracle tenure... I'm sure i could find something else to do
if need be)
In other words going back to the model sarcasmthat worked so well in
past years/sarcarm

Norbert
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] Encrypted password -- NEW ENCRYPTION BUG!

2011-06-01 Thread Jan Holesovsky

Hi Dennis,

On 2011-05-31 at 12:59 -0700, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

 There is a new problem around encryption (and, consequentially,
 protection) in LO 3.4.0rc2 on x86 Windows.  This may be related to the
 non-operating Change Password feature.

Thank you very much for the bug report - would be great to use the
bugzilla (http://bugs.freedesktop.org) for that instead :-) 

Regards,
Kendy

___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice] [PUSHED] Re: [REVIEW] updated pt-BR dictionary

2011-06-01 Thread Jan Holesovsky

Hi Andras,

On 2011-05-30 at 10:42 +0200, Andras Timar wrote:

  I need one review for 3-4.
  http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/libs-extern-sys/commit/?id=f1c5626a27f72d5f7400f3e36fe0d4f2f3c5fe90
   
 This belongs to the commit above, makefile fixup.
 http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/libs-extern-sys/commit/?id=2bc91e9e20ad06d2210ffeb1a5d213f43fbbc44f

Cherry-picked both to the libreoffice-3-4 branch.

Regards,
Kendy

___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] FYI: Latest Oracle move wrt to OpenOffice.org

I also notice that the Apache CLA is not a copyright assignment, it is simply a 
non-exclusive license with the usual attestation that I have the right to grant 
the license and it is my original work.  (Patch contributions apparently don't 
even require a CLA, but committers do.)  One could make the same contribution 
to both an Apache project and LibreOffice, although it takes more work.  For 
individual contributors such as myself: 
http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt
 
So, in that regard, it is not like the transfer that I understand Sun/Oracle 
required for contributions to OO.o.
 
- Dennis
 
PS: It is personally appealing to me that the Apache project proposes to use 
the tools I already use for other projects (i.e., Subversion and JIRA).  I 
don't have any plans to contribute anything, but it is heartening to know that 
part of the learning curve would be handled for me if I chose to do so.
 
-Original Message-
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org] 
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2011-June/013136.html
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 13:12
To: 'Tibby Lickle'; 'libreoffice@lists.freedesktop.org'
Subject: RE: [Libreoffice] FYI: Latest Oracle move wrt to OpenOffice.org
 
I think this is about licenses.
Under the Apache 2.0 license, I expect we will see contributions from IBM and 
others for whom reciprocal licenses are toxic.  
 
I recently noticed that the ODF Toolkit Java bits are Apache licensed already, 
so that is also helpful.
[ ... ]
At the moment, I feel a bit conflicted, caught straddling between preference 
for user discussions and bug submissions here, and my established desire to  
develop and contribute code that is acceptable  to Apache-licensed projects.   
And hey, Subversion works for me.
- Dennis
PS: I notice that the proposal to create an Apache Incubator omits the risk of 
their being a fork and divided developer community.  There is this presumption: 
Both Oracle and ASF agree that the OpenOffice.org development community, 
previously fragmented, would re-unite under ASF to ensure a stable and long 
term future for OpenOffice.org.  ASF would enable corporate, non-profit, and 
volunteer stakeholders to contribute code in a collaborative fashion.  I agree 
with what ASF would enable, but I don't think it is in the power of ASF and 
Oracle to ensure re-uniting of the development community.  
 
[ ... ]
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] Encrypted password -- NEW ENCRYPTION BUG!

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37825

Once I was confident I had a reproducible bug, I wanted to provide a heads-up 
as quickly as possible.  The bug report took more work, but it has everything 
to demonstrate and reproduce the bug.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: libreoffice-bounces+dennis.hamilton=acm@lists.freedesktop.org 
[mailto:libreoffice-bounces+dennis.hamilton=acm@lists.freedesktop.org] On 
Behalf Of Jan Holesovsky
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 15:11
To: dennis.hamil...@acm.org
Cc: 'Marc Paré'; kyosh...@novell.com; libreoffice@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Libreoffice] Encrypted password -- NEW ENCRYPTION BUG!

Hi Dennis,

On 2011-05-31 at 12:59 -0700, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

 There is a new problem around encryption (and, consequentially,
 protection) in LO 3.4.0rc2 on x86 Windows.  This may be related to the 
 non-operating Change Password feature.

Thank you very much for the bug report - would be great to use the bugzilla 
(http://bugs.freedesktop.org) for that instead :-) 

Regards,
Kendy

___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] FYI: Latest Oracle move wrt to OpenOffice.org

2011-06-01 Thread Kohei Yoshida

Hi Dennis,

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:51 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
 PS: It is personally appealing to me that the Apache project proposes to use
 the tools I already use for other projects (i.e., Subversion and JIRA).  I
 don't have any plans to contribute anything, but it is heartening to know
 that part of the learning curve would be handled for me if I chose to do so.

I wouldn't be so thrilled about their use of Subversion if I were you.
 Many of us went through the period when OOo used Subversion back in
the old days, and all I can say is that Subversion had a massive
scalability issue dealing with a code base the size of OOo that it
brought more pain than its worth, so much so that it actually
accelerated the process of finding an alternative VCS.  Besides, once
you get used to the benefit of using a distributed VCS such as git and
mercurial, you can't really go back to the old, centralized VCS such
as Subversion.

There is a learning curve on distributed VCS, for sure, but it's well
worth it in the long term.

Kohei
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] FYI: Latest Oracle move wrt to OpenOffice.org

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 5:51 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
 I also notice that the Apache CLA is not a copyright assignment, it is
 simply a non-exclusive license with the usual attestation that I have the
 right to grant the license and it is my original work.  (Patch contributions
 apparently don't even require a CLA, but committers do.)  One could make the
 same contribution to both an Apache project and LibreOffice, although it
 takes more work.  For individual contributors such as myself:
 http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt



 So, in that regard, it is not like the transfer that I understand Sun/Oracle
 required for contributions to OO.o.

That is incorrect. the Sun/Oracle Ccontributor Agreement stipulate a
'join' ownership. http://www.openoffice.org/licenses/oca.pdf

It is essentially the same thing, except that in turn Apache grant
license to everybody to do what-ever they want with the code (i.e not
copy-left)
whereas Sun/Oracle where doing that only to a select few of their choosing.

So, from a Third-Party Closed License perspective Apache License is
'better'... but from a 'community' point of view it is just as bad.

Norbert
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] [ANN] List for collaboration around user experience topics created

2011-06-01 Thread Friedrich Strohmaier

Hi Thorsten, *,

Thorsten Behrens schrieb:

 with the design team (and the UX people, as part of that), and the
 hackers mostly working on separate lists, we thought it would be
 helpful to provide a low-traffic, easy-to-post-to third list, where
 interested parties of either side can meet - the list

That's a great idea. I wondered how the collaboration between hackers
and designers work up to now (I'm neither of both, but I'm convinced
this beeing a key for the success of LibreOffice as an end user product)

 * is unmoderated, i.e. you can post without subscribing

hmm on the tdf-based lists moderation means: mails of unsubscribed users
go through, but spam doesn't..

 * does not change Reply-To, so you're free to use that according to
   your needs
 * draft list topic: Meeting ground for hackers and UX experts -
   get advise here for user experience questions

cool! ;o))

 It would be great if people working on UI-relevant hacks could give
 a quick shout there - and conversely, it would be cool if a few UX
 experts could monitor that list, funnel the question to the design
 list  get back with some actionable results.

 The list address is: libreoffice-ux-adv...@lists.freedesktop.org

Hmm I'd like to see that list's home among the libreoffice.org family
for one main advantage those have: Each mail has in it's header an
Archived-At: tag.

The last, I posted on projects list has:
Archived-At: http://go.mail-archive.com/s5lAIIvEapds74WcmeN5ORhy5Zo=

You might examine any (fairly recent) tdf list's headers to find it.

This is a great feature particularly for this hybrid list regarding it's
role beeing glue between the two worlds and fuel for discussions in
each, throught very easy pointing at a contribution.

Additionally there is a very effective moderation mechanism by just
answering a mail for passing a posting to the list, which reduces pain
to do so. (I would volunteer in this case :o)) )

 (see also
 http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise)

Think about it - less work for You in total ;o))

Please keep me in CC to avoid delay - as I don't scan the dev list
daily.


Gruß/regards
-- 
Friedrich
Libreoffice-Box http://libreofficebox.org/
LibreOffice and more on CD/DVD images



___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: [Libreoffice] FYI: Latest Oracle move wrt to OpenOffice.org