On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin <
robertburrelldon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Marcus (OOo)
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > When Oracle will shutdown the main server for distributing release files,
> > then also the mirrors will delete them (except GWDG wh
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> When Oracle will shutdown the main server for distributing release files,
> then also the mirrors will delete them (except GWDG which I've asked to host
> the files longer).
>
> So, we have to rebuild a little mirror system if we want this
Am 06/19/2011 10:45 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
For what it's worth, as many have noted, I'm sure, OOo uses for
distribution a host—a vast host—of volunteer mirrors. Many include
legacy releases already.
And then we should just keep having this. As far as I know,
htt
OK, good to know.
Am 06/19/2011 04:23 AM, schrieb Greg Stein:
Go look at archive.org sometime. It seems just fine if they crawl and save
the entire OOo site. Has nothing to do with licensing.
Cheers,
-g
On Jun 18, 2011 9:56 PM, "Luke Kowalski" wrote:
Simon,
I am not sure that everyone woul
Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
> For what it's worth, as many have noted, I'm sure, OOo uses for
> distribution a host—a vast host—of volunteer mirrors. Many include
> legacy releases already.
And then we should just keep having this. As far as I know,
http://archive.services.openoffice.org/
dynamicall
Go look at archive.org sometime. It seems just fine if they crawl and save
the entire OOo site. Has nothing to do with licensing.
Cheers,
-g
On Jun 18, 2011 9:56 PM, "Luke Kowalski" wrote:
> Simon,
>
> I am not sure that everyone would be comfortable with you arranging to
have the entire site scr
Simon,
I am not sure that everyone would be comfortable with you arranging to have the
entire site screen scraped and all the releases archived at a third party
service / location. The site contains a mixture of content. This is not
usnusual for open source project sites. For example, on MySql.
HI,
On 2011-06-18, at 18:08 , Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> +1
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Simon Phipps [mailto:si...@webmink.com]
> Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2011 13:46
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Subversion history
>
> On Fri, Jun
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 10:27 PM, Marcus Lange wrote:
> Am 06/18/2011 10:45 PM, schrieb Simon Phipps:
>
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 19:00, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>>>
But would ASF be able to distribute such binary releases (and the
>>
+1
-Original Message-
From: Simon Phipps [mailto:si...@webmink.com]
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2011 13:46
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Subversion history
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 19:00, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>
Am 06/18/2011 10:45 PM, schrieb Simon Phipps:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 19:00, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
But would ASF be able to distribute such binary releases (and the
corresponding sources) that include non-Oracle LGPL bits?
Probably not, bu
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 19:00, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
> > But would ASF be able to distribute such binary releases (and the
> > corresponding sources) that include non-Oracle LGPL bits?
>
> Probably not, but in more recent years, we've been tal
Hi,
Am 17.06.2011 14:55, schrieb Jens-Heiner Rechtien:
> The OOO340 codeline contains the DEV300_m106 tag so OOO340 is definitely
> branched of DEV300_m106, which is incidentally also the very last
> milestone we did on DEV300. Using m103 does not make sense at all. But
> if the grant includes all
On Jun 17, 2011, at 1:12 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 08:55, Jens-Heiner Rechtien wrote:
>> ...
>> The OOO340 codeline contains the DEV300_m106 tag so OOO340 is definitely
>> branched of DEV300_m106, which is incidentally also the very last milestone
>> we did on DEV300. Using
On 06/17/2011 10:12 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 08:55, Jens-Heiner Rechtien wrote:
...
The OOO340 codeline contains the DEV300_m106 tag so OOO340 is definitely
branched of DEV300_m106, which is incidentally also the very last milestone
we did on DEV300. Using m103 does not mak
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 08:55, Jens-Heiner Rechtien wrote:
>...
> The OOO340 codeline contains the DEV300_m106 tag so OOO340 is definitely
> branched of DEV300_m106, which is incidentally also the very last milestone
> we did on DEV300. Using m103 does not make sense at all. But if the grant
> inc
Am 06/17/2011 01:40 PM, schrieb Marcus Lange:
Am 06/17/2011 01:55 AM, schrieb Greg Stein:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 19:00, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
If you want the older binary releases, then make a proposal and a
list.
OK, I'll compile the list of archived release files.
But would ASF be able to
On 06/17/2011 10:42 AM, Mathias Bauer wrote:
On 17.06.2011 10:01, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Mathias
Bauerwrote:
If we did it this way, my recommendation would be not to use the
DEV300m103
milestone (that was used in the grant) but the most recent OOO340m1
milesto
Am 06/17/2011 01:55 AM, schrieb Greg Stein:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 19:00, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
If you want the older binary releases, then make a proposal and a list.
OK, I'll compile the list of archived release files.
But would ASF be able to distribute such binary releases (and the
corr
Am 06/17/2011 12:49 PM, schrieb Reizinger Zoltán:
2011.06.17. 11:26 keltezéssel, Stephan Bergmann írta:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Mathias
Bauerwrote:
On 17.06.2011 10:01, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
The other way around, DEV300 (tip rev 6b24005a31b8) past DEV300_m103
(why
was such an ol
2011.06.17. 11:26 keltezéssel, Stephan Bergmann írta:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Mathias Bauerwrote:
On 17.06.2011 10:01, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
The other way around, DEV300 (tip rev 6b24005a31b8) past DEV300_m103 (why
was such an old version chosen, anyway?) contains changesets not
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Mathias Bauer wrote:
> On 17.06.2011 10:01, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
>
>> The other way around, DEV300 (tip rev 6b24005a31b8) past DEV300_m103 (why
>
> was such an old version chosen, anyway?) contains changesets not in OOO340
>> (tip rev c904c1944462), but for new
On 17.06.2011 10:01, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Mathias Bauerwrote:
If we did it this way, my recommendation would be not to use the DEV300m103
milestone (that was used in the grant) but the most recent OOO340m1
milestone. This would force me to check my list for a
This is awesome work, guys.
I just got worried by a couple phrases in email (it happens!), but it
looks like things are good. I understand the "negative" aspect, so I
can see that can be easier. That works just fine, although the
Software Grant needs positive (easy enough).
Moving up to a more re
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Mathias Bauer wrote:
> If we did it this way, my recommendation would be not to use the DEV300m103
> milestone (that was used in the grant) but the most recent OOO340m1
> milestone. This would force me to check my list for any new files, but that
> isn't a big prob
On 16.06.2011 21:39, Greg Stein wrote:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 07:18, Mathias Bauer wrote:
...
I now have a list of files that IMHO can't be part of the software grant. A
list with all other files is worked on by Oracle.
Umm. I don't think Oracle is working on any additional lists. We have
t
While here, on a slightly different topic:
Some old promotional demos of SUN's OpenOffice carried
a nice set of fonts. Perhaps Oracle may make those
available? And if so, I wonder about the license for
those: ASL 2.0 would be fine but font licenses is
something I doubt anyone, except SIL, has give
+1
-Original Message-
From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 16:56
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Subversion history
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 19:00, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>>> If you want the older binary releases, then make a pro
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 19:00, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>>> If you want the older binary releases, then make a proposal and a list.
>>
>> OK, I'll compile the list of archived release files.
>
> But would ASF be able to distribute such binary releases (and the
> corresponding sources) that include non
Also, there will probably be content that is archived elsewhere. I
think it is highly unlikely any of the previous OOo releases could be
relicensed.
That would probably preclude transferring them to ASF. This is not to
say that this content should disappear, only that some types of content
ca
>> If you want the older binary releases, then make a proposal and a list.
>
> OK, I'll compile the list of archived release files.
But would ASF be able to distribute such binary releases (and the
corresponding sources) that include non-Oracle LGPL bits?
(Assuming the Oracle-owned LGPL bits of O
Am 06/17/2011 12:13 AM, schrieb Greg Stein:
Hi Greg,
Andrew (Oracle) is not making a list. We have to provide a list of
stuff that we would like.
arrh, yes, of course. ;-)
If you want the older binary releases, then make a proposal and a
list.
OK, I'll compile the list of archived release
Andrew (Oracle) is not making a list. We have to provide a list of
stuff that we would like. Oracle can only grant us permission for the
materials they own; they may be willing to do a bit of archeology to
determine that, but most of the burden is about us.
If you want the older binary releases, t
Hi Andrew,
great to see that also the CWS data will be granted. Then also the very
most recent work is saved. :-)
Speaking of archives:
What about the older binary releases you can get here:
http://archive.services.openoffice.org/pub/openoffice-archive/
When the master server at Oracle is go
On 6/16/2011 12:39 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 07:18, Mathias Bauer wrote:
...
I now have a list of files that IMHO can't be part of the software grant. A
list with all other files is worked on by Oracle.
Umm. I don't think Oracle is working on any additional lists. We have
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 07:18, Mathias Bauer wrote:
>...
> I now have a list of files that IMHO can't be part of the software grant. A
> list with all other files is worked on by Oracle.
Umm. I don't think Oracle is working on any additional lists. We have
to come up with the list of files that w
On 14.06.2011 19:32, Greg Stein wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 13:17, Mathias Bauer wrote:
On 14.06.2011 19:04, Greg Stein wrote:
...
Right now, I believe our biggest impediment to an import is the list
of "which files?". We know there are gaps... we need to figure out
which files are necessar
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 13:17, Mathias Bauer wrote:
> On 14.06.2011 19:04, Greg Stein wrote:
>...
>> Right now, I believe our biggest impediment to an import is the list
>> of "which files?". We know there are gaps... we need to figure out
>> which files are necessary to fill those gaps, then requ
Hi Greg,
On 14.06.2011 19:04, Greg Stein wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 12:34, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
...
One doubt I have is whether the historic metadata from the previous OOo
Hg/bugzilla will also be imported. I would guess in the SVN repository
we want to start from scratch with the donated
39 matches
Mail list logo
