Re: Actual process to make changes on the website
Hi all Am 11/27/2016 um 12:27 AM schrieb Andrea Pescetti: Raphael Bircher wrote: I noticed, that the web frontend of the Apache CMS don't work anymore. Well, it never really worked for me. I've always used SVN access to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk (or subdirectories of it). Ne manual process need access to the people Server, right? For some reasons (I don't know what) I can't connect people.apache.org :-( It is being retired. The partial replacement is home.apache.org but it's SFTP-only (no shell). Should I contact Infra to solve the problem, or is there a other way to update the website? You checkout the above repository or one of the subdirectories (for the tree see: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/ ) on your local computer, you make changes and you commit. Then there is the publishing step, or you just wait for someone to publish the site; this is unchanged, but if you need details on this too just ask after you have committed your changes. Ok, just got it,you need publish.pl and a perl intepreter on windows ;-) Regards, Raphael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Actual process to make changes on the website
Hi Andrea Am 11/27/2016 um 12:27 AM schrieb Andrea Pescetti: Raphael Bircher wrote: I noticed, that the web frontend of the Apache CMS don't work anymore. Well, it never really worked for me. I've always used SVN access to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk (or subdirectories of it). Ne manual process need access to the people Server, right? For some reasons (I don't know what) I can't connect people.apache.org :-( It is being retired. The partial replacement is home.apache.org but it's SFTP-only (no shell). Should I contact Infra to solve the problem, or is there a other way to update the website? You checkout the above repository or one of the subdirectories (for the tree see: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/ ) on your local computer, you make changes and you commit. Then there is the publishing step, or you just wait for someone to publish the site; this is unchanged, but if you need details on this too just ask after you have committed your changes. Thx for your information The thing with the SVN I know. I'm interested in the publishing step. Regards, Raphael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Actual process to make changes on the website
Raphael Bircher wrote: I noticed, that the web frontend of the Apache CMS don't work anymore. Well, it never really worked for me. I've always used SVN access to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk (or subdirectories of it). Ne manual process need access to the people Server, right? For some reasons (I don't know what) I can't connect people.apache.org :-( It is being retired. The partial replacement is home.apache.org but it's SFTP-only (no shell). Should I contact Infra to solve the problem, or is there a other way to update the website? You checkout the above repository or one of the subdirectories (for the tree see: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/ ) on your local computer, you make changes and you commit. Then there is the publishing step, or you just wait for someone to publish the site; this is unchanged, but if you need details on this too just ask after you have committed your changes. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Actual process to make changes on the website
Hi all I noticed, that the web frontend of the Apache CMS don't work anymore. Ne manual process need access to the people Server, right? For some reasons (I don't know what) I can't connect people.apache.org :-( Should I contact Infra to solve the problem, or is there a other way to update the website? Regards Raphael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Request to join back the PMC
Hi all In february 2015 I stepped back from the OpenOffice PMC. I stepped backi because I have no more time to work on the project. Now I want to come back. Let me know, if this is ok or not. Regards Raphael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Questions about AOO Users
On 24/11/16 08:29, RA Stehmann wrote: > distribute AOO, all figures are not really significant to identify the number > of users. Twould be much more appropriate to recommend software on the basis of the client's proposed use case, using examples of users with similar use-cases, that demonstrate how suitable, or unsuitable the proposed solution is. jonathon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [Google+] YouTube channel
Hi Matthias Am 11/26/2016 um 11:18 AM schrieb Matthias Seidel: Hi Raphael, After some "try and error" I think it is now visible, if you want to have a look? regards, Matthias Yea, it's on, thanks a load Regards Raphael - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Hash values of downloaded files
On 11/26/2016 4:22 AM, Brian Barker wrote: ... As I explained, the user quite properly derived the hash value of the installation file. He then - understandably but wrongly - performed the same process to derive the hash value *of* the hash file - instead of inspecting the value provided in that file. Not surprisingly, these values never matched, whatever version he tried or mirror source he used. You and I will think that this misunderstanding is unlikely, but that is because we already understand how hashes are used to confirm the integrity of files in this way. As I mentioned, the web site - at http://www.openoffice.org/download/checksums.html - uses expressions such as "If both hash values do not match" and "When both hash values match", and the use of the word "match" is asking the users to seek similarity. The values to be compared are not "hash values" in the same way. It is surely not surprising that this user therefore believed hat he was being asked to do similar things with both files? In any case, whatever you and I think, that is what he did. I'm suggesting that we should believe the evidence. Can you suggest an alternative wording that would be clearer? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Hash values of downloaded files
Am 11/26/2016 01:22 PM, schrieb Brian Barker: At 22:44 24/11/2016 +0100, Marcus Noname wrote: Am 11/24/2016 10:25 PM, schrieb Brian Barker: I've been hearing from a intending user of OpenOffice who was repeatedly finding the hashes on his downloads did not match. He (I think he was a "he") had repeatedly downloaded form different mirrors but could not get a match. He even, he says, tried other versions and other operating systems. Clearly there was something wrong at his end. Can you guess yet? as you don't write from where he has done the downloads, this could be a source of error. Thanks for this. That was the first thing I checked, of course - and yes, he was using the official site. 1. Download OpenOffice from here [1]. Er, where? No footnote! But that's not the problem ... sorry, I wanted to add the "http://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html; webpage. [your long explanation] ... or in shorter words. He has generated the hash value of the downloaded installation file *and* of the hash file (*.md5 or *.sha256 file extension) itself. And then finally compared both with each other. OK, this indeed doesn't work. Unfortunately, you missed to tell us the user's operating system and how he has generated the has value. So, I assume he is working on Windows and has used a tool. Then you can find the following paragraph on the instructions webpage "http://www.openoffice.org/download/checksums.html#hash_win;. Point #4 says to open the hash file to get the value. For me that is pretty clear. But I'm not a native speaker, so maybe there is room for misunderstanding. Or do you mean another section of the instruction webpage? Then please tell us. PS: Please don't take it personally. However, I haven't heard ever about doing the hash comparison this way. And when I look *into* the *.md5 or *.sha256 hash file I would see that this is the value that I need to compare with the generated one. Thanks Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Hash values of downloaded files
At 22:44 24/11/2016 +0100, Marcus Noname wrote: Am 11/24/2016 10:25 PM, schrieb Brian Barker: I've been hearing from a intending user of OpenOffice who was repeatedly finding the hashes on his downloads did not match. He (I think he was a "he") had repeatedly downloaded form different mirrors but could not get a match. He even, he says, tried other versions and other operating systems. Clearly there was something wrong at his end. Can you guess yet? as you don't write from where he has done the downloads, this could be a source of error. Thanks for this. That was the first thing I checked, of course - and yes, he was using the official site. 1. Download OpenOffice from here [1]. Er, where? No footnote! But that's not the problem ... 2. Download the hash file from the same webpage ... Now you are teaching me how to do this, so let's be clear. You know what to do. I know what to do. Even the naive user now knows what to do. Originally he made a mistake, but he eventually realised what he had done. I understand the mistake and why he made it. You don't (yet) understand what he did or why the web site instructions are perhaps not clear enough to prevent this mistake by users. I'm hoping I can get you (or whoever) to understand this and perhaps improve the web site. Sorry, I don't understand what he has done. Comparing the file with itself? No, of course not. I think that the fact that you found my description (which I've re-read and I'm sure is clear) didn't lead you immediately to an appreciation of the problem only goes to show how the necessary wording can be confusing. That's my point. Incidentally, did no-one else want understand my point? Let's look at your description instead of at the web site. At point 3, you say to "generate the hash value from the downloaded OpenOffice file". At point 4, you say to "[c]ompare it with the value of the downloaded hash file". There are two tiny words there that differ between the instructions: you mean something very different by a value *from* a file and a value *of* a file. In the first case you mean a value derived from a file by processing it through a program; in the second you mean to refer to a value stored in a file. Can you see that a user might easily miss that very important distinction? As I explained, the user quite properly derived the hash value of the installation file. He then - understandably but wrongly - performed the same process to derive the hash value *of* the hash file - instead of inspecting the value provided in that file. Not surprisingly, these values never matched, whatever version he tried or mirror source he used. You and I will think that this misunderstanding is unlikely, but that is because we already understand how hashes are used to confirm the integrity of files in this way. As I mentioned, the web site - at http://www.openoffice.org/download/checksums.html - uses expressions such as "If both hash values do not match" and "When both hash values match", and the use of the word "match" is asking the users to seek similarity. The values to be compared are not "hash values" in the same way. It is surely not surprising that this user therefore believed hat he was being asked to do similar things with both files? In any case, whatever you and I think, that is what he did. I'm suggesting that we should believe the evidence. If there are any mistakes or room for improvements, then please tell us. I thought I had. The web page separately sets out instructions for different methods of deriving the hash value. In the couple of lines at the top, there is only one sentence explaining the purpose. There is simply no statement that the hash file already contains the *answer* that should match what is derived from the file being checked. The later use of expressions such as "both hash values do not match" and "both hash values match" gives a strong impression that we are comparing like with like. There are two hash values, we are being told, which should match. It's not surprising that a user expects to derive two hash values in the same way. It would be better not to call both values "hash values" but to distinguish between the hash value (derived form the file being checked) with the "comparison value" or "check value" or "correct result" or whatever contained in (and not derived from) the hash value file. Brian Barker - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Building with the latest SDK on Windows
Am 11/26/2016 02:53 AM, schrieb Pedro Giffuni: I would expect trouble building with the latest MSVC: at least python requires some changes in the build support and it may also involve losing support for Windows XP. AFAIK we can still support Win XP because technichal changes hadn't any influence until now. When there is a good reason to build with an updated SDK then loosing support for Win XP shouldn't be a problem IMHO. Microsoft has stopped its support on any level on April, 2014. So, when parts of OpenOffice wouldn't run like before, then it's acceptable. And when OpenOffice wouldn't run or install at all, then so be it. My 2 ct. I think it should be possible, and advantageous, to update to MSVC 2010 first. Note that Apache committers have access to the MSDN but the process to get access to it has changed a couple of times. Someone in the PMC should know ;). Yes, here and there I see some mails from Apache members regarding "How can I get access to MSDN?" but I haven't followed this. So, at the moment I cannot tell you what to do. Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [Google+] YouTube channel
Hi Raphael, After some "try and error" I think it is now visible, if you want to have a look? regards, Matthias Am 26.11.2016 um 01:14 schrieb Raphael Bircher: > Hi Matthias > > > Am 11/25/2016 um 3:28 PM schrieb Matthias Seidel: >> Accompanied with our Google+ page there is also a YouTube channel: >> >> https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5VAaY4mqQVhNe8j7fZCEfw > I have a playlist for my Apache OpenOffice Video on my Channel > https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLPVE2QuHDcl92Ie5kUO_DU-UFn3WZ50Qh > > I don't know, but maybe you are able to include playlists on your Channel > > > Regards Raphael > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [PROPOSAL] Buildbot builds should include more than en-US only
Am 11/24/2016 11:04 PM, schrieb Matthias Seidel: To be more precise, I mean the buildbots listed here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Buildbot+info And especially the 4.1.4 for linux64: https://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/install/41x/ @Damjan: Do you have access to the buildbots? Can you halp us here? Thanks Marcus Am 24.11.2016 um 22:31 schrieb Marcus: Am 11/24/2016 08:43 PM, schrieb Matthias Seidel: +1 Especially for Linux64. 64bit is almost standard now, so we need localized builds from the build bots. 32bit has plenty of them... @Don: AFAIK you were working on the buildbots. Can you please change the setup so that we can get AOO builds with en-US, de, pt, ja? Thanks Marcus Am 19.09.2016 um 20:08 schrieb Marcus: I remember that old times at Sun where we have done builds with more than just en-US. In order to cover problems that could be language-related we have built: - en-US - as default - de - for the lazy German guys ;-) , can be left out now - pt - as these language has mostly the longest strings - one Asian language (ko, ja, zh-CN, zh-TW) to cover BIDI and font problems So, I suggest to expand the build.lst to this setup. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
fatal error on build
I have an error: In file included from /home/legine/workspace/aoo/main/udm/source/html/htmlitem.cxx:24:0: ../inc/precomp.h:32:30: fatal error: cosv/csv_precomp.h: No such file or directory #include do I need to set some variable for this? the definition is in main/cosv/inc/cosv/ Thanks for the help All the best Peter - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Build error on fonts
nvm. I fixed it. it seems that I needed to rerun bootstrap. On 26.11.2016 10:07, Peter Kovacs wrote: Hello all, I try to advance again on my build. And I run into an error again: dmake: Error: -- `../../unxlngx6.pro/misc/1725634df4bb3dcb1b2c91a6175f8789-GentiumBasic_1102.unpack' not found, and can't be made Why could it be that the File is not there? all the best Peter - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Build error on fonts
Hello all, I try to advance again on my build. And I run into an error again: dmake: Error: -- `../../unxlngx6.pro/misc/1725634df4bb3dcb1b2c91a6175f8789-GentiumBasic_1102.unpack' not found, and can't be made Why could it be that the File is not there? all the best Peter - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
