Introduction - NEW volunteer

[Larry Sadler]

Salutations

Quick profile:

 * started using StarOffice 4.x
 * have been using OO regularly then exclusively since
 * hold Bachelor of Business and Master of Business degrees
 * major in finance, minor in computers
 * Financial Manager for 8 years
 * IT Services Manager for 8 years
 * currently freelance
 * not a programmer
 * located in Toronto Canada [at least for now]
 * only fluent in English
 * experienced with not for profit organizations
 * open to suggestions where\how to jump in

L
--
Larry Sadler 416.354.2952

Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Jürgen Schmidt]

On 11/27/12 4:12 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> I was only talking about cleaning up my working copies from the SVN.  I have 
> no desire to touch Symphony on the SVN (and I believe the incubator SVN copy 
> is now read-only).
> 

perfect, means you are save now.

For all other people who are interested in improving the code or want to
help merging fixes/features from the Symphony code into trunk. Feel free
to analyze the code to understand it, extract a patch or whatever and
when you run into a problem with a license header come back on the dev
list and we will help you to solve this problem. The license header
shouldn't prevent anybody from doing some real work.

As we have pointed out now several times we have no plans to release
this code and it is only for reference and to cherry pick specific
features, fixes etc. from the code and merge it into trunk.

The reason is quite simple, we don't want to waste our time with stupid
editing work that is completely useless. We have really enough other
things to do.

When we think that there is nothing more in the Symphony tree that is
worth to merge we can and will remove the code. We can do that
immediately when people believe it is a real problem.

But please let us move forward with useful and important work to improve
our product. And please stop this fruitless discussion. If there are
real concerns about the code in SVN start a new thread as Rob mentioned
and seek lazy consensus for the removal.

Just my personal opinion

Juergen


>  - Dennis
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 15:18
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
> 
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
>> I don't think the web site situation is an equivalent.  I also don't think 
>> the choice of base for integration of Symphony features is relevant.
>>
>> I am concerned about the Symphony tree being in the public SVN and being an 
>> attractive nuisance.  If it is not going to be morphed into something that 
>> can be worked with and integrated by the community of contributors, I 
>> recommend that it be gone.
>>
> 
> Feel free to make a proposal in a new thread, seek lazy consensus and
> act on it after 72 hours.  You have karma.
> 
> -Rob
> 
>> (Of course, I can remove it from any working copy that I possess, and I 
>> shall do that in switching to the new repository location.)
>>
>>  - Dennis
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
>> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 14:25
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>>  wrote:
>>>   "Remember, we wrote it."
>>>   Well, I suppose the notion of "work for hire" might provide some nuance 
>>> to "we".
>>>
>>
>> And the CCLA covers that side of it.
>>
>>>   I gather this means that IBM-associated contributors will make 
>>> ALv2-covered contributions directly to the SVN and/or via patches and that 
>>> is the provenance there is.  That should safeguard the interests of the ASF.
>>>
>>>   So what is the point of there being a Symphony portion of the SVN tree?
>>>
>>
>> Go back to the discussion on this list when we initially checked it
>> in.  We had a long discussion about what to do with that code, with
>> the two main options being: 1) Make /symphony be the new trunk and
>> merge the delta from AOO 3.4 into Symphony, or 2) Keep the current AOO
>> trunk and merge selected features from Symphony into the AOO trunk.
>> The decision ultimately was to do 2), what we refer to as the "slow
>> merge".  Since we took that direction the /symphony tree has not
>> undergone development.  Its main value (in retrospect) was to support
>> that decision making process.  Of course, if we had decided to take
>> the other approach then /symphony would become the new trunk and the
>> usual clean up activities would have occurred on the way to releasing
>> that trunk.
>>
>> Remember, IP Cleanup is not just about changing the headers.  It is a
>> longer process, culminating in a vote to accept the code base.  Once a
>> code base is accepted, we should be releasing it and doing the other
>> kinds of maintenance functions -- security patches, etc. -- that a
>> responsible PMC does for its releases.  But I see zero volunteers
>> stepping forward to maintain a second office suite in this project.
>> So it makes no sense to me to spend time on a tree that we're never
>> going to release.
>>
>>>   I now agree with a comment that you made in a previous discussion about 
>>> this.  I think it should be removed if it is never going to be IP-scrubbed.
>>>
>>
>> We have another direction in Subversion that is also odd.  It has an
>> eclectic set of licenses on its files.  In some cases it includes
>> files where we cannot clearly identify the license.  Instead of
>> hypotheticals we have actual exa

Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Yong Lin Ma]

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 5:42 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:

>   "Remember, we wrote it."
>   Well, I suppose the notion of "work for hire" might provide some nuance
> to "we".
>
>   I gather this means that IBM-associated contributors will make
> ALv2-covered contributions directly to the SVN and/or via patches and that
> is the provenance there is.  That should safeguard the interests of the ASF.
>
>   So what is the point of there being a Symphony portion of the SVN tree?
>

The Symphony portion is a good reference if a contributor want to fix a
defect already been fixed in Symphony.
The gallery, art works are also valuable and can be integrated into AOO.
It save contributors from IBM a lot of effort on additional legal process.
Back to a couple of years ago, we need went through internal legal process
every time we want to contributed something to OpenOffice.org.





>
>   I now agree with a comment that you made in a previous discussion about
> this.  I think it should be removed if it is never going to be IP-scrubbed.
>
>  - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 10:41
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton 
> wrote:
> > Is this to be based on the Symphony code?
> >
>
> Dennis,  we have Symphony code within IBM.  Remember, we wrote it.
> Whatever code we check in is covered by signed ICLA's and CCLA's.
> That should address all reasonable concerns with regards to the
> provenance of the code.
>
> -Rob
>
> >  - Dennis
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Steve Yin [mailto:steve.yin@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 01:07
> > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
> >
> > Thanks for both of your suggestions. The time table will be provided
> later.
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Jürgen Schmidt  >wrote:
> >
> >> On 11/26/12 6:59 AM, Steve Yin wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > I propose to integrate IAccessible2 as an accessibility feature for
> AOO
> >> > 4.0. A wiki for the effort estimation can be found here:
> >> >
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+IAccessible2
> >> > Here is my question. Should I create a feature in AOO Bugzilla and a
> >> branch
> >> > for development?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Hi Steve,
> >>
> >> this is good news. I would suggest that you give some details what do
> >> you expect to implement when. The integration of IAccessible2 is a
> >> bigger task and I don't see it all integrated in the next 4 month or so.
> >> Creating a new feature task in bugzilla would be the normal procedure
> >> and a new branch is a must from my perspective for this huge piece of
> work.
> >>
> >> Good to see progress on this important integration.
> >>
> >> Juergen
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Steve Yin
> >
>
>


-- 
Regards

Yong Lin Ma

Re: Edit and create new pages in wiki.openoffice.org

[Andrew Douglas Pitonyak]

On 11/26/2012 08:59 PM, Salva wrote:

Hello

User: Salva
Mail: sa...@open-office.es
ID user: 50644

I am an active member of the wiki
I'm currently editing the pages for StarBasic in Spanish
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/ES/Manuales/GuiaAOO/TemasAvanzados/Macros/StarBasic

I can not add new pages
Please update my publishing rights

Thanks
I am replying, only to say that I looked around, and it is not obvious 
that an "administrator", I don't see how to set this to be allowed 
So, how is this now handled?


--
Andrew Pitonyak
My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt
Info:  http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php

Re: Could anybody who has MS word 97 help to verify bug 35763?

[Ji Yan]

There are two scenarios should be covered while you testing this defect.
1. Import:
a. Create sample document which contains color underling with Word 97
b. Open it in AOO
c. Verify if the color underling shows correctly.
2. Export:
a. Create sample document which contains color underling with AOO
b. Open it in Word 97.
c. Verify if the color underling shows correctly.

If the verify point of above two scenarios are correctly, then you can
change defect status to "VERIFIED".


On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Rob Weir  wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Ji Yan  wrote:
> > Hi Rob,
> >
> >  Have you verify this bug? Has it been fixed already?
> >
>
> I do have Office 97.  But what part needs to be verified?  Is there a
> document I need to load?  Do you have the test document?
>
> -Rob
>
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 2:58 AM, Damjan Jovanovic  >
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 4:25 AM, lou ql  wrote:
> >> >> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=35763
> >> >>
> >> >> It's about the import/export of underling color, I have verified
> with MS
> >> >> word 2003, but I don't have MS word 97, could anybody help with this?
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks.
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Regards,
> >> >> Lou QingLe
> >> >
> >> > On a related note, is there any possibility of setting up one or more
> >> > servers with (as much as possible) every possible version of MS office
> >> > ever made, and offering VNC access to them, so it can help developers
> >> > test compatibility issues without having their own MS office copy?
> >> >
> >>
> >> I doubt the Microsoft EULA would allow this.
> >>
> >> But one thing Microsoft has done is offer a free subscription to MSDN
> >> for Apache Committers.  That allows us to download ISO images for
> >> previous versions of Windows and Office for testing purposes.  This
> >> plus VirtualBox is a good solution for a local machine.
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >> > Regards
> >> > Damjan Jovanovic
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> > Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
>



-- 


Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji

Re: Apache OpenOffice / Linuxday 2012 in Dornbirn

[Yue Helen]

Hi Detlef,

Thanks for the sharing! although I do not understand German ^o^

It would be helpful if you/or others can translate it into English, and
copy to marketing mail list (market...@openoffice.apache.org). I believe
it's a requirement for marketing to clarify the message.

Helen

2012/11/26 Jürgen Schmidt 

> Hi Detlef,
>
> thanks for sharing this informative report and thanks for representing
> AOO on the Linuxday.
>
> The report is good and the outcome is that users welcome that OpenOfifce
> is still alive and found a new home under the ASF. But it also shows
> that many, many user are confused and don't really understand the
> difference between AOO and LO. Something where we can work on to
> communicate our message more clearly.
>
> Juergen
>
> On 11/25/12 11:26 PM, Detlef Nannen wrote:
> > In german
> > ... translate.google.com is your friend ;-)
> > --
> >
> > Hallo zusammen,
> >
> > Raphael Bircher und ich waren gestern für Apache OpenOffice (AOO) auf dem
> > Linuxday in Dornbirn.
> >
> > Zuerst: Die Messe war von der Linux User Group Dornbirn super
> > organisiert. Ich kann
> > nur sagen, Hut ab! Bilder findet Ihr sicher in den nächsten Tagen auf
> > www.linuxday.at
> >
> > Wir waren gemeinsam mit LibreOffice (LO) an einen Abschnitt platziert.
> Das
> > gab gleich Fragen nach dem Unterschied und dem Verhältnis zwischen
> LO/AOO.
> > Also einiges an interessanten Gesprächen am Stand, die auch
> > Verunsicherung über  LO/AOO erkennen ließ. Die Entscheidung, was für die
> > Zukunft die richtige Software ist, lag einigen doch sehr am Herzen.
> > Besonders der einzige erkennbare Firmenbesucher sprach uns darauf an,
> > wie er sich gegenüber seinen Kunden verhalten kann, wenn er als Berater
> > selbst nicht erkennen kann wohin die Reise geht. Weiter einige
> > Privatpersonen, Lehrer und andere Standbetreiber.
> > Das angenehmste war für mich, dass fast alle Besucher erfreut
> > feststellten, dass es OpenOffice noch gibt, und das AOO von ihnen wohl
> > als DER Nachfolger oder die Weiterführung angesehen wird. (Schön, dass
> > es OpenOffice wieder/noch gibt!)
> >
> > Unsere Flyer, 4 schnelle Plakate, und mein sehr alter IBM-Thinkpad mit
> > AOO waren auf Ubuntu alles was wir an Messematerial hatten. Ohne unser
> > bisschen Zeugs wären wir völlig Blank gewesen. (Ich bin da beruflich
> > etwas verwöhnt.) Falls Interesse besteht, AOO weiter und öfter auf
> > Messen zu präsentieren, müssen wir uns nach meiner Meinung generell was
> > einfallen lassen. Nochmal vielen Dank an Jan Christian Wienand, Jörg
> > Schmidt und Josef Latt für die schnelle Unterstützung und Hinweise.
> >
> > Also, mir hat es sehr gefallen, und ich plane es für 2013 mal grob mit
> > ein (was noch keine feste Zusage bedeutet  :-).
> >
>
>

Re: Please add me to The OpenOffice.org Documentation Project list

[Yue Helen]

Welcome Mark!

Are you interested in contributing to OpenOffice documentation? Can you
please introduce yourself briefly or what areas you are interested in?

I'm from development...I think we need people on documentation. Can someone
here explain if we have a documentation project? if no, we may need to set
up at least one wiki page to collaborate the work?

Helen

2012/11/27 Mark Roest 

> Please add me to The OpenOffice.org Documentation Project list
>
> Regards,
>
> Mark Roest
>

RE: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

I was only talking about cleaning up my working copies from the SVN.  I have no 
desire to touch Symphony on the SVN (and I believe the incubator SVN copy is 
now read-only).

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 15:18
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
> I don't think the web site situation is an equivalent.  I also don't think 
> the choice of base for integration of Symphony features is relevant.
>
> I am concerned about the Symphony tree being in the public SVN and being an 
> attractive nuisance.  If it is not going to be morphed into something that 
> can be worked with and integrated by the community of contributors, I 
> recommend that it be gone.
>

Feel free to make a proposal in a new thread, seek lazy consensus and
act on it after 72 hours.  You have karma.

-Rob

> (Of course, I can remove it from any working copy that I possess, and I shall 
> do that in switching to the new repository location.)
>
>  - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 14:25
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>  wrote:
>>   "Remember, we wrote it."
>>   Well, I suppose the notion of "work for hire" might provide some nuance to 
>> "we".
>>
>
> And the CCLA covers that side of it.
>
>>   I gather this means that IBM-associated contributors will make 
>> ALv2-covered contributions directly to the SVN and/or via patches and that 
>> is the provenance there is.  That should safeguard the interests of the ASF.
>>
>>   So what is the point of there being a Symphony portion of the SVN tree?
>>
>
> Go back to the discussion on this list when we initially checked it
> in.  We had a long discussion about what to do with that code, with
> the two main options being: 1) Make /symphony be the new trunk and
> merge the delta from AOO 3.4 into Symphony, or 2) Keep the current AOO
> trunk and merge selected features from Symphony into the AOO trunk.
> The decision ultimately was to do 2), what we refer to as the "slow
> merge".  Since we took that direction the /symphony tree has not
> undergone development.  Its main value (in retrospect) was to support
> that decision making process.  Of course, if we had decided to take
> the other approach then /symphony would become the new trunk and the
> usual clean up activities would have occurred on the way to releasing
> that trunk.
>
> Remember, IP Cleanup is not just about changing the headers.  It is a
> longer process, culminating in a vote to accept the code base.  Once a
> code base is accepted, we should be releasing it and doing the other
> kinds of maintenance functions -- security patches, etc. -- that a
> responsible PMC does for its releases.  But I see zero volunteers
> stepping forward to maintain a second office suite in this project.
> So it makes no sense to me to spend time on a tree that we're never
> going to release.
>
>>   I now agree with a comment that you made in a previous discussion about 
>> this.  I think it should be removed if it is never going to be IP-scrubbed.
>>
>
> We have another direction in Subversion that is also odd.  It has an
> eclectic set of licenses on its files.  In some cases it includes
> files where we cannot clearly identify the license.  Instead of
> hypotheticals we have actual examples of real 3rd parties wanting to
> reuse the files, but we're not always able to clearly point them to
> the license terms.  We don't even have an SGA for these files.  So
> should we delete this directory as well?  Of course, I speak of our
> website in /ooo-site.  IMHO, it is not a problem so long as we don't
> include it in a release.
>
> -Rob
>
>>  - Dennis
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
>> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 10:41
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
>> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  
>> wrote:
>>> Is this to be based on the Symphony code?
>>>
>>
>> Dennis,  we have Symphony code within IBM.  Remember, we wrote it.
>> Whatever code we check in is covered by signed ICLA's and CCLA's.
>> That should address all reasonable concerns with regards to the
>> provenance of the code.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>>  - Dennis
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Steve Yin [mailto:steve.yin@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 01:07
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>>>
>>> Thanks for both of your suggestions. The time table will be provided later.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Jürgen Schmidt 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 On 11/26/12 6:59 AM, Steve Yin wrote:
 > Hi,
 >
 > I pr

Edit and create new pages in wiki.openoffice.org

[Salva]

Hello

User: Salva
Mail: sa...@open-office.es
ID user: 50644

I am an active member of the wiki
I'm currently editing the pages for StarBasic in Spanish
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/ES/Manuales/GuiaAOO/TemasAvanzados/Macros/StarBasic

I can not add new pages
Please update my publishing rights

Thanks


Salva   Visita  la Web open-office es y  mi bLog  
Lo escuché y lo olvidé, lo vi y lo entendí, lo hice y lo aprendí
 Antes de imprimir, piensa en tu entorno
Before printing, think about the environment

Re: Gallery extension from Symphony ressources

[Shenfeng Liu]

2012/11/27 Marcus (OOo) 

> Am 11/26/2012 02:44 PM, schrieb Armin Le Grand:
>
>  Hi List,
>>
>> I took a closer look at Symphony's checked in ressources concerning the
>> gallery. There are quite some nice and useful additional themes there we
>> (and our users) should benefit from. Thus, I propose (and volunteer :-)
>> to integrate these to the trunk. Please have a look at a current
>> Symphony version or look at the provides symphony sourcecode to get an
>> impression (it's in main/extras/source/gallery). The added themes are:
>>
>> arrows
>> bullets
>> computers
>> diagrams
>> education
>> environment
>> finance
>> gallery_sound
>> gallery_system
>> people
>> sounds
>> symbols
>> transportation
>> txtshapes
>>
>> The currently existing themes in trunk are:
>>
>> bullets
>> gallery_sound
>> gallery_system
>> htmpexpo
>> rulers
>> sounds
>> ww-back
>> www-graf
>>
>> Where bullets, gallery_sound, gallery_system and sounds are double. I
>> propose to just merge the contents. (gallery_sound and gallery_system
>> are hidden, internal themes). For info: ww-back and www-graf are also
>> hidden themes which are used in Writer's www export.
>>
>> I think these themes are useful for a wide variety of users and I will
>> try to just merge them smoothly to have these available.
>>
>> All contents are in png format (not yet svg) with transparencies and
>> offer quite some useful stuff. We should have them in that format for
>> now, conversion to SVG is not realistic due to many contained gradients.
>> For adding future themes I propose to use svg, but for now we should use
>> what we have. Same is true for evtl. later add online data access for
>> the gallery for clipart libraries (which support svg). But one step
>> after the other...
>>
>> I'm currently inverstigating on the issue (wrote #121407# for it, see
>> there) and will report how much size it would add to download packages.
>>
>> Suggestions welcome!
>>
>
> Yeah, great idea. :-)
>
> +1. Let's add those themes in! Thanks, Armin!

- Shenfeng (Simon)

Marcus
>

Re: [RELEASE]: new languages for AOO 3.4.1

[Andrew Rist]

On 11/23/2012 8:14 AM, Rory O'Farrell wrote:

On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 17:00:54 +0100
jan iversen  wrote:


Good idea, that was basically what I meant...however even microsoft, does
provide a slim setup, that then downloads the needed packages.

There is a disadvantage to that: such an installation has to have on-line 
access at install time.  There are still many users who do not have on-line 
access 24/7 at broadband speeds; they may rely for installation on a download 
on a public library machine or a friend's machine and transfer the file to the 
target computer by USB key, so a complete package (whether compiled for natice 
language or as outlined above) would be useful to them,
This point comes up over and over again.  We need to serve both groups, 
but the solution should not force either group into a degraded install 
process.


We can have a 'slim setup' that then loads resources from the same 
location/media it came from.
This approach works for those who need local media due to bandwidth 
constraints  (CD/USB Key/File system)
It also works efficiently for broadband loading the bootstrap ('slim 
setup') over the network, and then collecting additional resources as 
needed.


If it is built correctly, this type of install would also facilitate 
1-click installs without requiring the duplication of bits which is a 
growing problem as we again add languages.   If the bootstrap setup is 
loaded with a configuration file, it could be set to load specific 
language packs, dictionaries, and additional extensions. (The additional 
files would either be downloaded over the network from the same network 
location, or bundled on the same media in the same folder for a CD/USB 
type install)


Let's stop arguing over which of the two scenarios our install will 
support correctly, and agree that we need to support both scenarios 
correctly.



Andrew

Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

[Joe Schaefer]

CMS stuff won't work til I upgrade the
paths- sorry, that won't be til tomorrow.





>
> From: Kay Schenk 
>To: dev@openoffice.apache.org 
>Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 6:29 PM
>Subject: Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"
> 
>
>
>On 11/26/2012 03:19 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>>> [top posting]
>>>
>>> hmmm...OK, I switched the svn for the project website to:
>>>
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/site/trunk/
>>>
>>> This is the only part I needed for now.
>>>
>>> I made some edits, and committed them...all good.
>>>
>>> But, they are NOT reflected on the old/actual staging site:
>>>
>>> http://openofficeorg.staging.apache.org/openofficeorg/pmc-faqs.html
>>>
>>
>> Did you check in the changes via Subversion or via the CMS?  If you do
>> it via Subversion you need to click the "update" link to force the CMS
>> to fetch the latest files from SVN.
>
>I did it with subversion. But usually when I do this and commit, I can 
>bring up the staging copy, and assuming the build is done, can see the 
>changes on staging. I don't even use the "update" link. (???)
>
>Or alternatively. if I use "Easy Publish", I use "Diff" to see the 
>changes in staging before publishing.
>
>Maybe someone else can try to publish something to the new project web 
>site location, and have different results. If so, please share what you did.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>> and I'm not sure where this is now.
>>>
>>> Maybe I need to do a re-published but, well, I don't know if a new "web"
>>> area needs to be established first.
>>>
>>> I'll comment on our existing ticket for this.
>>>
>>> The user portal, www.openoffice.org, should work without issue (maybe?). It
>>> already has a basically a top-level web area.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/26/2012 02:49 PM, janI wrote:

 Got it...I just thought you had removed "incubator" in all links.

 Jan.

 On 26 November 2012 23:46, Rob Weir  wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:44 PM, janI  wrote:
>>
>> I was thinking of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/
>> ooo-site/trunk/content/l10n
>>
>> The l10n branch is one I have created for development, and it contains
>
> only
>>
>> the source trunk at least yesterday, when I did an update, I am still
>> working on "svn switch" to get my local copy updated.
>>
>> And it was merely the update that rob had made, that interested me.
>>
>
> So my changes were simple.  They were not renaming or moving files.  I
> was editing the content of pages where they referred to locations in
> SVN.  For example, we had a Subversion tutorial and another page that
> told visitors where to download the AOO source code from.  Stuff like
> that.  I don't think there were any L10n dependencies there.
>
> -Rob
>
>> Jan I.
>>
>>
>> On 26 November 2012 23:37, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
>>
>>> Just go to  and browse
>>> around to confirm that everything you are interested in is there.
>>>
>>> (Are you thinking of the l10n under openoffice/branches ?  It does
>
> appear
>>>
>>> that all of openoffice/ooo-site and openoffice/site are there.)
>>>
>>>    - Dennis
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: janI [mailto:j...@apache.org]
>>> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 13:48
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"
>>>
>>> #rob:
>>>
>>> did you include subdirs in ooo-site, so that l10n and other are taken
>
> care
>>>
>>> of ?
>>>
>>> mwiki might be a special problem, since there are loads of text, but I
>
> am
>>>
>>> more or less getting used to writing mwiki sql worms (right now I am
>>> juggling with 63.517 spam user accounts), so I can have a look at it
>
> after
>>>
>>> the user problem.
>>>
>>> Jan
>>>
>>> On 26 November 2012 20:27, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>>
 On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Herbert Duerr 
>
> wrote:
>
> On 26.11.2012 04:32, j...@apache.org wrote:
>>
>>
>> Author: joes
>> Date: Mon Nov 26 03:32:20 2012
>> New Revision: 1413471
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1413471&view=rev
>> Log:
>> mv ooo to top-level
>>
>> Added:
>>        openoffice/
>>          - copied from r1413470, incubator/ooo/
>
>
>
> So our locations in the SVN repository were moved as discussed last
>>>
>>> week.
>
> Thank you, Joe!
>
> Here are the instructions to switch your checkouts to the new
>
> location:
>
>
> In case you are using SVN na

Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Kay Schenk]

On 11/26/2012 03:17 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:

I don't think the web site situation is an equivalent.  I also don't think the 
choice of base for integration of Symphony features is relevant.

I am concerned about the Symphony tree being in the public SVN and being an 
attractive nuisance.  If it is not going to be morphed into something that can 
be worked with and integrated by the community of contributors, I recommend 
that it be gone.



Feel free to make a proposal in a new thread, seek lazy consensus and
act on it after 72 hours.  You have karma.

-Rob


yes, Dennis has karma but please see...

http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-moveothercopyright





(Of course, I can remove it from any working copy that I possess, and I shall 
do that in switching to the new repository location.)

  - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 14:25
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
 wrote:

   "Remember, we wrote it."
   Well, I suppose the notion of "work for hire" might provide some nuance to 
"we".



And the CCLA covers that side of it.


   I gather this means that IBM-associated contributors will make ALv2-covered 
contributions directly to the SVN and/or via patches and that is the provenance 
there is.  That should safeguard the interests of the ASF.

   So what is the point of there being a Symphony portion of the SVN tree?



Go back to the discussion on this list when we initially checked it
in.  We had a long discussion about what to do with that code, with
the two main options being: 1) Make /symphony be the new trunk and
merge the delta from AOO 3.4 into Symphony, or 2) Keep the current AOO
trunk and merge selected features from Symphony into the AOO trunk.
The decision ultimately was to do 2), what we refer to as the "slow
merge".  Since we took that direction the /symphony tree has not
undergone development.  Its main value (in retrospect) was to support
that decision making process.  Of course, if we had decided to take
the other approach then /symphony would become the new trunk and the
usual clean up activities would have occurred on the way to releasing
that trunk.

Remember, IP Cleanup is not just about changing the headers.  It is a
longer process, culminating in a vote to accept the code base.  Once a
code base is accepted, we should be releasing it and doing the other
kinds of maintenance functions -- security patches, etc. -- that a
responsible PMC does for its releases.  But I see zero volunteers
stepping forward to maintain a second office suite in this project.
So it makes no sense to me to spend time on a tree that we're never
going to release.


   I now agree with a comment that you made in a previous discussion about 
this.  I think it should be removed if it is never going to be IP-scrubbed.



We have another direction in Subversion that is also odd.  It has an
eclectic set of licenses on its files.  In some cases it includes
files where we cannot clearly identify the license.  Instead of
hypotheticals we have actual examples of real 3rd parties wanting to
reuse the files, but we're not always able to clearly point them to
the license terms.  We don't even have an SGA for these files.  So
should we delete this directory as well?  Of course, I speak of our
website in /ooo-site.  IMHO, it is not a problem so long as we don't
include it in a release.

-Rob


  - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 10:41
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:

Is this to be based on the Symphony code?



Dennis,  we have Symphony code within IBM.  Remember, we wrote it.
Whatever code we check in is covered by signed ICLA's and CCLA's.
That should address all reasonable concerns with regards to the
provenance of the code.

-Rob


  - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Steve Yin [mailto:steve.yin@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 01:07
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

Thanks for both of your suggestions. The time table will be provided later.


On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:


On 11/26/12 6:59 AM, Steve Yin wrote:

Hi,

I propose to integrate IAccessible2 as an accessibility feature for AOO
4.0. A wiki for the effort estimation can be found here:


https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+IAccessible2

Here is my question. Should I create a feature in AOO Bugzilla and a

branch

for development?



Hi Steve,

this is good news. I would suggest that you give some details what do
you expect to implement when. The integration of IAccessible2 is a
bigger task and I don't 

Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

[Kay Schenk]

On 11/26/2012 03:47 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 6:29 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:



On 11/26/2012 03:19 PM, Rob Weir wrote:


On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:


[top posting]

hmmm...OK, I switched the svn for the project website to:

https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/site/trunk/

This is the only part I needed for now.

I made some edits, and committed them...all good.

But, they are NOT reflected on the old/actual staging site:

http://openofficeorg.staging.apache.org/openofficeorg/pmc-faqs.html



Did you check in the changes via Subversion or via the CMS?  If you do
it via Subversion you need to click the "update" link to force the CMS
to fetch the latest files from SVN.



I did it with subversion. But usually when I do this and commit, I can bring
up the staging copy, and assuming the build is done, can see the changes on
staging. I don't even use the "update" link. (???)

Or alternatively. if I use "Easy Publish", I use "Diff" to see the changes
in staging before publishing.

Maybe someone else can try to publish something to the new project web site
location, and have different results. If so, please share what you did.



So I just tried to make a change via the CMS web interface.  When I
tried the quick commit I got this error message:


Error

The operation is forbidden by the server: Commit failed (details
follow):: Changing file
'/usr/local/cms/wc/ooo-site/robweir-1STUF7/trunk/content/index.html'
is forbidden by the server: Access to
'/repos/asf/!svn/txr/1413943-uw56/incubator/ooo/ooo-site/trunk/content/index.html'
forbidden at /usr/local/cms/webgui/lib/ASF/CMS/WC/Commit.pm line 64

Is it pointing to /incubator/ooo still ?


Yes, the old site is locked for changes this way -- i.e. navigating 
using the CMS bookmarklet. It's not the "pointing" that I'm concerned 
with right now, though that is an issue also long term, but right now, I 
don't think a "new" site is established.


You can see where these actually live, if you log in with to 
people.apache.org, and go to "/www".








-Rob










-Rob


and I'm not sure where this is now.

Maybe I need to do a re-published but, well, I don't know if a new "web"
area needs to be established first.

I'll comment on our existing ticket for this.

The user portal, www.openoffice.org, should work without issue (maybe?).
It
already has a basically a top-level web area.


On 11/26/2012 02:49 PM, janI wrote:



Got it...I just thought you had removed "incubator" in all links.

Jan.

On 26 November 2012 23:46, Rob Weir  wrote:


On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:44 PM, janI  wrote:



I was thinking of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/
ooo-site/trunk/content/l10n

The l10n branch is one I have created for development, and it contains



only



the source trunk at least yesterday, when I did an update, I am still
working on "svn switch" to get my local copy updated.

And it was merely the update that rob had made, that interested me.



So my changes were simple.  They were not renaming or moving files.  I
was editing the content of pages where they referred to locations in
SVN.  For example, we had a Subversion tutorial and another page that
told visitors where to download the AOO source code from.  Stuff like
that.  I don't think there were any L10n dependencies there.

-Rob


Jan I.


On 26 November 2012 23:37, Dennis E. Hamilton 
wrote:


Just go to  and browse
around to confirm that everything you are interested in is there.

(Are you thinking of the l10n under openoffice/branches ?  It does



appear



that all of openoffice/ooo-site and openoffice/site are there.)

- Dennis

-Original Message-
From: janI [mailto:j...@apache.org]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 13:48
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

#rob:

did you include subdirs in ooo-site, so that l10n and other are taken



care



of ?

mwiki might be a special problem, since there are loads of text, but
I



am



more or less getting used to writing mwiki sql worms (right now I am
juggling with 63.517 spam user accounts), so I can have a look at it



after



the user problem.

Jan

On 26 November 2012 20:27, Rob Weir  wrote:


On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Herbert Duerr 



wrote:



On 26.11.2012 04:32, j...@apache.org wrote:




Author: joes
Date: Mon Nov 26 03:32:20 2012
New Revision: 1413471

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1413471&view=rev
Log:
mv ooo to top-level

Added:
openoffice/
  - copied from r1413470, incubator/ooo/





So our locations in the SVN repository were moved as discussed last



week.



Thank you, Joe!

Here are the instructions to switch your checkouts to the new



location:




In case you are using SVN natively please change into the directory



where



your checked out AOO and run
   svn switch



https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk



there. If 

Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 6:29 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>
>
> On 11/26/2012 03:19 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>>>
>>> [top posting]
>>>
>>> hmmm...OK, I switched the svn for the project website to:
>>>
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/site/trunk/
>>>
>>> This is the only part I needed for now.
>>>
>>> I made some edits, and committed them...all good.
>>>
>>> But, they are NOT reflected on the old/actual staging site:
>>>
>>> http://openofficeorg.staging.apache.org/openofficeorg/pmc-faqs.html
>>>
>>
>> Did you check in the changes via Subversion or via the CMS?  If you do
>> it via Subversion you need to click the "update" link to force the CMS
>> to fetch the latest files from SVN.
>
>
> I did it with subversion. But usually when I do this and commit, I can bring
> up the staging copy, and assuming the build is done, can see the changes on
> staging. I don't even use the "update" link. (???)
>
> Or alternatively. if I use "Easy Publish", I use "Diff" to see the changes
> in staging before publishing.
>
> Maybe someone else can try to publish something to the new project web site
> location, and have different results. If so, please share what you did.
>

So I just tried to make a change via the CMS web interface.  When I
tried the quick commit I got this error message:


Error

The operation is forbidden by the server: Commit failed (details
follow):: Changing file
'/usr/local/cms/wc/ooo-site/robweir-1STUF7/trunk/content/index.html'
is forbidden by the server: Access to
'/repos/asf/!svn/txr/1413943-uw56/incubator/ooo/ooo-site/trunk/content/index.html'
forbidden at /usr/local/cms/webgui/lib/ASF/CMS/WC/Commit.pm line 64

Is it pointing to /incubator/ooo still ?

-Rob

>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>> and I'm not sure where this is now.
>>>
>>> Maybe I need to do a re-published but, well, I don't know if a new "web"
>>> area needs to be established first.
>>>
>>> I'll comment on our existing ticket for this.
>>>
>>> The user portal, www.openoffice.org, should work without issue (maybe?).
>>> It
>>> already has a basically a top-level web area.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/26/2012 02:49 PM, janI wrote:


 Got it...I just thought you had removed "incubator" in all links.

 Jan.

 On 26 November 2012 23:46, Rob Weir  wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:44 PM, janI  wrote:
>>
>>
>> I was thinking of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/
>> ooo-site/trunk/content/l10n
>>
>> The l10n branch is one I have created for development, and it contains
>
>
> only
>>
>>
>> the source trunk at least yesterday, when I did an update, I am still
>> working on "svn switch" to get my local copy updated.
>>
>> And it was merely the update that rob had made, that interested me.
>>
>
> So my changes were simple.  They were not renaming or moving files.  I
> was editing the content of pages where they referred to locations in
> SVN.  For example, we had a Subversion tutorial and another page that
> told visitors where to download the AOO source code from.  Stuff like
> that.  I don't think there were any L10n dependencies there.
>
> -Rob
>
>> Jan I.
>>
>>
>> On 26 November 2012 23:37, Dennis E. Hamilton 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Just go to  and browse
>>> around to confirm that everything you are interested in is there.
>>>
>>> (Are you thinking of the l10n under openoffice/branches ?  It does
>
>
> appear
>>>
>>>
>>> that all of openoffice/ooo-site and openoffice/site are there.)
>>>
>>>- Dennis
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: janI [mailto:j...@apache.org]
>>> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 13:48
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"
>>>
>>> #rob:
>>>
>>> did you include subdirs in ooo-site, so that l10n and other are taken
>
>
> care
>>>
>>>
>>> of ?
>>>
>>> mwiki might be a special problem, since there are loads of text, but
>>> I
>
>
> am
>>>
>>>
>>> more or less getting used to writing mwiki sql worms (right now I am
>>> juggling with 63.517 spam user accounts), so I can have a look at it
>
>
> after
>>>
>>>
>>> the user problem.
>>>
>>> Jan
>>>
>>> On 26 November 2012 20:27, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>>
 On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Herbert Duerr 
>
>
> wrote:
>
>
> On 26.11.2012 04:32, j...@apache.org wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Author: joes
>> Date: Mon Nov 26 03:32:20 2012
>> New Revision: 1413471
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1413471&view=rev
>> Log:
>> mv ooo to top-level
>>

Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

[Kay Schenk]

On 11/26/2012 03:19 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:

[top posting]

hmmm...OK, I switched the svn for the project website to:

https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/site/trunk/

This is the only part I needed for now.

I made some edits, and committed them...all good.

But, they are NOT reflected on the old/actual staging site:

http://openofficeorg.staging.apache.org/openofficeorg/pmc-faqs.html



Did you check in the changes via Subversion or via the CMS?  If you do
it via Subversion you need to click the "update" link to force the CMS
to fetch the latest files from SVN.


I did it with subversion. But usually when I do this and commit, I can 
bring up the staging copy, and assuming the build is done, can see the 
changes on staging. I don't even use the "update" link. (???)


Or alternatively. if I use "Easy Publish", I use "Diff" to see the 
changes in staging before publishing.


Maybe someone else can try to publish something to the new project web 
site location, and have different results. If so, please share what you did.









-Rob


and I'm not sure where this is now.

Maybe I need to do a re-published but, well, I don't know if a new "web"
area needs to be established first.

I'll comment on our existing ticket for this.

The user portal, www.openoffice.org, should work without issue (maybe?). It
already has a basically a top-level web area.


On 11/26/2012 02:49 PM, janI wrote:


Got it...I just thought you had removed "incubator" in all links.

Jan.

On 26 November 2012 23:46, Rob Weir  wrote:


On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:44 PM, janI  wrote:


I was thinking of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/
ooo-site/trunk/content/l10n

The l10n branch is one I have created for development, and it contains


only


the source trunk at least yesterday, when I did an update, I am still
working on "svn switch" to get my local copy updated.

And it was merely the update that rob had made, that interested me.



So my changes were simple.  They were not renaming or moving files.  I
was editing the content of pages where they referred to locations in
SVN.  For example, we had a Subversion tutorial and another page that
told visitors where to download the AOO source code from.  Stuff like
that.  I don't think there were any L10n dependencies there.

-Rob


Jan I.


On 26 November 2012 23:37, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:


Just go to  and browse
around to confirm that everything you are interested in is there.

(Are you thinking of the l10n under openoffice/branches ?  It does


appear


that all of openoffice/ooo-site and openoffice/site are there.)

   - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: janI [mailto:j...@apache.org]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 13:48
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

#rob:

did you include subdirs in ooo-site, so that l10n and other are taken


care


of ?

mwiki might be a special problem, since there are loads of text, but I


am


more or less getting used to writing mwiki sql worms (right now I am
juggling with 63.517 spam user accounts), so I can have a look at it


after


the user problem.

Jan

On 26 November 2012 20:27, Rob Weir  wrote:


On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Herbert Duerr 


wrote:


On 26.11.2012 04:32, j...@apache.org wrote:



Author: joes
Date: Mon Nov 26 03:32:20 2012
New Revision: 1413471

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1413471&view=rev
Log:
mv ooo to top-level

Added:
   openoffice/
 - copied from r1413470, incubator/ooo/




So our locations in the SVN repository were moved as discussed last


week.


Thank you, Joe!

Here are the instructions to switch your checkouts to the new


location:



In case you are using SVN natively please change into the directory


where


your checked out AOO and run
  svn switch


https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk


there. If you are not working on trunk you have to replace "trunk"


by


the


branches/bname (with bname being the branch name you are interested


in),


of


course.

In case you are using git-svn please change into the directory of


your


git-svn clone, open the file
  .git/config
and find the section named
  [svn-remote "svn"]
in there. In the "url=" line of that section please change the
"incubator/ooo" part of the URL to "openoffice".



I've edited the websites in /site and /ooo-site to update around 7
files that had hard-coded references to the old SVN address.

I didn't see any mentions on the Mwiki.

-Rob



Herbert












--

MzK

“How wrong is it for a woman to expect the man to build the world
  she wants, rather than to create it herself?”
 -- Anais Nin


--

MzK

“How wrong is it for a 

Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
 wrote:
> I think I've expressed my concerns.  I have nothing to add.
>
> One follow-up question though:
>
> Previously you had offered to see if it was possible to get a permission 
> letter from IBM to ASF allowing the project to adjust headers and notices to 
> have them be under ALv2.
>
> Is that not going to happen?
>

The headers are red herring.  Remind yourself of how long it took to
remove the Oracle copyright and the LGPL headers from /trunk.  The SGA
was submitted in June (or was it May?) 2011.  But we didn't get code
checked in until 2011-08-29, right?  And the license header updates
were done over a longer period of time, not completed until
2012-04-30.   Did this prevent anyone from working with the code
before 2012-04-30?  Of course not.  Did anyone raise any concerns?
No.  In fact we did almost the *entire AOO 3.4.0 work* in that time
period.  The headers had to be updated before we could release the
code.  But it did not prevent anyone from working with the code before
the release.

-Rob

>  - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 14:57
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: RE: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>
> I don't think the web site situation is an equivalent.  I also don't think 
> the choice of base for integration of Symphony features is relevant.
>
> I am concerned about the Symphony tree being in the public SVN and being an 
> attractive nuisance.  If it is not going to be morphed into something that 
> can be worked with and integrated by the community of contributors, I 
> recommend that it be gone.
>
> (Of course, I can remove it from any working copy that I possess, and I shall 
> do that in switching to the new repository location.)
>
>  - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 14:25
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>  wrote:
>>   "Remember, we wrote it."
>>   Well, I suppose the notion of "work for hire" might provide some nuance to 
>> "we".
>>
>
> And the CCLA covers that side of it.
>
>>   I gather this means that IBM-associated contributors will make 
>> ALv2-covered contributions directly to the SVN and/or via patches and that 
>> is the provenance there is.  That should safeguard the interests of the ASF.
>>
>>   So what is the point of there being a Symphony portion of the SVN tree?
>>
>
> Go back to the discussion on this list when we initially checked it
> in.  We had a long discussion about what to do with that code, with
> the two main options being: 1) Make /symphony be the new trunk and
> merge the delta from AOO 3.4 into Symphony, or 2) Keep the current AOO
> trunk and merge selected features from Symphony into the AOO trunk.
> The decision ultimately was to do 2), what we refer to as the "slow
> merge".  Since we took that direction the /symphony tree has not
> undergone development.  Its main value (in retrospect) was to support
> that decision making process.  Of course, if we had decided to take
> the other approach then /symphony would become the new trunk and the
> usual clean up activities would have occurred on the way to releasing
> that trunk.
>
> Remember, IP Cleanup is not just about changing the headers.  It is a
> longer process, culminating in a vote to accept the code base.  Once a
> code base is accepted, we should be releasing it and doing the other
> kinds of maintenance functions -- security patches, etc. -- that a
> responsible PMC does for its releases.  But I see zero volunteers
> stepping forward to maintain a second office suite in this project.
> So it makes no sense to me to spend time on a tree that we're never
> going to release.
>
>>   I now agree with a comment that you made in a previous discussion about 
>> this.  I think it should be removed if it is never going to be IP-scrubbed.
>>
>
> We have another direction in Subversion that is also odd.  It has an
> eclectic set of licenses on its files.  In some cases it includes
> files where we cannot clearly identify the license.  Instead of
> hypotheticals we have actual examples of real 3rd parties wanting to
> reuse the files, but we're not always able to clearly point them to
> the license terms.  We don't even have an SGA for these files.  So
> should we delete this directory as well?  Of course, I speak of our
> website in /ooo-site.  IMHO, it is not a problem so long as we don't
> include it in a release.
>
> -Rob
>
>>  - Dennis
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
>> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 10:41
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
>> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  
>> wrote:
>>> Is this to be based on

Re: Gallery extension from Symphony ressources

[Marcus (OOo)]

Am 11/26/2012 02:44 PM, schrieb Armin Le Grand:

Hi List,

I took a closer look at Symphony's checked in ressources concerning the
gallery. There are quite some nice and useful additional themes there we
(and our users) should benefit from. Thus, I propose (and volunteer :-)
to integrate these to the trunk. Please have a look at a current
Symphony version or look at the provides symphony sourcecode to get an
impression (it's in main/extras/source/gallery). The added themes are:

arrows
bullets
computers
diagrams
education
environment
finance
gallery_sound
gallery_system
people
sounds
symbols
transportation
txtshapes

The currently existing themes in trunk are:

bullets
gallery_sound
gallery_system
htmpexpo
rulers
sounds
ww-back
www-graf

Where bullets, gallery_sound, gallery_system and sounds are double. I
propose to just merge the contents. (gallery_sound and gallery_system
are hidden, internal themes). For info: ww-back and www-graf are also
hidden themes which are used in Writer's www export.

I think these themes are useful for a wide variety of users and I will
try to just merge them smoothly to have these available.

All contents are in png format (not yet svg) with transparencies and
offer quite some useful stuff. We should have them in that format for
now, conversion to SVG is not realistic due to many contained gradients.
For adding future themes I propose to use svg, but for now we should use
what we have. Same is true for evtl. later add online data access for
the gallery for clipart libraries (which support svg). But one step
after the other...

I'm currently inverstigating on the issue (wrote #121407# for it, see
there) and will report how much size it would add to download packages.

Suggestions welcome!


Yeah, great idea. :-)

Marcus

Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
> [top posting]
>
> hmmm...OK, I switched the svn for the project website to:
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/site/trunk/
>
> This is the only part I needed for now.
>
> I made some edits, and committed them...all good.
>
> But, they are NOT reflected on the old/actual staging site:
>
> http://openofficeorg.staging.apache.org/openofficeorg/pmc-faqs.html
>

Did you check in the changes via Subversion or via the CMS?  If you do
it via Subversion you need to click the "update" link to force the CMS
to fetch the latest files from SVN.

-Rob

> and I'm not sure where this is now.
>
> Maybe I need to do a re-published but, well, I don't know if a new "web"
> area needs to be established first.
>
> I'll comment on our existing ticket for this.
>
> The user portal, www.openoffice.org, should work without issue (maybe?). It
> already has a basically a top-level web area.
>
>
> On 11/26/2012 02:49 PM, janI wrote:
>>
>> Got it...I just thought you had removed "incubator" in all links.
>>
>> Jan.
>>
>> On 26 November 2012 23:46, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:44 PM, janI  wrote:

 I was thinking of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/
 ooo-site/trunk/content/l10n

 The l10n branch is one I have created for development, and it contains
>>>
>>> only

 the source trunk at least yesterday, when I did an update, I am still
 working on "svn switch" to get my local copy updated.

 And it was merely the update that rob had made, that interested me.

>>>
>>> So my changes were simple.  They were not renaming or moving files.  I
>>> was editing the content of pages where they referred to locations in
>>> SVN.  For example, we had a Subversion tutorial and another page that
>>> told visitors where to download the AOO source code from.  Stuff like
>>> that.  I don't think there were any L10n dependencies there.
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
 Jan I.


 On 26 November 2012 23:37, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:

> Just go to  and browse
> around to confirm that everything you are interested in is there.
>
> (Are you thinking of the l10n under openoffice/branches ?  It does
>>>
>>> appear
>
> that all of openoffice/ooo-site and openoffice/site are there.)
>
>   - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: janI [mailto:j...@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 13:48
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"
>
> #rob:
>
> did you include subdirs in ooo-site, so that l10n and other are taken
>>>
>>> care
>
> of ?
>
> mwiki might be a special problem, since there are loads of text, but I
>>>
>>> am
>
> more or less getting used to writing mwiki sql worms (right now I am
> juggling with 63.517 spam user accounts), so I can have a look at it
>>>
>>> after
>
> the user problem.
>
> Jan
>
> On 26 November 2012 20:27, Rob Weir  wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Herbert Duerr 
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 26.11.2012 04:32, j...@apache.org wrote:


 Author: joes
 Date: Mon Nov 26 03:32:20 2012
 New Revision: 1413471

 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1413471&view=rev
 Log:
 mv ooo to top-level

 Added:
   openoffice/
 - copied from r1413470, incubator/ooo/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So our locations in the SVN repository were moved as discussed last
>
> week.
>>>
>>> Thank you, Joe!
>>>
>>> Here are the instructions to switch your checkouts to the new
>>>
>>> location:
>>>
>>>
>>> In case you are using SVN natively please change into the directory
>
> where
>>>
>>> your checked out AOO and run
>>>  svn switch
>>>
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk
>>>
>>> there. If you are not working on trunk you have to replace "trunk"
>>>
>>> by
>
> the
>>>
>>> branches/bname (with bname being the branch name you are interested
>
> in),
>>
>> of
>>>
>>> course.
>>>
>>> In case you are using git-svn please change into the directory of
>>>
>>> your
>>>
>>> git-svn clone, open the file
>>>  .git/config
>>> and find the section named
>>>  [svn-remote "svn"]
>>> in there. In the "url=" line of that section please change the
>>> "incubator/ooo" part of the URL to "openoffice".
>>>
>>
>> I've edited the websites in /site and /ooo-site to update around 7
>> files that had hard-coded references to the old SVN address.
>>
>> I didn't see any mentions on the Mwiki.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>>> Herbert
>>
>>
>
>
>>>
>>
>

Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
> I don't think the web site situation is an equivalent.  I also don't think 
> the choice of base for integration of Symphony features is relevant.
>
> I am concerned about the Symphony tree being in the public SVN and being an 
> attractive nuisance.  If it is not going to be morphed into something that 
> can be worked with and integrated by the community of contributors, I 
> recommend that it be gone.
>

Feel free to make a proposal in a new thread, seek lazy consensus and
act on it after 72 hours.  You have karma.

-Rob

> (Of course, I can remove it from any working copy that I possess, and I shall 
> do that in switching to the new repository location.)
>
>  - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 14:25
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>  wrote:
>>   "Remember, we wrote it."
>>   Well, I suppose the notion of "work for hire" might provide some nuance to 
>> "we".
>>
>
> And the CCLA covers that side of it.
>
>>   I gather this means that IBM-associated contributors will make 
>> ALv2-covered contributions directly to the SVN and/or via patches and that 
>> is the provenance there is.  That should safeguard the interests of the ASF.
>>
>>   So what is the point of there being a Symphony portion of the SVN tree?
>>
>
> Go back to the discussion on this list when we initially checked it
> in.  We had a long discussion about what to do with that code, with
> the two main options being: 1) Make /symphony be the new trunk and
> merge the delta from AOO 3.4 into Symphony, or 2) Keep the current AOO
> trunk and merge selected features from Symphony into the AOO trunk.
> The decision ultimately was to do 2), what we refer to as the "slow
> merge".  Since we took that direction the /symphony tree has not
> undergone development.  Its main value (in retrospect) was to support
> that decision making process.  Of course, if we had decided to take
> the other approach then /symphony would become the new trunk and the
> usual clean up activities would have occurred on the way to releasing
> that trunk.
>
> Remember, IP Cleanup is not just about changing the headers.  It is a
> longer process, culminating in a vote to accept the code base.  Once a
> code base is accepted, we should be releasing it and doing the other
> kinds of maintenance functions -- security patches, etc. -- that a
> responsible PMC does for its releases.  But I see zero volunteers
> stepping forward to maintain a second office suite in this project.
> So it makes no sense to me to spend time on a tree that we're never
> going to release.
>
>>   I now agree with a comment that you made in a previous discussion about 
>> this.  I think it should be removed if it is never going to be IP-scrubbed.
>>
>
> We have another direction in Subversion that is also odd.  It has an
> eclectic set of licenses on its files.  In some cases it includes
> files where we cannot clearly identify the license.  Instead of
> hypotheticals we have actual examples of real 3rd parties wanting to
> reuse the files, but we're not always able to clearly point them to
> the license terms.  We don't even have an SGA for these files.  So
> should we delete this directory as well?  Of course, I speak of our
> website in /ooo-site.  IMHO, it is not a problem so long as we don't
> include it in a release.
>
> -Rob
>
>>  - Dennis
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
>> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 10:41
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
>> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  
>> wrote:
>>> Is this to be based on the Symphony code?
>>>
>>
>> Dennis,  we have Symphony code within IBM.  Remember, we wrote it.
>> Whatever code we check in is covered by signed ICLA's and CCLA's.
>> That should address all reasonable concerns with regards to the
>> provenance of the code.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>>  - Dennis
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Steve Yin [mailto:steve.yin@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 01:07
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>>>
>>> Thanks for both of your suggestions. The time table will be provided later.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Jürgen Schmidt 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 On 11/26/12 6:59 AM, Steve Yin wrote:
 > Hi,
 >
 > I propose to integrate IAccessible2 as an accessibility feature for AOO
 > 4.0. A wiki for the effort estimation can be found here:
 >
 https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+IAccessible2
 > Here is my question. Should I create a feature in AOO Bugzilla and a
 branch
 > for development?
 >

 Hi Steve,

 this is go

RE: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

I think I've expressed my concerns.  I have nothing to add.

One follow-up question though: 

Previously you had offered to see if it was possible to get a permission letter 
from IBM to ASF allowing the project to adjust headers and notices to have them 
be under ALv2.  

Is that not going to happen?

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@apache.org] 
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 14:57
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: RE: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

I don't think the web site situation is an equivalent.  I also don't think the 
choice of base for integration of Symphony features is relevant.

I am concerned about the Symphony tree being in the public SVN and being an 
attractive nuisance.  If it is not going to be morphed into something that can 
be worked with and integrated by the community of contributors, I recommend 
that it be gone.  

(Of course, I can remove it from any working copy that I possess, and I shall 
do that in switching to the new repository location.)

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 14:25
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
 wrote:
>   "Remember, we wrote it."
>   Well, I suppose the notion of "work for hire" might provide some nuance to 
> "we".
>

And the CCLA covers that side of it.

>   I gather this means that IBM-associated contributors will make ALv2-covered 
> contributions directly to the SVN and/or via patches and that is the 
> provenance there is.  That should safeguard the interests of the ASF.
>
>   So what is the point of there being a Symphony portion of the SVN tree?
>

Go back to the discussion on this list when we initially checked it
in.  We had a long discussion about what to do with that code, with
the two main options being: 1) Make /symphony be the new trunk and
merge the delta from AOO 3.4 into Symphony, or 2) Keep the current AOO
trunk and merge selected features from Symphony into the AOO trunk.
The decision ultimately was to do 2), what we refer to as the "slow
merge".  Since we took that direction the /symphony tree has not
undergone development.  Its main value (in retrospect) was to support
that decision making process.  Of course, if we had decided to take
the other approach then /symphony would become the new trunk and the
usual clean up activities would have occurred on the way to releasing
that trunk.

Remember, IP Cleanup is not just about changing the headers.  It is a
longer process, culminating in a vote to accept the code base.  Once a
code base is accepted, we should be releasing it and doing the other
kinds of maintenance functions -- security patches, etc. -- that a
responsible PMC does for its releases.  But I see zero volunteers
stepping forward to maintain a second office suite in this project.
So it makes no sense to me to spend time on a tree that we're never
going to release.

>   I now agree with a comment that you made in a previous discussion about 
> this.  I think it should be removed if it is never going to be IP-scrubbed.
>

We have another direction in Subversion that is also odd.  It has an
eclectic set of licenses on its files.  In some cases it includes
files where we cannot clearly identify the license.  Instead of
hypotheticals we have actual examples of real 3rd parties wanting to
reuse the files, but we're not always able to clearly point them to
the license terms.  We don't even have an SGA for these files.  So
should we delete this directory as well?  Of course, I speak of our
website in /ooo-site.  IMHO, it is not a problem so long as we don't
include it in a release.

-Rob

>  - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 10:41
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
>> Is this to be based on the Symphony code?
>>
>
> Dennis,  we have Symphony code within IBM.  Remember, we wrote it.
> Whatever code we check in is covered by signed ICLA's and CCLA's.
> That should address all reasonable concerns with regards to the
> provenance of the code.
>
> -Rob
>
>>  - Dennis
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Steve Yin [mailto:steve.yin@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 01:07
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>>
>> Thanks for both of your suggestions. The time table will be provided later.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/26/12 6:59 AM, Steve Yin wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > I propose to integrate IAccessible2 as an accessibility feature for AOO
>>> > 4.0. A wiki for the effort estimation can be found here:
>>> >
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+IAcc

Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

[Kay Schenk]

[top posting]

hmmm...OK, I switched the svn for the project website to:

https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/site/trunk/

This is the only part I needed for now.

I made some edits, and committed them...all good.

But, they are NOT reflected on the old/actual staging site:

http://openofficeorg.staging.apache.org/openofficeorg/pmc-faqs.html

and I'm not sure where this is now.

Maybe I need to do a re-published but, well, I don't know if a new "web" 
area needs to be established first.


I'll comment on our existing ticket for this.

The user portal, www.openoffice.org, should work without issue (maybe?). 
It already has a basically a top-level web area.


On 11/26/2012 02:49 PM, janI wrote:

Got it...I just thought you had removed "incubator" in all links.

Jan.

On 26 November 2012 23:46, Rob Weir  wrote:


On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:44 PM, janI  wrote:

I was thinking of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/
ooo-site/trunk/content/l10n

The l10n branch is one I have created for development, and it contains

only

the source trunk at least yesterday, when I did an update, I am still
working on "svn switch" to get my local copy updated.

And it was merely the update that rob had made, that interested me.



So my changes were simple.  They were not renaming or moving files.  I
was editing the content of pages where they referred to locations in
SVN.  For example, we had a Subversion tutorial and another page that
told visitors where to download the AOO source code from.  Stuff like
that.  I don't think there were any L10n dependencies there.

-Rob


Jan I.


On 26 November 2012 23:37, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:


Just go to  and browse
around to confirm that everything you are interested in is there.

(Are you thinking of the l10n under openoffice/branches ?  It does

appear

that all of openoffice/ooo-site and openoffice/site are there.)

  - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: janI [mailto:j...@apache.org]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 13:48
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

#rob:

did you include subdirs in ooo-site, so that l10n and other are taken

care

of ?

mwiki might be a special problem, since there are loads of text, but I

am

more or less getting used to writing mwiki sql worms (right now I am
juggling with 63.517 spam user accounts), so I can have a look at it

after

the user problem.

Jan

On 26 November 2012 20:27, Rob Weir  wrote:


On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Herbert Duerr 

wrote:

On 26.11.2012 04:32, j...@apache.org wrote:


Author: joes
Date: Mon Nov 26 03:32:20 2012
New Revision: 1413471

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1413471&view=rev
Log:
mv ooo to top-level

Added:
  openoffice/
- copied from r1413470, incubator/ooo/



So our locations in the SVN repository were moved as discussed last

week.

Thank you, Joe!

Here are the instructions to switch your checkouts to the new

location:


In case you are using SVN natively please change into the directory

where

your checked out AOO and run
 svn switch

https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk

there. If you are not working on trunk you have to replace "trunk"

by

the

branches/bname (with bname being the branch name you are interested

in),

of

course.

In case you are using git-svn please change into the directory of

your

git-svn clone, open the file
 .git/config
and find the section named
 [svn-remote "svn"]
in there. In the "url=" line of that section please change the
"incubator/ooo" part of the URL to "openoffice".



I've edited the websites in /site and /ooo-site to update around 7
files that had hard-coded references to the old SVN address.

I didn't see any mentions on the Mwiki.

-Rob



Herbert











--

MzK

“How wrong is it for a woman to expect the man to build the world
 she wants, rather than to create it herself?”
-- Anais Nin

RE: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

I don't think the web site situation is an equivalent.  I also don't think the 
choice of base for integration of Symphony features is relevant.

I am concerned about the Symphony tree being in the public SVN and being an 
attractive nuisance.  If it is not going to be morphed into something that can 
be worked with and integrated by the community of contributors, I recommend 
that it be gone.  

(Of course, I can remove it from any working copy that I possess, and I shall 
do that in switching to the new repository location.)

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 14:25
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
 wrote:
>   "Remember, we wrote it."
>   Well, I suppose the notion of "work for hire" might provide some nuance to 
> "we".
>

And the CCLA covers that side of it.

>   I gather this means that IBM-associated contributors will make ALv2-covered 
> contributions directly to the SVN and/or via patches and that is the 
> provenance there is.  That should safeguard the interests of the ASF.
>
>   So what is the point of there being a Symphony portion of the SVN tree?
>

Go back to the discussion on this list when we initially checked it
in.  We had a long discussion about what to do with that code, with
the two main options being: 1) Make /symphony be the new trunk and
merge the delta from AOO 3.4 into Symphony, or 2) Keep the current AOO
trunk and merge selected features from Symphony into the AOO trunk.
The decision ultimately was to do 2), what we refer to as the "slow
merge".  Since we took that direction the /symphony tree has not
undergone development.  Its main value (in retrospect) was to support
that decision making process.  Of course, if we had decided to take
the other approach then /symphony would become the new trunk and the
usual clean up activities would have occurred on the way to releasing
that trunk.

Remember, IP Cleanup is not just about changing the headers.  It is a
longer process, culminating in a vote to accept the code base.  Once a
code base is accepted, we should be releasing it and doing the other
kinds of maintenance functions -- security patches, etc. -- that a
responsible PMC does for its releases.  But I see zero volunteers
stepping forward to maintain a second office suite in this project.
So it makes no sense to me to spend time on a tree that we're never
going to release.

>   I now agree with a comment that you made in a previous discussion about 
> this.  I think it should be removed if it is never going to be IP-scrubbed.
>

We have another direction in Subversion that is also odd.  It has an
eclectic set of licenses on its files.  In some cases it includes
files where we cannot clearly identify the license.  Instead of
hypotheticals we have actual examples of real 3rd parties wanting to
reuse the files, but we're not always able to clearly point them to
the license terms.  We don't even have an SGA for these files.  So
should we delete this directory as well?  Of course, I speak of our
website in /ooo-site.  IMHO, it is not a problem so long as we don't
include it in a release.

-Rob

>  - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 10:41
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
>> Is this to be based on the Symphony code?
>>
>
> Dennis,  we have Symphony code within IBM.  Remember, we wrote it.
> Whatever code we check in is covered by signed ICLA's and CCLA's.
> That should address all reasonable concerns with regards to the
> provenance of the code.
>
> -Rob
>
>>  - Dennis
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Steve Yin [mailto:steve.yin@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 01:07
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>>
>> Thanks for both of your suggestions. The time table will be provided later.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/26/12 6:59 AM, Steve Yin wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > I propose to integrate IAccessible2 as an accessibility feature for AOO
>>> > 4.0. A wiki for the effort estimation can be found here:
>>> >
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+IAccessible2
>>> > Here is my question. Should I create a feature in AOO Bugzilla and a
>>> branch
>>> > for development?
>>> >
>>>
>>> Hi Steve,
>>>
>>> this is good news. I would suggest that you give some details what do
>>> you expect to implement when. The integration of IAccessible2 is a
>>> bigger task and I don't see it all integrated in the next 4 month or so.
>>> Creating a new feature task in bugzilla would be the normal procedure
>>> and a new branch is a must from my perspective for this huge piece o

Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

[janI]

Got it...I just thought you had removed "incubator" in all links.

Jan.

On 26 November 2012 23:46, Rob Weir  wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:44 PM, janI  wrote:
> > I was thinking of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/
> > ooo-site/trunk/content/l10n
> >
> > The l10n branch is one I have created for development, and it contains
> only
> > the source trunk at least yesterday, when I did an update, I am still
> > working on "svn switch" to get my local copy updated.
> >
> > And it was merely the update that rob had made, that interested me.
> >
>
> So my changes were simple.  They were not renaming or moving files.  I
> was editing the content of pages where they referred to locations in
> SVN.  For example, we had a Subversion tutorial and another page that
> told visitors where to download the AOO source code from.  Stuff like
> that.  I don't think there were any L10n dependencies there.
>
> -Rob
>
> > Jan I.
> >
> >
> > On 26 November 2012 23:37, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
> >
> >> Just go to  and browse
> >> around to confirm that everything you are interested in is there.
> >>
> >> (Are you thinking of the l10n under openoffice/branches ?  It does
> appear
> >> that all of openoffice/ooo-site and openoffice/site are there.)
> >>
> >>  - Dennis
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: janI [mailto:j...@apache.org]
> >> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 13:48
> >> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"
> >>
> >> #rob:
> >>
> >> did you include subdirs in ooo-site, so that l10n and other are taken
> care
> >> of ?
> >>
> >> mwiki might be a special problem, since there are loads of text, but I
> am
> >> more or less getting used to writing mwiki sql worms (right now I am
> >> juggling with 63.517 spam user accounts), so I can have a look at it
> after
> >> the user problem.
> >>
> >> Jan
> >>
> >> On 26 November 2012 20:27, Rob Weir  wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Herbert Duerr 
> wrote:
> >> > > On 26.11.2012 04:32, j...@apache.org wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Author: joes
> >> > >> Date: Mon Nov 26 03:32:20 2012
> >> > >> New Revision: 1413471
> >> > >>
> >> > >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1413471&view=rev
> >> > >> Log:
> >> > >> mv ooo to top-level
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Added:
> >> > >>  openoffice/
> >> > >>- copied from r1413470, incubator/ooo/
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > So our locations in the SVN repository were moved as discussed last
> >> week.
> >> > > Thank you, Joe!
> >> > >
> >> > > Here are the instructions to switch your checkouts to the new
> location:
> >> > >
> >> > > In case you are using SVN natively please change into the directory
> >> where
> >> > > your checked out AOO and run
> >> > > svn switch
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk
> >> > > there. If you are not working on trunk you have to replace "trunk"
> by
> >> the
> >> > > branches/bname (with bname being the branch name you are interested
> >> in),
> >> > of
> >> > > course.
> >> > >
> >> > > In case you are using git-svn please change into the directory of
> your
> >> > > git-svn clone, open the file
> >> > > .git/config
> >> > > and find the section named
> >> > > [svn-remote "svn"]
> >> > > in there. In the "url=" line of that section please change the
> >> > > "incubator/ooo" part of the URL to "openoffice".
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > I've edited the websites in /site and /ooo-site to update around 7
> >> > files that had hard-coded references to the old SVN address.
> >> >
> >> > I didn't see any mentions on the Mwiki.
> >> >
> >> > -Rob
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > Herbert
> >> >
> >>
> >>
>

Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:44 PM, janI  wrote:
> I was thinking of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/
> ooo-site/trunk/content/l10n
>
> The l10n branch is one I have created for development, and it contains only
> the source trunk at least yesterday, when I did an update, I am still
> working on "svn switch" to get my local copy updated.
>
> And it was merely the update that rob had made, that interested me.
>

So my changes were simple.  They were not renaming or moving files.  I
was editing the content of pages where they referred to locations in
SVN.  For example, we had a Subversion tutorial and another page that
told visitors where to download the AOO source code from.  Stuff like
that.  I don't think there were any L10n dependencies there.

-Rob

> Jan I.
>
>
> On 26 November 2012 23:37, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
>
>> Just go to  and browse
>> around to confirm that everything you are interested in is there.
>>
>> (Are you thinking of the l10n under openoffice/branches ?  It does appear
>> that all of openoffice/ooo-site and openoffice/site are there.)
>>
>>  - Dennis
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: janI [mailto:j...@apache.org]
>> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 13:48
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"
>>
>> #rob:
>>
>> did you include subdirs in ooo-site, so that l10n and other are taken care
>> of ?
>>
>> mwiki might be a special problem, since there are loads of text, but I am
>> more or less getting used to writing mwiki sql worms (right now I am
>> juggling with 63.517 spam user accounts), so I can have a look at it after
>> the user problem.
>>
>> Jan
>>
>> On 26 November 2012 20:27, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>
>> > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Herbert Duerr  wrote:
>> > > On 26.11.2012 04:32, j...@apache.org wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> Author: joes
>> > >> Date: Mon Nov 26 03:32:20 2012
>> > >> New Revision: 1413471
>> > >>
>> > >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1413471&view=rev
>> > >> Log:
>> > >> mv ooo to top-level
>> > >>
>> > >> Added:
>> > >>  openoffice/
>> > >>- copied from r1413470, incubator/ooo/
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > So our locations in the SVN repository were moved as discussed last
>> week.
>> > > Thank you, Joe!
>> > >
>> > > Here are the instructions to switch your checkouts to the new location:
>> > >
>> > > In case you are using SVN natively please change into the directory
>> where
>> > > your checked out AOO and run
>> > > svn switch https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk
>> > > there. If you are not working on trunk you have to replace "trunk" by
>> the
>> > > branches/bname (with bname being the branch name you are interested
>> in),
>> > of
>> > > course.
>> > >
>> > > In case you are using git-svn please change into the directory of your
>> > > git-svn clone, open the file
>> > > .git/config
>> > > and find the section named
>> > > [svn-remote "svn"]
>> > > in there. In the "url=" line of that section please change the
>> > > "incubator/ooo" part of the URL to "openoffice".
>> > >
>> >
>> > I've edited the websites in /site and /ooo-site to update around 7
>> > files that had hard-coded references to the old SVN address.
>> >
>> > I didn't see any mentions on the Mwiki.
>> >
>> > -Rob
>> >
>> >
>> > > Herbert
>> >
>>
>>

Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

[janI]

I was thinking of http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/
ooo-site/trunk/content/l10n

The l10n branch is one I have created for development, and it contains only
the source trunk at least yesterday, when I did an update, I am still
working on "svn switch" to get my local copy updated.

And it was merely the update that rob had made, that interested me.

Jan I.


On 26 November 2012 23:37, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:

> Just go to  and browse
> around to confirm that everything you are interested in is there.
>
> (Are you thinking of the l10n under openoffice/branches ?  It does appear
> that all of openoffice/ooo-site and openoffice/site are there.)
>
>  - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: janI [mailto:j...@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 13:48
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"
>
> #rob:
>
> did you include subdirs in ooo-site, so that l10n and other are taken care
> of ?
>
> mwiki might be a special problem, since there are loads of text, but I am
> more or less getting used to writing mwiki sql worms (right now I am
> juggling with 63.517 spam user accounts), so I can have a look at it after
> the user problem.
>
> Jan
>
> On 26 November 2012 20:27, Rob Weir  wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Herbert Duerr  wrote:
> > > On 26.11.2012 04:32, j...@apache.org wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Author: joes
> > >> Date: Mon Nov 26 03:32:20 2012
> > >> New Revision: 1413471
> > >>
> > >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1413471&view=rev
> > >> Log:
> > >> mv ooo to top-level
> > >>
> > >> Added:
> > >>  openoffice/
> > >>- copied from r1413470, incubator/ooo/
> > >
> > >
> > > So our locations in the SVN repository were moved as discussed last
> week.
> > > Thank you, Joe!
> > >
> > > Here are the instructions to switch your checkouts to the new location:
> > >
> > > In case you are using SVN natively please change into the directory
> where
> > > your checked out AOO and run
> > > svn switch https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk
> > > there. If you are not working on trunk you have to replace "trunk" by
> the
> > > branches/bname (with bname being the branch name you are interested
> in),
> > of
> > > course.
> > >
> > > In case you are using git-svn please change into the directory of your
> > > git-svn clone, open the file
> > > .git/config
> > > and find the section named
> > > [svn-remote "svn"]
> > > in there. In the "url=" line of that section please change the
> > > "incubator/ooo" part of the URL to "openoffice".
> > >
> >
> > I've edited the websites in /site and /ooo-site to update around 7
> > files that had hard-coded references to the old SVN address.
> >
> > I didn't see any mentions on the Mwiki.
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> >
> > > Herbert
> >
>
>

Re: New wiki acount

[TJ Frazier]

On 11/26/2012 16:24, Vincent Thiry wrote:

User name : balak064

Mail : balak...@gmail.com

Thank you

Done. You will want to change your password after you first log in. If 
you have any problems, please write again.


/tj/
(User:TJFrazier on Mwiki)

RE: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

Just go to  and browse around to 
confirm that everything you are interested in is there.  

(Are you thinking of the l10n under openoffice/branches ?  It does appear that 
all of openoffice/ooo-site and openoffice/site are there.)

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: janI [mailto:j...@apache.org] 
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 13:48
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

#rob:

did you include subdirs in ooo-site, so that l10n and other are taken care
of ?

mwiki might be a special problem, since there are loads of text, but I am
more or less getting used to writing mwiki sql worms (right now I am
juggling with 63.517 spam user accounts), so I can have a look at it after
the user problem.

Jan

On 26 November 2012 20:27, Rob Weir  wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Herbert Duerr  wrote:
> > On 26.11.2012 04:32, j...@apache.org wrote:
> >>
> >> Author: joes
> >> Date: Mon Nov 26 03:32:20 2012
> >> New Revision: 1413471
> >>
> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1413471&view=rev
> >> Log:
> >> mv ooo to top-level
> >>
> >> Added:
> >>  openoffice/
> >>- copied from r1413470, incubator/ooo/
> >
> >
> > So our locations in the SVN repository were moved as discussed last week.
> > Thank you, Joe!
> >
> > Here are the instructions to switch your checkouts to the new location:
> >
> > In case you are using SVN natively please change into the directory where
> > your checked out AOO and run
> > svn switch https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk
> > there. If you are not working on trunk you have to replace "trunk" by the
> > branches/bname (with bname being the branch name you are interested in),
> of
> > course.
> >
> > In case you are using git-svn please change into the directory of your
> > git-svn clone, open the file
> > .git/config
> > and find the section named
> > [svn-remote "svn"]
> > in there. In the "url=" line of that section please change the
> > "incubator/ooo" part of the URL to "openoffice".
> >
>
> I've edited the websites in /site and /ooo-site to update around 7
> files that had hard-coded references to the old SVN address.
>
> I didn't see any mentions on the Mwiki.
>
> -Rob
>
>
> > Herbert
>

Re: Request Mwiki account

[TJ Frazier]

On 11/26/2012 17:08, janI wrote:

Just a question...I presume you send the whole account information in the
e-mail, should we not advice to change the password, you might already have
done it, but I just wanted to make sure we all did it.

Jan.


I think this advice is given automatically, on the first login (but I 
haven't checked that).


/tj/



On 26 November 2012 22:59, TJ Frazier  wrote:


On 11/26/2012 13:06, Thiago Ramos wrote:


My username can be thiago_addlabs and e-mail this same.

Thanks.

Att,

Thiago Giannini Ramos
--**-
Analista de Sistemas - ADDLabs - IC/UFF

http://www.addlabs.uff.br/
Av. Gal. Milton Tavares de Souza, s/nº - Niterói - RJ

  Done. Your confirmation email should be there by now. Please write again

if you have problems.

/tj/
(User:TJFrazier on Mwiki)

Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
 wrote:
>   "Remember, we wrote it."
>   Well, I suppose the notion of "work for hire" might provide some nuance to 
> "we".
>

And the CCLA covers that side of it.

>   I gather this means that IBM-associated contributors will make ALv2-covered 
> contributions directly to the SVN and/or via patches and that is the 
> provenance there is.  That should safeguard the interests of the ASF.
>
>   So what is the point of there being a Symphony portion of the SVN tree?
>

Go back to the discussion on this list when we initially checked it
in.  We had a long discussion about what to do with that code, with
the two main options being: 1) Make /symphony be the new trunk and
merge the delta from AOO 3.4 into Symphony, or 2) Keep the current AOO
trunk and merge selected features from Symphony into the AOO trunk.
The decision ultimately was to do 2), what we refer to as the "slow
merge".  Since we took that direction the /symphony tree has not
undergone development.  Its main value (in retrospect) was to support
that decision making process.  Of course, if we had decided to take
the other approach then /symphony would become the new trunk and the
usual clean up activities would have occurred on the way to releasing
that trunk.

Remember, IP Cleanup is not just about changing the headers.  It is a
longer process, culminating in a vote to accept the code base.  Once a
code base is accepted, we should be releasing it and doing the other
kinds of maintenance functions -- security patches, etc. -- that a
responsible PMC does for its releases.  But I see zero volunteers
stepping forward to maintain a second office suite in this project.
So it makes no sense to me to spend time on a tree that we're never
going to release.

>   I now agree with a comment that you made in a previous discussion about 
> this.  I think it should be removed if it is never going to be IP-scrubbed.
>

We have another direction in Subversion that is also odd.  It has an
eclectic set of licenses on its files.  In some cases it includes
files where we cannot clearly identify the license.  Instead of
hypotheticals we have actual examples of real 3rd parties wanting to
reuse the files, but we're not always able to clearly point them to
the license terms.  We don't even have an SGA for these files.  So
should we delete this directory as well?  Of course, I speak of our
website in /ooo-site.  IMHO, it is not a problem so long as we don't
include it in a release.

-Rob

>  - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 10:41
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
>> Is this to be based on the Symphony code?
>>
>
> Dennis,  we have Symphony code within IBM.  Remember, we wrote it.
> Whatever code we check in is covered by signed ICLA's and CCLA's.
> That should address all reasonable concerns with regards to the
> provenance of the code.
>
> -Rob
>
>>  - Dennis
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Steve Yin [mailto:steve.yin@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 01:07
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>>
>> Thanks for both of your suggestions. The time table will be provided later.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/26/12 6:59 AM, Steve Yin wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > I propose to integrate IAccessible2 as an accessibility feature for AOO
>>> > 4.0. A wiki for the effort estimation can be found here:
>>> >
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+IAccessible2
>>> > Here is my question. Should I create a feature in AOO Bugzilla and a
>>> branch
>>> > for development?
>>> >
>>>
>>> Hi Steve,
>>>
>>> this is good news. I would suggest that you give some details what do
>>> you expect to implement when. The integration of IAccessible2 is a
>>> bigger task and I don't see it all integrated in the next 4 month or so.
>>> Creating a new feature task in bugzilla would be the normal procedure
>>> and a new branch is a must from my perspective for this huge piece of work.
>>>
>>> Good to see progress on this important integration.
>>>
>>> Juergen
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Steve Yin
>>
>

Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Marcus (OOo)]

Am 11/26/2012 06:59 AM, schrieb Steve Yin:

Hi,

I propose to integrate IAccessible2 as an accessibility feature for AOO
4.0. A wiki for the effort estimation can be found here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+IAccessible2
Here is my question. Should I create a feature in AOO Bugzilla and a branch
for development?


Thats good news. I'm looking forward to this really long-wanted improvement.

Marcus

Re: Request Mwiki account

[janI]

Just a question...I presume you send the whole account information in the
e-mail, should we not advice to change the password, you might already have
done it, but I just wanted to make sure we all did it.

Jan.


On 26 November 2012 22:59, TJ Frazier  wrote:

> On 11/26/2012 13:06, Thiago Ramos wrote:
>
>> My username can be thiago_addlabs and e-mail this same.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Att,
>>
>> Thiago Giannini Ramos
>> --**-
>> Analista de Sistemas - ADDLabs - IC/UFF
>>
>> http://www.addlabs.uff.br/
>> Av. Gal. Milton Tavares de Souza, s/nº - Niterói - RJ
>>
>>  Done. Your confirmation email should be there by now. Please write again
> if you have problems.
>
> /tj/
> (User:TJFrazier on Mwiki)
>
>
>

Re: Request Mwiki account

[TJ Frazier]

On 11/26/2012 13:06, Thiago Ramos wrote:

My username can be thiago_addlabs and e-mail this same.

Thanks.

Att,

Thiago Giannini Ramos
---
Analista de Sistemas - ADDLabs - IC/UFF

http://www.addlabs.uff.br/
Av. Gal. Milton Tavares de Souza, s/nº - Niterói - RJ

Done. Your confirmation email should be there by now. Please write again 
if you have problems.


/tj/
(User:TJFrazier on Mwiki)

Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

[janI]

#rob:

did you include subdirs in ooo-site, so that l10n and other are taken care
of ?

mwiki might be a special problem, since there are loads of text, but I am
more or less getting used to writing mwiki sql worms (right now I am
juggling with 63.517 spam user accounts), so I can have a look at it after
the user problem.

Jan

On 26 November 2012 20:27, Rob Weir  wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Herbert Duerr  wrote:
> > On 26.11.2012 04:32, j...@apache.org wrote:
> >>
> >> Author: joes
> >> Date: Mon Nov 26 03:32:20 2012
> >> New Revision: 1413471
> >>
> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1413471&view=rev
> >> Log:
> >> mv ooo to top-level
> >>
> >> Added:
> >>  openoffice/
> >>- copied from r1413470, incubator/ooo/
> >
> >
> > So our locations in the SVN repository were moved as discussed last week.
> > Thank you, Joe!
> >
> > Here are the instructions to switch your checkouts to the new location:
> >
> > In case you are using SVN natively please change into the directory where
> > your checked out AOO and run
> > svn switch https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk
> > there. If you are not working on trunk you have to replace "trunk" by the
> > branches/bname (with bname being the branch name you are interested in),
> of
> > course.
> >
> > In case you are using git-svn please change into the directory of your
> > git-svn clone, open the file
> > .git/config
> > and find the section named
> > [svn-remote "svn"]
> > in there. In the "url=" line of that section please change the
> > "incubator/ooo" part of the URL to "openoffice".
> >
>
> I've edited the websites in /site and /ooo-site to update around 7
> files that had hard-coded references to the old SVN address.
>
> I didn't see any mentions on the Mwiki.
>
> -Rob
>
>
> > Herbert
>

RE: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

  "Remember, we wrote it."
  Well, I suppose the notion of "work for hire" might provide some nuance to 
"we".

  I gather this means that IBM-associated contributors will make ALv2-covered 
contributions directly to the SVN and/or via patches and that is the provenance 
there is.  That should safeguard the interests of the ASF.

  So what is the point of there being a Symphony portion of the SVN tree?

  I now agree with a comment that you made in a previous discussion about this. 
 I think it should be removed if it is never going to be IP-scrubbed.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 10:41
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
> Is this to be based on the Symphony code?
>

Dennis,  we have Symphony code within IBM.  Remember, we wrote it.
Whatever code we check in is covered by signed ICLA's and CCLA's.
That should address all reasonable concerns with regards to the
provenance of the code.

-Rob

>  - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Yin [mailto:steve.yin@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 01:07
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>
> Thanks for both of your suggestions. The time table will be provided later.
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On 11/26/12 6:59 AM, Steve Yin wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I propose to integrate IAccessible2 as an accessibility feature for AOO
>> > 4.0. A wiki for the effort estimation can be found here:
>> >
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+IAccessible2
>> > Here is my question. Should I create a feature in AOO Bugzilla and a
>> branch
>> > for development?
>> >
>>
>> Hi Steve,
>>
>> this is good news. I would suggest that you give some details what do
>> you expect to implement when. The integration of IAccessible2 is a
>> bigger task and I don't see it all integrated in the next 4 month or so.
>> Creating a new feature task in bugzilla would be the normal procedure
>> and a new branch is a must from my perspective for this huge piece of work.
>>
>> Good to see progress on this important integration.
>>
>> Juergen
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
>
> Steve Yin
>

Re: [RELEASE]: new languages for AOO 3.4.1

[Rob Weir]

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 8:45 PM, 胡其图  wrote:
> Hi there,
> I am a mongolian where living in inner mongolia, china. and I want to build a 
> traditional mongolian AOO if it possible.
> and I know there have a slav mongolian AOO, but this is not similar to 
> traditional mongolian.
> tell me how to add about a language for traditional mongolian?
>

The first step is to join our localization mailing list by sending an
email to l10n-subscr...@openoffice.apache.org.  This will generate a
confirmation email that you will need to respond to.

As you mention, we have a Cyrillic/Mongolian translation of OpenOffice
3.0.0, but no traditional Mongolian translation.

Starting a new translation is a lot of work, but is manageable if you
can find some other volunteers to help.

But a linguistics question for you:  Is traditional Mongolian just a
change of script compared to the Cyrillic script?  If so, is it
possible to transform the scripts from one to another by a program,
and then clean up the results?  I've seen this done for Traditional
versus Simplified Chinese, for example.  Or will this require a
complete new translation?

If you start from scratch, then the translation/localization
considerations include:

1) Develop a glossary of common terminology related to the application
and the user interface.  This helps ensure consistency.

2) Translate the user interface

3) In-product localization, for things like calendar systems, counting
conventions for numbered lists, etc.

4) Creating a spell checking dictionary

5) Translation of help files

As you see, this is a big effort, but it can be very rewarding.

Are you able to find other Mongolian volunteers to help with this?

Regards,

-Rob

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 2012-11-23 16:39:46,"Jürgen Schmidt"  wrote:
>>Hi,
>>
>>we all know that the number of volunteers helping with translation is
>>growing and we would like to make new languages as soon as possible
>>available. This is important for two reason, first to make AOO available
>>in further languages to reach more users. Second to show our volunteers
>>that their work is appreciated and become integrated as soon as
>>possible. We don't have a well defined process for doing it at moment
>>but we will find a working way that will be ok for all of us. And we can
>>improve it over time when see demand for changes or improvements, means
>>we don't have to find a 100% perfect solution from the beginning.
>>
>>The most important part is how we do the naming of the different parts
>>of such a release.
>>
>>I see two different scenarios:
>>
>>1. Only new languages, no bugfixes, no other code changes
>>We add the new languages on top of the existing AOO34 branch, build the
>>office with the new languages and release the new languages as
>>convenience binary packages. We also build a new src release package and
>>add the revision number in the name to identify a respin of the orginal
>>3.4.1.
>>
>>For example: aoo-3.4.1-rev1372282-src.tar.bz2
>>
>>This new src release becomes the default for 3.4.1 because it is a
>>respin only (no functional changes)
>>
>>The revision number is part of the about dialog as well and it is
>>possible to identify the respin.
>>
>>
>>2. New languages + bug-fixes or security fixes
>>The micro number will be increased and we do a normal release cycle.
>>The src release will contain the revision number in future always.
>>
>>
>>
>>Concrete proposal for 3.4.1 and new languages:
>>
>>1. set a deadline for new translations, for exmaple December 31, 2012
>>2. integrate the new languages and provide the builds until January 10, 2013
>>3. test and verify the new language builds asap
>>4. release the new languages at the end of January
>>
>>
>>Why a deadline until December:
>>The reason is quite simply, we have 22 languages with an UI coverage of
>>more than 95% (ok Turkish 93%). My plan is to prepare a blog entry and
>>call again for volunteers for these languages where the effort is
>>moderate. My hope is that we can integrate a few of the important ones.
>>
>>UI coverage with more than 93%
>>==
>>100%: Danish
>>98%: Korean, Polish, Asturian, Uighur, Icelandic, Indonesian, Welsh,
>>Catalan, Bulgarian, Latvian
>>97%: Greek, Basque
>>96%: English (South Africa)
>>95%: Portuguese, Swedish, Marathi, Kannada, Gujarati, Irish, Oriya
>>93%: Turkish
>>
>>
>>Juergen

Re: [RELEASE]: new languages for AOO 3.4.1

[Johanne Mathisen Tandberg]

Cancel me from the maling list

Johanne

Den 26. nov. 2012 kl. 04:51 skrev "Shenfeng Liu" :

> Welcome to join AOO!
> I suggest you can start from our New Volunteer Orientation page for how to
> do translation: http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/translate.html .
> And besides the dev@openoffice.apache.org mail group, you should also
> subscript to l...@openoffice.apache.org, by sending an email to
> l10n-subscr...@openoffice.apache.org. In I10n, translation related
> topics/questions will be discussed in more details.
> 
> - Shenfeng (Simon)
> 
> 
> 2012/11/26 胡其图 
> 
>> Hi there,
>> I am a mongolian where living in inner mongolia, china. and I want to
>> build a traditional mongolian AOO if it possible.
>> and I know there have a slav mongolian AOO, but this is not similar to
>> traditional mongolian.
>> tell me how to add about a language for traditional mongolian?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> At 2012-11-23 16:39:46,"Jürgen Schmidt"  wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> we all know that the number of volunteers helping with translation is
>>> growing and we would like to make new languages as soon as possible
>>> available. This is important for two reason, first to make AOO available
>>> in further languages to reach more users. Second to show our volunteers
>>> that their work is appreciated and become integrated as soon as
>>> possible. We don't have a well defined process for doing it at moment
>>> but we will find a working way that will be ok for all of us. And we can
>>> improve it over time when see demand for changes or improvements, means
>>> we don't have to find a 100% perfect solution from the beginning.
>>> 
>>> The most important part is how we do the naming of the different parts
>>> of such a release.
>>> 
>>> I see two different scenarios:
>>> 
>>> 1. Only new languages, no bugfixes, no other code changes
>>> We add the new languages on top of the existing AOO34 branch, build the
>>> office with the new languages and release the new languages as
>>> convenience binary packages. We also build a new src release package and
>>> add the revision number in the name to identify a respin of the orginal
>>> 3.4.1.
>>> 
>>> For example: aoo-3.4.1-rev1372282-src.tar.bz2
>>> 
>>> This new src release becomes the default for 3.4.1 because it is a
>>> respin only (no functional changes)
>>> 
>>> The revision number is part of the about dialog as well and it is
>>> possible to identify the respin.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2. New languages + bug-fixes or security fixes
>>> The micro number will be increased and we do a normal release cycle.
>>> The src release will contain the revision number in future always.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Concrete proposal for 3.4.1 and new languages:
>>> 
>>> 1. set a deadline for new translations, for exmaple December 31, 2012
>>> 2. integrate the new languages and provide the builds until January 10,
>> 2013
>>> 3. test and verify the new language builds asap
>>> 4. release the new languages at the end of January
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Why a deadline until December:
>>> The reason is quite simply, we have 22 languages with an UI coverage of
>>> more than 95% (ok Turkish 93%). My plan is to prepare a blog entry and
>>> call again for volunteers for these languages where the effort is
>>> moderate. My hope is that we can integrate a few of the important ones.
>>> 
>>> UI coverage with more than 93%
>>> ==
>>> 100%: Danish
>>> 98%: Korean, Polish, Asturian, Uighur, Icelandic, Indonesian, Welsh,
>>> Catalan, Bulgarian, Latvian
>>> 97%: Greek, Basque
>>> 96%: English (South Africa)
>>> 95%: Portuguese, Swedish, Marathi, Kannada, Gujarati, Irish, Oriya
>>> 93%: Turkish
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Juergen
>> 

Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
 wrote:
> I thought I asked a yes-no question.
>

Do you think this is your courtroom or something?

> I am having trouble parsing the response.
>

Feel free to ask questions if anything was not clear.

> Is this to the effect that the only folks who can derive from the Symphony 
> code are IBM employees who will contribute new ALv2-safe parts outside the 
> SVN Symphony hierarchy as if newborn?  That is, the checkins will not have 
> any provenance with what is in the SVN Symphony subtree?
>

We're not doing svn copy's or svn move's from /symphony.  So no SVN
history will be brought along.   The integration of the Symphony code
into AOO 4.0 is far more fine grained.  It is not just bulk copying a
bunch of files over.  I wish it were that easy.

Regards,

-Rob

>  - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 10:41
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
>> Is this to be based on the Symphony code?
>>
>
> Dennis,  we have Symphony code within IBM.  Remember, we wrote it.
> Whatever code we check in is covered by signed ICLA's and CCLA's.
> That should address all reasonable concerns with regards to the
> provenance of the code.
>
> -Rob
>
>>  - Dennis
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Steve Yin [mailto:steve.yin@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 01:07
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>>
>> Thanks for both of your suggestions. The time table will be provided later.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/26/12 6:59 AM, Steve Yin wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > I propose to integrate IAccessible2 as an accessibility feature for AOO
>>> > 4.0. A wiki for the effort estimation can be found here:
>>> >
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+IAccessible2
>>> > Here is my question. Should I create a feature in AOO Bugzilla and a
>>> branch
>>> > for development?
>>> >
>>>
>>> Hi Steve,
>>>
>>> this is good news. I would suggest that you give some details what do
>>> you expect to implement when. The integration of IAccessible2 is a
>>> bigger task and I don't see it all integrated in the next 4 month or so.
>>> Creating a new feature task in bugzilla would be the normal procedure
>>> and a new branch is a must from my perspective for this huge piece of work.
>>>
>>> Good to see progress on this important integration.
>>>
>>> Juergen
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Steve Yin
>>
>

RE: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

I thought I asked a yes-no question.

I am having trouble parsing the response.  

Is this to the effect that the only folks who can derive from the Symphony code 
are IBM employees who will contribute new ALv2-safe parts outside the SVN 
Symphony hierarchy as if newborn?  That is, the checkins will not have any 
provenance with what is in the SVN Symphony subtree?

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 10:41
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
> Is this to be based on the Symphony code?
>

Dennis,  we have Symphony code within IBM.  Remember, we wrote it.
Whatever code we check in is covered by signed ICLA's and CCLA's.
That should address all reasonable concerns with regards to the
provenance of the code.

-Rob

>  - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Yin [mailto:steve.yin@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 01:07
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>
> Thanks for both of your suggestions. The time table will be provided later.
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On 11/26/12 6:59 AM, Steve Yin wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I propose to integrate IAccessible2 as an accessibility feature for AOO
>> > 4.0. A wiki for the effort estimation can be found here:
>> >
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+IAccessible2
>> > Here is my question. Should I create a feature in AOO Bugzilla and a
>> branch
>> > for development?
>> >
>>
>> Hi Steve,
>>
>> this is good news. I would suggest that you give some details what do
>> you expect to implement when. The integration of IAccessible2 is a
>> bigger task and I don't see it all integrated in the next 4 month or so.
>> Creating a new feature task in bugzilla would be the normal procedure
>> and a new branch is a must from my perspective for this huge piece of work.
>>
>> Good to see progress on this important integration.
>>
>> Juergen
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
>
> Steve Yin
>

Re: IPAD

[Rob Weir]

I nominate this for an FAQ.

-Rob

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Dhrubajyoti Gogoi  wrote:
> No. Currently OpenOffice wont run on an iPad. Although you may find some
> third party solutions supporting it.
>
> On 25 November 2012 09:52, Al  wrote:
>
>> Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>

Re: Could anybody who has MS word 97 help to verify bug 35763?

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Ji Yan  wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
>  Have you verify this bug? Has it been fixed already?
>

I do have Office 97.  But what part needs to be verified?  Is there a
document I need to load?  Do you have the test document?

-Rob

>
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 2:58 AM, Damjan Jovanovic 
>> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 4:25 AM, lou ql  wrote:
>> >> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=35763
>> >>
>> >> It's about the import/export of underling color, I have verified with MS
>> >> word 2003, but I don't have MS word 97, could anybody help with this?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Lou QingLe
>> >
>> > On a related note, is there any possibility of setting up one or more
>> > servers with (as much as possible) every possible version of MS office
>> > ever made, and offering VNC access to them, so it can help developers
>> > test compatibility issues without having their own MS office copy?
>> >
>>
>> I doubt the Microsoft EULA would allow this.
>>
>> But one thing Microsoft has done is offer a free subscription to MSDN
>> for Apache Committers.  That allows us to download ISO images for
>> previous versions of Windows and Office for testing purposes.  This
>> plus VirtualBox is a good solution for a local machine.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> > Regards
>> > Damjan Jovanovic
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji

Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Herbert Duerr  wrote:
> On 26.11.2012 04:32, j...@apache.org wrote:
>>
>> Author: joes
>> Date: Mon Nov 26 03:32:20 2012
>> New Revision: 1413471
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1413471&view=rev
>> Log:
>> mv ooo to top-level
>>
>> Added:
>>  openoffice/
>>- copied from r1413470, incubator/ooo/
>
>
> So our locations in the SVN repository were moved as discussed last week.
> Thank you, Joe!
>
> Here are the instructions to switch your checkouts to the new location:
>
> In case you are using SVN natively please change into the directory where
> your checked out AOO and run
> svn switch https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk
> there. If you are not working on trunk you have to replace "trunk" by the
> branches/bname (with bname being the branch name you are interested in), of
> course.
>
> In case you are using git-svn please change into the directory of your
> git-svn clone, open the file
> .git/config
> and find the section named
> [svn-remote "svn"]
> in there. In the "url=" line of that section please change the
> "incubator/ooo" part of the URL to "openoffice".
>

I've edited the websites in /site and /ooo-site to update around 7
files that had hard-coded references to the old SVN address.

I didn't see any mentions on the Mwiki.

-Rob


> Herbert

Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 2:18 PM, TJ Frazier  wrote:
> On 11/26/2012 13:40, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Is this to be based on the Symphony code?
>>>
>>
>> Dennis,  we have Symphony code within IBM.  Remember, we wrote it.
>> Whatever code we check in is covered by signed ICLA's and CCLA's.
>> That should address all reasonable concerns with regards to the
>> provenance of the code.
>>
>> -Rob
>
>
> Rob,
>
> "Cover concerns" in the larger sense, yes: nobody should be worried that we
> or our downline customers will be jumping on anyone's copyright, by using
> the material in accordance with ALv2.
>
> But, in the smaller sense, maybe no. If the themes contain license
> information (presumably IBM's), then IIUC this /SHALL/ be changed by a duly
> authorized IBM employee before the code is added to AOO. (This is the same
> dull, demanding, and absolutely necessary job that Andrew Rist did for us,
> as authorized by Oracle.) A simple statement by Armand that no such license
> data exists, or by an IBM'er that the data will be changed, should allay any
> concerns; and we should feel confident of passing the RAT scan.
>

If you see anyone check in any files to the AOO tree with IBM license
information in them, then please shout out.  That should not happen.
But I'm not going to respond to hypothetical concerns from
hypothetical developers about hypothetical check-ins..

-Rob


> /tj/
>
>>
>>>   - Dennis
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Steve Yin [mailto:steve.yin@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 01:07
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>>>
>>> Thanks for both of your suggestions. The time table will be provided
>>> later.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Jürgen Schmidt
>>> wrote:
>>>
 On 11/26/12 6:59 AM, Steve Yin wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I propose to integrate IAccessible2 as an accessibility feature for AOO
> 4.0. A wiki for the effort estimation can be found here:
>

 https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+IAccessible2
>
> Here is my question. Should I create a feature in AOO Bugzilla and a

 branch
>
> for development?
>

 Hi Steve,

 this is good news. I would suggest that you give some details what do
 you expect to implement when. The integration of IAccessible2 is a
 bigger task and I don't see it all integrated in the next 4 month or so.
 Creating a new feature task in bugzilla would be the normal procedure
 and a new branch is a must from my perspective for this huge piece of
 work.

 Good to see progress on this important integration.

 Juergen


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>> Steve Yin
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[TJ Frazier]

On 11/26/2012 13:40, Rob Weir wrote:

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:

Is this to be based on the Symphony code?



Dennis,  we have Symphony code within IBM.  Remember, we wrote it.
Whatever code we check in is covered by signed ICLA's and CCLA's.
That should address all reasonable concerns with regards to the
provenance of the code.

-Rob


Rob,

"Cover concerns" in the larger sense, yes: nobody should be worried that 
we or our downline customers will be jumping on anyone's copyright, by 
using the material in accordance with ALv2.


But, in the smaller sense, maybe no. If the themes contain license 
information (presumably IBM's), then IIUC this /SHALL/ be changed by a 
duly authorized IBM employee before the code is added to AOO. (This is 
the same dull, demanding, and absolutely necessary job that Andrew Rist 
did for us, as authorized by Oracle.) A simple statement by Armand that 
no such license data exists, or by an IBM'er that the data will be 
changed, should allay any concerns; and we should feel confident of 
passing the RAT scan.


/tj/



  - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Steve Yin [mailto:steve.yin@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 01:07
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

Thanks for both of your suggestions. The time table will be provided later.


On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:


On 11/26/12 6:59 AM, Steve Yin wrote:

Hi,

I propose to integrate IAccessible2 as an accessibility feature for AOO
4.0. A wiki for the effort estimation can be found here:


https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+IAccessible2

Here is my question. Should I create a feature in AOO Bugzilla and a

branch

for development?



Hi Steve,

this is good news. I would suggest that you give some details what do
you expect to implement when. The integration of IAccessible2 is a
bigger task and I don't see it all integrated in the next 4 month or so.
Creating a new feature task in bugzilla would be the normal procedure
and a new branch is a must from my perspective for this huge piece of work.

Good to see progress on this important integration.

Juergen





--
Best Regards,

Steve Yin

Re: Bug in Impress: report

[Rob Weir]

Thanks for the bug report.  I've added it to our Bugzilla issue tracker here:

https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121410

If you create a BZ account you can "watch" this issue or enter
additional comments.

Regards,

-Rob

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Tony Hagon  wrote:
> Hello
> I wonder if you would please pass this bug report to whoever cares about
> it
>
> I use Impress 3.4.1 on XP SP3.
>
> On a presentation today, I created a text box, font Jane Austen (a script
> type font).
> In custom animation I selected Appear, On click
> Properties Text animation: As one object
> Effects: Animate: Letter by letter.
> Selected ok and OpenOffice crashed.
> I repeated the exercise several times and it crashed at the same point
>
> HTH
>
>
> Tony Hagon
> Glenrhu
> Bowermadden
> Scotland

Re: svn commit: r839584 - /infrastructure/buildbot/aegis/buildmaster/master1/projects/openofficeorg.conf

[Andrew Rist]

Herbert,
Did you run switch on the svn tree for the windows nightly build? That 
seems to be the only piece not updated by this change.

A.

On 11/26/2012 12:30 AM, h...@apache.org wrote:

Author: hdu
Date: Mon Nov 26 08:30:23 2012
New Revision: 839584

Log:
after graduation openoffice moved from incubator/ooo

Modified:
 
infrastructure/buildbot/aegis/buildmaster/master1/projects/openofficeorg.conf

Modified: 
infrastructure/buildbot/aegis/buildmaster/master1/projects/openofficeorg.conf
==
--- 
infrastructure/buildbot/aegis/buildmaster/master1/projects/openofficeorg.conf 
(original)
+++ 
infrastructure/buildbot/aegis/buildmaster/master1/projects/openofficeorg.conf 
Mon Nov 26 08:30:23 2012
@@ -3,32 +3,32 @@
  # schedulers
  
  c['schedulers'].append(AnyBranchScheduler(name="on-openofficeorg-commit",

- branches=["incubator/ooo/site"],
+ branches=["openoffice/site"],
   treeStableTimer=2,
   builderNames=["openofficeorg-site-staging"]))
  
  c['schedulers'].append(Nightly(name='openoffice-linux64-nightly',

builderNames=['openoffice-linux64-nightly'],
-  branch='incubator/ooo/trunk',
+  branch='openoffice/trunk',
hour=4,
minute=10))
  
  c['schedulers'].append(Nightly(name='openoffice-linux64-rat',

builderNames=['openoffice-linux64-rat'],
-  branch='incubator/ooo/trunk',
+  branch='openoffice/trunk',
dayOfWeek=0,
hour=3,
minute=10))
  
  c['schedulers'].append(Nightly(name='openoffice-linux32-nightly',

builderNames=['openoffice-linux32-nightly'],
-  branch='incubator/ooo/trunk',
+  branch='openoffice/trunk',
hour=4,
minute=20))
  
  c['schedulers'].append(Nightly(name='aoo-win7-weekly',

builderNames=['aoo-win7'],
-  branch='incubator/ooo/trunk',
+  branch='openoffice/trunk',
properties={'rsync_opts':'--delete'},
dayOfWeek=0,
hour=6,
@@ -36,13 +36,13 @@ c['schedulers'].append(Nightly(name='aoo
  
  c['schedulers'].append(Nightly(name='aoo-win7-nightly',

builderNames=['aoo-win7'],
-  branch='incubator/ooo/trunk',
+  branch='openoffice/trunk',
hour=4,
minute=30))
  
  c['schedulers'].append(Nightly(name='aoo-win7-snapshot',

builderNames=['aoo-w7snap'],
-  branch='incubator/ooo/trunk',
+  branch='openoffice/trunk',
dayOfWeek=0,
hour=2,
minute=30))
@@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ c['status'].append(mail.MailNotifier(fro
  # schedulers
  
  c['schedulers'].append(AnyBranchScheduler(name="on-ooo-site-commit",

- branches=["incubator/ooo/ooo-site"],
+ branches=["openoffice/ooo-site"],
   treeStableTimer=2,
   builderNames=["ooo-site-site-staging"]))
  
@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ f_ooo_1 = factory.BuildFactory()

  f_ooo_1.addStep(SVN(
  mode="copy",
  baseURL="http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/";,
-defaultBranch="incubator/ooo/trunk",
+defaultBranch="openoffice/trunk",
  ))
  
  f_ooo_1.addStep(SetProperty(command="date +%Y-%m-%d_%H:%M:%S", property="today"))

@@ -228,7 +228,7 @@ f_ooo_1r = factory.BuildFactory()
  f_ooo_1r.addStep(SVN(
  mode="copy",
  baseURL="http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/";,
-defaultBranch="incubator/ooo/trunk",
+defaultBranch="openoffice/trunk",
  ))
  
  # RAT reporting. An xml config file on the slave points the rat jar to main/rat-excludes as part of its run.

@@ -418,7 +418,7 @@ c['builders'].append(b_ooo_w1)
  f_ooo_w2 = factory.BuildFactory()
  
  # svn under cygwin - as required by windows build

-# f_ooo_w2.addStep(Compile(command=[winbash , '-cliex', 'cd 
/cygdrive/e/slave14/aoo-w7snap/ ; svn co 
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/tags/SNAPSHOT build_svn'],
+# f_ooo_w2.addStep(Compile(command=[winbash , '-cliex', 'cd 
/cygdrive/e/slave14/aoo-w7snap/ ; svn co 
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/SNAPSHOT build_svn'],
  f_ooo_w2.addStep(Compile(command=[winbash , '-cliex', 'cd 
/cygdrive/e/slave14/aoo-w7snap/ ; svn up build_svn'],
  haltOnFailure=True, workdir="build",
  description=["updating","reference source"], 
descriptionDone=["updated","reference source"],
@@ -562,7 +562,7 @@ f_ooo_3 = factory.BuildFactory()
  f_ooo_3.addStep(SVN(
  mode="copy",
  baseURL="http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/";,
-defaultBranch="incubator/ooo/trunk",
+defaultBranch="openoffice/trunk",
  ))
  
  f_ooo_3.addStep(SetProperty(command="date +%Y-%m-%d_%H:%M:%S", proper

Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
> Is this to be based on the Symphony code?
>

Dennis,  we have Symphony code within IBM.  Remember, we wrote it.
Whatever code we check in is covered by signed ICLA's and CCLA's.
That should address all reasonable concerns with regards to the
provenance of the code.

-Rob

>  - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Yin [mailto:steve.yin@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 01:07
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0
>
> Thanks for both of your suggestions. The time table will be provided later.
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On 11/26/12 6:59 AM, Steve Yin wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I propose to integrate IAccessible2 as an accessibility feature for AOO
>> > 4.0. A wiki for the effort estimation can be found here:
>> >
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+IAccessible2
>> > Here is my question. Should I create a feature in AOO Bugzilla and a
>> branch
>> > for development?
>> >
>>
>> Hi Steve,
>>
>> this is good news. I would suggest that you give some details what do
>> you expect to implement when. The integration of IAccessible2 is a
>> bigger task and I don't see it all integrated in the next 4 month or so.
>> Creating a new feature task in bugzilla would be the normal procedure
>> and a new branch is a must from my perspective for this huge piece of work.
>>
>> Good to see progress on this important integration.
>>
>> Juergen
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
>
> Steve Yin
>

RE: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

Is this to be based on the Symphony code?

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Steve Yin [mailto:steve.yin@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 01:07
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

Thanks for both of your suggestions. The time table will be provided later.


On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

> On 11/26/12 6:59 AM, Steve Yin wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I propose to integrate IAccessible2 as an accessibility feature for AOO
> > 4.0. A wiki for the effort estimation can be found here:
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+IAccessible2
> > Here is my question. Should I create a feature in AOO Bugzilla and a
> branch
> > for development?
> >
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> this is good news. I would suggest that you give some details what do
> you expect to implement when. The integration of IAccessible2 is a
> bigger task and I don't see it all integrated in the next 4 month or so.
> Creating a new feature task in bugzilla would be the normal procedure
> and a new branch is a must from my perspective for this huge piece of work.
>
> Good to see progress on this important integration.
>
> Juergen
>
>


-- 
Best Regards,

Steve Yin

Bug in Impress: report

[Tony Hagon]

Hello
I wonder if you would please pass this bug report to whoever cares about 
it


I use Impress 3.4.1 on XP SP3.

On a presentation today, I created a text box, font Jane Austen (a 
script type font).

In custom animation I selected Appear, On click
Properties Text animation: As one object
Effects: Animate: Letter by letter.
Selected ok and OpenOffice crashed.
I repeated the exercise several times and it crashed at the same point

HTH

Tony Hagon
Glenrhu
Bowermadden
Scotland

Fwd: Bug in Impress: report

[Tony Hagon]

I should have added that in Text Animation I checked Animate attached shape.
I have just tried it with a Wipe effect instead of Appear and the same 
crash happened


Tony Hagon

 Original Message 
Subject:Bug in Impress: report
Date:   Mon, 26 Nov 2012 15:59:31 +
From:   Tony Hagon 
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org



Hello
I wonder if you would please pass this bug report to whoever cares about
it

I use Impress 3.4.1 on XP SP3.

On a presentation today, I created a text box, font Jane Austen (a
script type font).
In custom animation I selected Appear, On click
Properties Text animation: As one object
Effects: Animate: Letter by letter.
Selected ok and OpenOffice crashed.
I repeated the exercise several times and it crashed at the same point

HTH

Tony Hagon
Glenrhu
Bowermadden
Scotland

Re: Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

[Herbert Duerr]

Following up to myself:


In case you are using git-svn please change into the directory of your
git-svn clone, open the file
 .git/config
and find the section named
 [svn-remote "svn"]
in there. In the "url=" line of that section please change the
"incubator/ooo" part of the URL to "openoffice".


If you are running into problems with this simple approach please use 
the extended instructions for the "General Case" at

https://git.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/GitSvnSwitch

Thanks for the feedback, Oliver-Rainer!

Herbert

Re: spam attack

[Dave Barton]

Copy to Gordon Cairns - Non-Subscribed Poster

 Original Message  
From: Rory O'Farrell 
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:51:40 +

> On Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:01:32 +
> Cairns  wrote:
> 
>> Having been bedevilled by OpenOffice 3.4.1 System crashes to the extent 
>> of wanting to ditch the whole programme I now understand the programme 
>> is under spam attack and you ask users to contact you for a solution.  
>> That would be most welcome.
>> Regards, Gordon Cairns
>>
> The stability of OpenOffice is a matter of interaction with your operating 
> system.  You need to tell us what your operating system is and what symptoms 
> you are experiencing.  You may also find it of use to search the Forum at
> http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/
> 
> 
> I doubt that any such instability is caused by a spam attack; the current 
> spam attack is to the mwiki pages.

Just to further clarify Rory's reply. It is not the program itself which
came under spam attack, it was the Wiki area of the project's web
services. The attack has now been thwarted by an excellent team of
hardworking volunteers.

Please post back to this list or the user support list
us...@openoffice.apache.org with the information Rory suggested for
assistance in resolving the issues you are experiencing.

Re: Gallery extension from Symphony ressources

[Armin Le Grand]

Hi Jani,

On 26.11.2012 14:56, janI wrote:

+1 I am all for extra themes. My only concern is the size, at some point,
we might consider, making an "extra" package, like with languages.


Yes, I will have a look at the size. That's the background for ckecing 
this first...
Hopefully, it's not getting too much extra. Still, we will need to 
weight between more size and usefulness. We need numbers first...




Jan.

On 26 November 2012 14:44, Armin Le Grand  wrote:


Hi List,

I took a closer look at Symphony's checked in ressources concerning the
gallery. There are quite some nice and useful additional themes there we
(and our users) should benefit from. Thus, I propose (and volunteer :-) to
integrate these to the trunk. Please have a look at a current Symphony
version or look at the provides symphony sourcecode to get an impression
(it's in main/extras/source/gallery). The added themes are:

arrows
bullets
computers
diagrams
education
environment
finance
gallery_sound
gallery_system
people
sounds
symbols
transportation
txtshapes

The currently existing themes in trunk are:

bullets
gallery_sound
gallery_system
htmpexpo
rulers
sounds
ww-back
www-graf

Where bullets, gallery_sound, gallery_system and sounds are double. I
propose to just merge the contents. (gallery_sound and gallery_system are
hidden, internal themes). For info: ww-back and www-graf are also hidden
themes which are used in Writer's www export.

I think these themes are useful for a wide variety of users and I will try
to just merge them smoothly to have these available.

All contents are in png format (not yet svg) with transparencies and offer
quite some useful stuff. We should have them in that format for now,
conversion to SVG is not realistic due to many contained gradients. For
adding future themes I propose to use svg, but for now we should use what
we have. Same is true for evtl. later add online data access for the
gallery for clipart libraries (which support svg). But one step after the
other...

I'm currently inverstigating on the issue (wrote #121407# for it, see
there) and will report how much size it would add to download packages.

Suggestions welcome!

Sincerely,
 Armin
--
ALG

Re: Gallery extension from Symphony ressources

[Yue Helen]

+1

This is a great idea! I like these clip-arts and have been using them in my
presentation (exported from Symphony) :-) These are nicely designed and
quite useful. Thanks for taking this work.

Helen

2012/11/26 Armin Le Grand 

> Hi List,
>
> I took a closer look at Symphony's checked in ressources concerning the
> gallery. There are quite some nice and useful additional themes there we
> (and our users) should benefit from. Thus, I propose (and volunteer :-) to
> integrate these to the trunk. Please have a look at a current Symphony
> version or look at the provides symphony sourcecode to get an impression
> (it's in main/extras/source/gallery). The added themes are:
>
> arrows
> bullets
> computers
> diagrams
> education
> environment
> finance
> gallery_sound
> gallery_system
> people
> sounds
> symbols
> transportation
> txtshapes
>
> The currently existing themes in trunk are:
>
> bullets
> gallery_sound
> gallery_system
> htmpexpo
> rulers
> sounds
> ww-back
> www-graf
>
> Where bullets, gallery_sound, gallery_system and sounds are double. I
> propose to just merge the contents. (gallery_sound and gallery_system are
> hidden, internal themes). For info: ww-back and www-graf are also hidden
> themes which are used in Writer's www export.
>
> I think these themes are useful for a wide variety of users and I will try
> to just merge them smoothly to have these available.
>
> All contents are in png format (not yet svg) with transparencies and offer
> quite some useful stuff. We should have them in that format for now,
> conversion to SVG is not realistic due to many contained gradients. For
> adding future themes I propose to use svg, but for now we should use what
> we have. Same is true for evtl. later add online data access for the
> gallery for clipart libraries (which support svg). But one step after the
> other...
>
> I'm currently inverstigating on the issue (wrote #121407# for it, see
> there) and will report how much size it would add to download packages.
>
> Suggestions welcome!
>
> Sincerely,
> Armin
> --
> ALG
>

Re: Gallery extension from Symphony ressources

[janI]

+1 I am all for extra themes. My only concern is the size, at some point,
we might consider, making an "extra" package, like with languages.

Jan.

On 26 November 2012 14:44, Armin Le Grand  wrote:

> Hi List,
>
> I took a closer look at Symphony's checked in ressources concerning the
> gallery. There are quite some nice and useful additional themes there we
> (and our users) should benefit from. Thus, I propose (and volunteer :-) to
> integrate these to the trunk. Please have a look at a current Symphony
> version or look at the provides symphony sourcecode to get an impression
> (it's in main/extras/source/gallery). The added themes are:
>
> arrows
> bullets
> computers
> diagrams
> education
> environment
> finance
> gallery_sound
> gallery_system
> people
> sounds
> symbols
> transportation
> txtshapes
>
> The currently existing themes in trunk are:
>
> bullets
> gallery_sound
> gallery_system
> htmpexpo
> rulers
> sounds
> ww-back
> www-graf
>
> Where bullets, gallery_sound, gallery_system and sounds are double. I
> propose to just merge the contents. (gallery_sound and gallery_system are
> hidden, internal themes). For info: ww-back and www-graf are also hidden
> themes which are used in Writer's www export.
>
> I think these themes are useful for a wide variety of users and I will try
> to just merge them smoothly to have these available.
>
> All contents are in png format (not yet svg) with transparencies and offer
> quite some useful stuff. We should have them in that format for now,
> conversion to SVG is not realistic due to many contained gradients. For
> adding future themes I propose to use svg, but for now we should use what
> we have. Same is true for evtl. later add online data access for the
> gallery for clipart libraries (which support svg). But one step after the
> other...
>
> I'm currently inverstigating on the issue (wrote #121407# for it, see
> there) and will report how much size it would add to download packages.
>
> Suggestions welcome!
>
> Sincerely,
> Armin
> --
> ALG
>

Gallery extension from Symphony ressources

[Armin Le Grand]

Hi List,

I took a closer look at Symphony's checked in ressources concerning the 
gallery. There are quite some nice and useful additional themes there we 
(and our users) should benefit from. Thus, I propose (and volunteer :-) 
to integrate these to the trunk. Please have a look at a current 
Symphony version or look at the provides symphony sourcecode to get an 
impression (it's in main/extras/source/gallery). The added themes are:


arrows
bullets
computers
diagrams
education
environment
finance
gallery_sound
gallery_system
people
sounds
symbols
transportation
txtshapes

The currently existing themes in trunk are:

bullets
gallery_sound
gallery_system
htmpexpo
rulers
sounds
ww-back
www-graf

Where bullets, gallery_sound, gallery_system and sounds are double. I 
propose to just merge the contents. (gallery_sound and gallery_system 
are hidden, internal themes). For info: ww-back and www-graf are also 
hidden themes which are used in Writer's www export.


I think these themes are useful for a wide variety of users and I will 
try to just merge them smoothly to have these available.


All contents are in png format (not yet svg) with transparencies and 
offer quite some useful stuff. We should have them in that format for 
now, conversion to SVG is not realistic due to many contained gradients. 
For adding future themes I propose to use svg, but for now we should use 
what we have. Same is true for evtl. later add online data access for 
the gallery for clipart libraries (which support svg). But one step 
after the other...


I'm currently inverstigating on the issue (wrote #121407# for it, see 
there) and will report how much size it would add to download packages.


Suggestions welcome!

Sincerely,
Armin
--
ALG

Re: spam attack

[Rory O'Farrell]

On Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:01:32 +
Cairns  wrote:

> Having been bedevilled by OpenOffice 3.4.1 System crashes to the extent 
> of wanting to ditch the whole programme I now understand the programme 
> is under spam attack and you ask users to contact you for a solution.  
> That would be most welcome.
> Regards, Gordon Cairns
> 
The stability of OpenOffice is a matter of interaction with your operating 
system.  You need to tell us what your operating system is and what symptoms 
you are experiencing.  You may also find it of use to search the Forum at
http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/


I doubt that any such instability is caused by a spam attack; the current spam 
attack is to the mwiki pages.

-- 
Rory O'Farrell 

Re: spam attack

[Rory O'Farrell]

On Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:01:32 +
Cairns  wrote:

> Having been bedevilled by OpenOffice 3.4.1 System crashes to the extent 
> of wanting to ditch the whole programme I now understand the programme 
> is under spam attack and you ask users to contact you for a solution.  
> That would be most welcome.
> Regards, Gordon Cairns
> 
The stability of OpenOffice is a matter of interaction with your operating 
system.  You need to tell us what your operating system is and what symptoms 
you are experiencing.  You may also find it of use to search the Forum at
http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/


I doubt that any such instability is caused by a spam attack; the current spam 
attack is to the mwiki pages.

-- 
Rory O'Farrell 

spam attack

[Cairns]

Having been bedevilled by OpenOffice 3.4.1 System crashes to the extent 
of wanting to ditch the whole programme I now understand the programme 
is under spam attack and you ask users to contact you for a solution.  
That would be most welcome.

Regards, Gordon Cairns

Re: [QA BUG] - some regression defects were found by GUI perfromance test

[Linyi Li]

Hi
I tested the regression defect *Bug
121200*on latest
build, performance downgrade still exist.

Pls see http://people.apache.org/~liuzhe/testdashboard/#pvt_gui_Benchmark

But the status of bug121200 is fixed.
I suggest to re-analyze this defect to see if there is any other problem.



On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Linyi Li  wrote:

> Hi Jianfang,
>
> Thanks for your clarification.
> I will retest it when the build is ready:)
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:20 PM, zhangjf  wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> For bug 121199, it has the same root cause as bug 121134, so I just
>> duplicated it with bug 121134. And Jinlong still doesn't have the
>> commit right yet, so he only put the fix patch into bug 121134. I have
>> just delivered this piece of fix code by revision 1402153. Hopefully
>> there will be a build for test tomorrow.
>>
>> Thank you again for the great bug finding.
>>
>> zhangjf
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Linyi Li 
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Herbert,
>> >
>> > I checked defect[2] on r1401602, it still has this problem. Could you
>> tell
>> > me which build you tested?
>> >
>> > About defect[1], I saw there is a response:
>> > --- Comment #5 from wujinl...@gmail.com ---
>> > This is a known bug, and I have already had a fix for it. Please see bug
>> > 121134
>> > for details.
>> > CC to wujinlong, is this fix already commited to trunk build?
>> >
>> > Defect[3] is found on ubuntu12.04, 32bit. It is OK on ubuntu12.04 64bit.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Linyi Li 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Thanks Herbert.
>> >> I will check[1][2] in current build:)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 11:03 PM, Herbert Duerr 
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hi,
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 24.10.2012 07:34, Linyi Li wrote:
>> >>>
>>  I did GUI performance test of AOO trunk build. I found some
>>  defects[1][2][3], and two of them are regression ones[1][2].
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>> Great finds and great bug reports, thank you!
>> >>>
>> >>> And kudos to the wonderful automated testing framework that allows to
>> run
>> >>> such extensive tests with that thoroughness and frequency.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>  I think defects[1][2] are severe which will block users‘ normal use
>> of
>>  AOO,
>>  so is there anyone who can help to fix these defects?
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>> I looked into them and updated their status:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>  [1]
>>  Bug 121199 - [Automation][Regression]**Crashed when loading 2 docx
>>  files.
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>> The patch that caused the crashes is known and reverting it solves the
>> >>> problem. But probably the patch can be updated to fix both the new
>> and the
>> >>> original issues. The developers knowing the patch best were CC'ed.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>  [2]
>>  Bug 121200 - [Regression][Automation][**Performance]Severe downgrade
>> to
>>  save
>>  xls sample files.
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>> This seems to be fixed in the current trunk revision.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>  [3]
>>  Bug 121256 - Crash when saving ppt on Linux.
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>> This cannot be reproduced here. If anyone sees the problem please
>> attach
>> >>> a stack trace in the issue. If possible for a build with sufficient
>> debug
>> >>> info.
>> >>>
>> >>> Herbert
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Best wishes.
>> >> Linyi Li
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best wishes.
>> > Linyi Li
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best wishes.
> Linyi Li
>
>


-- 
Best wishes.
Linyi Li

Re: [RELEASE]: new languages for AOO 3.4.1

[Jürgen Schmidt]

On 11/26/12 10:54 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> On 23/11/2012 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> 1. Only new languages, no bugfixes, no other code changes
>> We add the new languages on top of the existing AOO34 branch, build the
>> office with the new languages and release the new languages as
>> convenience binary packages. We also build a new src release package and
>> add the revision number ... aoo-3.4.1-rev1372282-src.tar.bz2
> 
> This is the best solution for me.
> 
>> 2. New languages + bug-fixes or security fixes
>> The micro number will be increased and we do a normal release cycle.
>> The src release will contain the revision number in future always.
> 
> This could still be a possibility, but only if we need to fix a critical
> security bug and 4.0 seems too far away. In that case, of course, we
> would need to release a 3.4.2 with only that security fix and doing so
> we would include all languages that are ready for 3.4.
> 
>> 1. set a deadline for new translations, for exmaple December 31, 2012
>> 2. integrate the new languages and provide the builds until January
>> 10, 2013
>> 3. test and verify the new language builds asap
>> 4. release the new languages at the end of January
> 
> All fine to me. I would honestly have started with what we already have
> and release it as soon as possible, and possibly with another release
> manager (so, Juergen focused on 4.x someone else works on the
> "maintenance" releases of 3.4.x), to test the process and avoid late
> surprises or policy questions. But if for the time being this is the
> best solution for release management, fine. Sure, in future we should
> definitely avoid that it takes this long to get a translation integrated
> and released. So I would try to use this occasion to learn how we can
> streamline the release process as much as possible. But let's start to
> communicate clear deadlines to volunteers,

I have include the deadline end of December already in my blog draft
that I will publish later today.

I will work on some update int eh wiki to reflect this plan in more detail.

Juergen

Re: [BLOG][DRAFT]: blog draft to reach out even more translators for the languages with more than 93% UI coverage

[Jürgen Schmidt]

Hi,

I have updated the draft and included a special call for help for Arabic
because I see a potential problem here for future releases. I plan to
publish the blog later today.

Juergen

On 11/23/12 11:23 PM, jan iversen wrote:
> That was for all the open texts, help and UI.
> 
> Jan.
> 
> 
> On 23 November 2012 23:19, Rob Weir  wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:12 PM, jan iversen  wrote:
>>> On 23 November 2012 23:05, Juergen Schmidt 
>> wrote:
>>>
 Am Freitag, 23. November 2012 um 18:17 schrieb Rob Weir:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Jürgen Schmidt <
>> jogischm...@gmail.com>
 wrote:
>> On 11/23/12 5:54 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Jürgen Schmidt <
 jogischm...@gmail.com> wrote:
 Hi,

 I drafted [1] a blog post to attract again some further
>> volunteers
 helping us with translations. As mentioned earlier we have
>> several
 languages where we have a UI coverage of more than 93%. I hope
>> we
 can
 find volunteers for this languages.

 Ok for some of the languages the work is already done or ongoing
 but I
 included them again. I should probably make clear that we can
 benefit
 from volunteers for the already released languages as well
>> because
 we
 all know the Arabic is not really maintained yet and I see a
 potential
 problem for our next release with more UI changes.

 Feedback are welcome and feel free to change the draft.
>> Especially
 a
 linguistic review make always sense because I am no native
>> speaker
 ;-)

>>>
>>>
>>> OK. I'll take a look and perhaps make some bolder changes. One
>> thing
>>> I've learned is that you need to draw the reader in early, in the
>>> first paragraph, and then get them to a state of awareness before
>> we
>>> ask them to take action. I'll try to motivate that.
>>>
>>
>>
>> thanks Rob, I am looking forward to your changes.
>
> OK. My changes are in. The headers help users scanning the article
> see if they are interested. Also, I give further information for
> taking action both in the first paragraph and the last one.
>
>

 perfect, much better now
>
> One thing that might help is if we had an estimate for how much effort
> is needed to move from 95% to 100%. Is it 4 hours or 40 hours? We
> probably deter some volunteers if they are scared to volunteer because
> they think the time commitment is too much. Maybe we can say,
> "Completing one of these translations takes approximately XXX hours,
> but this effort can be shared when several translators coordinate on
> the work".
>
>

 I agree, I will check the word counts and maybe Jan can share his
 experience for the Danish translation.

>>>
>>> I am happy to share, but I do not remember from which % I started. The
>>> translation I did took approx 30 hours incl. simple QA, this do no
>> include
>>> the little mix I managed to do with the help files
>>>
>>
>> When you started on it, the Danish translation (UI portion) was at
>> 97%.  Did it take 30 hours for the 3%?  Or did you do help file
>> translations as well?
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>> Jan
>>>

 Juergen
>
>> I have a further idea to attract designers for our art work (logo,
>> icons, etc.) that I will discuss next week...
>>
>
>
> Cool.
>
> -Rob
>
>> Juergen
>>
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
 Juergen

 [1]


>> https://blogs.apache.org/roller-ui/authoring/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=apache_openoffice_reached_out_to

>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>



>>
> 

Re: [RELEASE]: new languages for AOO 3.4.1

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 23/11/2012 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

1. Only new languages, no bugfixes, no other code changes
We add the new languages on top of the existing AOO34 branch, build the
office with the new languages and release the new languages as
convenience binary packages. We also build a new src release package and
add the revision number ... aoo-3.4.1-rev1372282-src.tar.bz2


This is the best solution for me.


2. New languages + bug-fixes or security fixes
The micro number will be increased and we do a normal release cycle.
The src release will contain the revision number in future always.


This could still be a possibility, but only if we need to fix a critical 
security bug and 4.0 seems too far away. In that case, of course, we 
would need to release a 3.4.2 with only that security fix and doing so 
we would include all languages that are ready for 3.4.



1. set a deadline for new translations, for exmaple December 31, 2012
2. integrate the new languages and provide the builds until January 10, 2013
3. test and verify the new language builds asap
4. release the new languages at the end of January


All fine to me. I would honestly have started with what we already have 
and release it as soon as possible, and possibly with another release 
manager (so, Juergen focused on 4.x someone else works on the 
"maintenance" releases of 3.4.x), to test the process and avoid late 
surprises or policy questions. But if for the time being this is the 
best solution for release management, fine. Sure, in future we should 
definitely avoid that it takes this long to get a translation integrated 
and released. So I would try to use this occasion to learn how we can 
streamline the release process as much as possible. But let's start to 
communicate clear deadlines to volunteers,


Regards,
  Andrea.

[QA Report]Weekly QA status update

[Ji Yan]

Hi all,

  I want to post QA weekly report to wiki, but I was rejected, it said
permission denied. I know there is something happened with Mwiki that new
users cannot registered by themselves. But I didn't realize that creating
new page is also restricted.

  I update QA status in this mail(only what's new)

QA task progress

Task ID

Total Defect Number

Verified

Remained

Complete Rate

{{Bug|121359}}

8

2

6

25%

{{Bug|121365}}

6

5

1

83%

{{Bug|121368}}

15

0

15

0%

{{Bug|121366}}

21

0

21

0%


-- 


Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji

Re: Apache OpenOffice / Linuxday 2012 in Dornbirn

[Jürgen Schmidt]

Hi Detlef,

thanks for sharing this informative report and thanks for representing
AOO on the Linuxday.

The report is good and the outcome is that users welcome that OpenOfifce
is still alive and found a new home under the ASF. But it also shows
that many, many user are confused and don't really understand the
difference between AOO and LO. Something where we can work on to
communicate our message more clearly.

Juergen

On 11/25/12 11:26 PM, Detlef Nannen wrote:
> In german
> ... translate.google.com is your friend ;-)
> --
> 
> Hallo zusammen,
> 
> Raphael Bircher und ich waren gestern für Apache OpenOffice (AOO) auf dem
> Linuxday in Dornbirn.
> 
> Zuerst: Die Messe war von der Linux User Group Dornbirn super
> organisiert. Ich kann
> nur sagen, Hut ab! Bilder findet Ihr sicher in den nächsten Tagen auf
> www.linuxday.at
> 
> Wir waren gemeinsam mit LibreOffice (LO) an einen Abschnitt platziert. Das
> gab gleich Fragen nach dem Unterschied und dem Verhältnis zwischen LO/AOO.
> Also einiges an interessanten Gesprächen am Stand, die auch
> Verunsicherung über  LO/AOO erkennen ließ. Die Entscheidung, was für die
> Zukunft die richtige Software ist, lag einigen doch sehr am Herzen.
> Besonders der einzige erkennbare Firmenbesucher sprach uns darauf an,
> wie er sich gegenüber seinen Kunden verhalten kann, wenn er als Berater
> selbst nicht erkennen kann wohin die Reise geht. Weiter einige
> Privatpersonen, Lehrer und andere Standbetreiber.
> Das angenehmste war für mich, dass fast alle Besucher erfreut
> feststellten, dass es OpenOffice noch gibt, und das AOO von ihnen wohl
> als DER Nachfolger oder die Weiterführung angesehen wird. (Schön, dass
> es OpenOffice wieder/noch gibt!)
> 
> Unsere Flyer, 4 schnelle Plakate, und mein sehr alter IBM-Thinkpad mit
> AOO waren auf Ubuntu alles was wir an Messematerial hatten. Ohne unser
> bisschen Zeugs wären wir völlig Blank gewesen. (Ich bin da beruflich
> etwas verwöhnt.) Falls Interesse besteht, AOO weiter und öfter auf
> Messen zu präsentieren, müssen wir uns nach meiner Meinung generell was
> einfallen lassen. Nochmal vielen Dank an Jan Christian Wienand, Jörg
> Schmidt und Josef Latt für die schnelle Unterstützung und Hinweise.
> 
> Also, mir hat es sehr gefallen, und ich plane es für 2013 mal grob mit
> ein (was noch keine feste Zusage bedeutet  :-).
> 

[QA Report]Weekly defect analysis report as of 2012/11/26

[Ji Yan]

I post weekly defect analysis report[1], please review.

[1]http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/QA/Report/DefectStatus/20121126

-- 


Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji

Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Steve Yin]

Thanks for both of your suggestions. The time table will be provided later.


On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

> On 11/26/12 6:59 AM, Steve Yin wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I propose to integrate IAccessible2 as an accessibility feature for AOO
> > 4.0. A wiki for the effort estimation can be found here:
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+IAccessible2
> > Here is my question. Should I create a feature in AOO Bugzilla and a
> branch
> > for development?
> >
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> this is good news. I would suggest that you give some details what do
> you expect to implement when. The integration of IAccessible2 is a
> bigger task and I don't see it all integrated in the next 4 month or so.
> Creating a new feature task in bugzilla would be the normal procedure
> and a new branch is a must from my perspective for this huge piece of work.
>
> Good to see progress on this important integration.
>
> Juergen
>
>


-- 
Best Regards,

Steve Yin

Our SVN moved from "incubator/ooo" to "openoffice"

[Herbert Duerr]

On 26.11.2012 04:32, j...@apache.org wrote:

Author: joes
Date: Mon Nov 26 03:32:20 2012
New Revision: 1413471

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1413471&view=rev
Log:
mv ooo to top-level

Added:
 openoffice/
   - copied from r1413470, incubator/ooo/


So our locations in the SVN repository were moved as discussed last 
week. Thank you, Joe!


Here are the instructions to switch your checkouts to the new location:

In case you are using SVN natively please change into the directory 
where your checked out AOO and run

svn switch https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk
there. If you are not working on trunk you have to replace "trunk" by 
the branches/bname (with bname being the branch name you are interested 
in), of course.


In case you are using git-svn please change into the directory of your 
git-svn clone, open the file

.git/config
and find the section named
[svn-remote "svn"]
in there. In the "url=" line of that section please change the 
"incubator/ooo" part of the URL to "openoffice".


Herbert

Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Jürgen Schmidt]

On 11/26/12 6:59 AM, Steve Yin wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I propose to integrate IAccessible2 as an accessibility feature for AOO
> 4.0. A wiki for the effort estimation can be found here:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+IAccessible2
> Here is my question. Should I create a feature in AOO Bugzilla and a branch
> for development?
> 

Hi Steve,

this is good news. I would suggest that you give some details what do
you expect to implement when. The integration of IAccessible2 is a
bigger task and I don't see it all integrated in the next 4 month or so.
Creating a new feature task in bugzilla would be the normal procedure
and a new branch is a must from my perspective for this huge piece of work.

Good to see progress on this important integration.

Juergen

Re: IAccessible2 integration for AOO 4.0

[Andre Fischer]

On 26.11.2012 06:59, Steve Yin wrote:

Hi,

I propose to integrate IAccessible2 as an accessibility feature for AOO


That is great news.


4.0. A wiki for the effort estimation can be found here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+IAccessible2
Here is my question. Should I create a feature in AOO Bugzilla and a branch
for development?


Yes, I think that would be best.

-Andre

Re: [UX] Desoign Exploration - Dockable Task Pane Content Design

[Kevin Grignon]

On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Manuel del Valle  wrote:

> >
> > NOTE: I really like the "style only" way. In fact, I would love to see an
> > alternative Writer UI were direct formatting is completely forbidden.
> > Direct formatting is a bad habit that always cause headaches. But that's
> > just me ;)
> >
> > Regards
> > Ricardo
> >
>
> +1
>
> I couldn't agree with you more, Ricardo. Perhaps users wouldn't be
> accustomed to it at the beginning, but eventually it becomes a win-win
> situation.
> In my (small) experience, most non-techie users (which are, by the way, a
> vast majority) don't even know styles and, even when you try to introduce
> it to them, or even when they actually do know them, they can't get used to
> it. They see it as some sort of a "problem" instead of a (very) useful tool.
> And so, in order to convince them, we end up writing articles like this
> one:
>
> http://openoffice.blogs.com/openoffice/2005/12/why_should_you_.html
>
> Even when it's quite aged, not much has changed since then regarding
> Styles' UX.
>
> It would be a good idea to try to make it more obvious for users that,
> whenever they write a Title (or anything else), they should "tell" OO that
> those words put toghether are meant to be a "Title" (or a subtitle, or...).
> Perhaps presenting it as some kind of "tagging" procedure would be a good
> idea, since users are very used to it as most web "giants" (Facebook, G+,
> GMail, etc) already feature them. And actually showing that tag (some
> transparency over the text, perhaps?) would probably help as well.
>
> That said, perhaps forbidding direct formatting might be a little too
> much. But maybe we could explore the idea of presenting it more clearly as
> the "second choice". Help users understand that, when direct formatting,
> they are actually overriding an already predefined style (e.g.: "default
> text").
> IMHO, the way we group tools toghether in a brand new Task pane could
> actually help that purpose. Among other things, of course, but all those
> would be a bit off-topic ;-)
>
> Regards,
>
> Manuel
>


Hello All,

I've further refined my proposal for the minimum viable content in support
of the task pane design exploration.

See:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AOO_UX_Design_Exploration_-_Task_Pane_Content_-_Information_Design#Must_Have

Please keep the great comments, as see above, coming. Ideally, we should be
open to enhancing the task panes and property views for the minimum
vialble, aka "must have" content as we implement this first phase of the
task pane capability. Insight taken from our review comments will help
drive such enhancements.

Best regards,
Kevin