correct response to finding previous found bug?

[Lucas Burson]

Hi,

I was doing some regression testing on Ubuntu and discovered a bug
which was already reported [1]. It's about 3 months old.
That got me wondering, is there some "best practice" (or something) to
update a previously found bug? In bugzilla, should I add a comment and
update the 'last confirmation date' field?

Also any idea where in the source I would browse to investigate this
'Auto Text' paths?

Thanks,
Lucas

[1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121028

Re: Sidebar

[Andre Fischer]

On 04.12.2012 03:32, Dali Liu wrote:

Hi Andre,
I am planning to merger a extension to sidebar model,  I would like to
verify the implementation of the sidebar.
Will I start from here:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Framework/Article/Tool_Panels?

Hi Dali Liu,

The sidebar is not yet finished.  Actually we just started designing the 
API.
Eventually we will probably use the functionality described in the "Tool 
Panels" wiki page, but there will be some additional interfaces and 
configuration entries.  At the end of this week I can probably say more.


-Andre



2012/12/3 Andre Fischer 


On 02.12.2012 19:11, Andrea Pescetti wrote:


On 30/11/2012 Andre Fischer wrote:


I will be working on the implementation of the
sidebar. In the hope of motivating others (you) to join me, I have
created a wiki page that gives a first and rough outline of the work
that has to be done and the API and code that already exists and
(hopefully) can be reused or adapted:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Sidebar


Thanks Andre, it seems that tasks are still very broad, so I guess that
this call is mainly aimed at existing or full-time developers, but if you
identify small self-contained tasks where new developers could be involved
please advertise them, since they might be useful in a future call for
developers or for FOSDEM.


Good idea, I will do that.  I just wanted to make sure that nobody feels
not invited.

By the way, I have activated the existing but unfinished sidebar
implementation that was discontinued shortly before OpenOffice came to
Apache.  You can find developer builds for Linux, Mac and Windows.  Please
see the "Status" section on 
http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Sidebar(near 
the top).  There you can also see screenshots of that sidebar
implementation.

Please do not use these developer snapshots for anything other than
analysis of the sidebar.  There appear to be some serious bugs. They are
meant as living demos of an unfinished feature.

Regards,
Andre



Regards,
   Andrea.

Re: WaE: sw/source/filter/ww8 compiler warnings

[Pavel Janík]

On Dec 4, 2012, at 3:14 AM, chengjh wrote:

> Sure,Pavel, after I have a clean build for this module, I get this warning
> too, and I have already committed the change and don't find any other
> warning..From that,I think my environment on Mac OS X 10.5.8 can identify
> the same warning set with yours, but level is still less than yours because
> I didn't catch any compile errors caused by these warnings.

This is because I have turned on "Warnings Are Errors", WAE with 
--enable-werror.
-- 
Pavel Janík

Re: Fisheye setup?

[Juergen Schmidt]

Am Montag, 3. Dezember 2012 um 23:34 schrieb Kay Schenk:

> I don't know who did the initial setup for our fisheye instance --
>  
> https://fisheye6.atlassian.com/browse/ooo
>  
> The last activity on "trunk/main" via this interface seems to be Nov 24.
>  
> Does the fisheye instance need editing do the recent svn move?
>  
> Since I don't download the complete source, I use this a lot to find  
> stuff. :/
>  
>  

I don't know, I have tested fisheye ones but do not use it. A much better tool 
to search the code is opengrok. You can find an instance under  
http://opengrok.adfinis-sygroup.org/source

I hope adfinis is keeping this up-to-date.  

Juergen
>  
> --  
> 
> 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: [QA Report] Weekly QA Status Update

[Shenfeng Liu]

Thanks Yan Ji for the report!
And thanks so much to every one who helped the test execution and defect
verification!

- Shenfeng (Simon)


2012/12/3 Ji Yan 

> Hi all,
>
>   I post QA status report for last week[1], please review.
>
>   I'd thanks for following volunteer who help on defect verification and
> test execution QA task recently:
>
> *louqle* helped on task Issue 121359
>   and Issue 121365
> 
>
> *Rob Weir* helped on verify defect Issue 35763
> 
>
> *gbolssens* helped on test cases execution
>
>
>
> [1] http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/QA/Report/WeeklyReport/201212
> --
>
>
> Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
>

Re: [Proposal] Create new mailing list: d...@openoffice.apache.org

[Peter Junge]

Rob,

On 12/4/2012 2:55 AM, Dave Barton wrote:

 Original Message  
From: Rob Weir 
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 13:14:46 -0500


This idea has come up on another thread, where we've been discussed
the future of the documentation effort and a future call for
volunteers.  We'd like a dedicated list for these efforts.

Name:  d...@openoffice.apache.org   OR  d...@openoffice.apache.org  (I
don't have a strong preference for the name)

Moderators:  Please respond if you can volunteer as moderator.  We
should aim for 2 or 3 geographically dispersed.


I can help with the geographical dispersion of the moderators.

Peter




I'll wait 72 hours, and if no objections we can ask Andrea to submit
the form for the new list creation.

Regards,

-Rob


Hi Rob,

I am currently at UTC +1 if you want me to moderate the (long overdue)
documentation list. For reasons I might explain at another time,
moderation is all can contribute to the project for the time being.
Although I will try to mentor/guide any newcomers who want to work on
user documentation.

Regards
Dave

Re: [Proposal] Create new mailing list: d...@openoffice.apache.org

[Andrew Douglas Pitonyak]

On 12/03/2012 01:14 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

This idea has come up on another thread, where we've been discussed
the future of the documentation effort and a future call for
volunteers.  We'd like a dedicated list for these efforts.

Name:  d...@openoffice.apache.org   OR  d...@openoffice.apache.org  (I
don't have a strong preference for the name)


doc is shorter, but can't say as though I really care!



Moderators:  Please respond if you can volunteer as moderator.  We
should aim for 2 or 3 geographically dispersed.


I am willing. I am in Ohio, so my time zone is GMT-4 or GMT-5 depending 
on the date.




I'll wait 72 hours, and if no objections we can ask Andrea to submit
the form for the new list creation.

Regards,

-Rob



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

Re: [User Docs] End of effort to get AOO v3.4 Getting Started Guide finished

[Andrew Douglas Pitonyak]

On 12/03/2012 12:14 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 1:24 AM, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak
 wrote:

On 12/02/2012 10:29 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

I can help drive steps 1-4, but I cannot do 5 by myself. I'd need the
commitment of 3-4 other project members to help mentor the new volunteers,
to volunteer as list moderators, and to help encourage the relaunched
documentation project to develop a documentation plan for AOO 4.0. Does
anyone want to help with this? -Rob

I am not currently a list moderator, but am willing to become one. What does
it entail?


Moderator responsibilities are:


-Review messages that have been held for moderation, reject spam
posts and allow the valid messages through.

-Assist users who are having difficulties subscribing or
unsubscribing from the list.

-Provide reports to the PMC on request, on the number of current
subscribers.

-For private lists, approve subscription requests for authorized
subscribers only.

-When needed, escalate technical issues to Infra and privacy
issues to the PMC.


95% of the time it is just the first item.


-Rob


OK, sounds reasonable.  I can do that.

How do I learn to do each task?

I am willing to help in this role! So, if and/or when you start looking 
for moderators, and you feel I am suitable for the task, sign me up!


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

Re: Sidebar

[Dali Liu]

Hi Andre,
I am planning to merger a extension to sidebar model,  I would like to
verify the implementation of the sidebar.
Will I start from here:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Framework/Article/Tool_Panels?

2012/12/3 Andre Fischer 

> On 02.12.2012 19:11, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
>> On 30/11/2012 Andre Fischer wrote:
>>
>>> I will be working on the implementation of the
>>> sidebar. In the hope of motivating others (you) to join me, I have
>>> created a wiki page that gives a first and rough outline of the work
>>> that has to be done and the API and code that already exists and
>>> (hopefully) can be reused or adapted:
>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Sidebar
>>>
>>
>> Thanks Andre, it seems that tasks are still very broad, so I guess that
>> this call is mainly aimed at existing or full-time developers, but if you
>> identify small self-contained tasks where new developers could be involved
>> please advertise them, since they might be useful in a future call for
>> developers or for FOSDEM.
>>
>
> Good idea, I will do that.  I just wanted to make sure that nobody feels
> not invited.
>
> By the way, I have activated the existing but unfinished sidebar
> implementation that was discontinued shortly before OpenOffice came to
> Apache.  You can find developer builds for Linux, Mac and Windows.  Please
> see the "Status" section on 
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Sidebar(near
>  the top).  There you can also see screenshots of that sidebar
> implementation.
>
> Please do not use these developer snapshots for anything other than
> analysis of the sidebar.  There appear to be some serious bugs. They are
> meant as living demos of an unfinished feature.
>
> Regards,
> Andre
>
>
>> Regards,
>>   Andrea.
>>
>
>

Re: WaE: sw/source/filter/ww8 compiler warnings

[chengjh]

Sure,Pavel, after I have a clean build for this module, I get this warning
too, and I have already committed the change and don't find any other
warning..From that,I think my environment on Mac OS X 10.5.8 can identify
the same warning set with yours, but level is still less than yours because
I didn't catch any compile errors caused by these warnings.Before that,for
there are many output logs during build, the warning messages are mixed
among the output info,easily ignored if not leading to compile error. Now,I
use this way "$build > out.txt" to filter other output info and only
warnings left on the screen. Thus, I can get the compile warnings obviously.

I attach my configure parameter for your comparison. If you think this way
is valuable for other developers, could you please composite them and add
to the build guide as "attention items" when doing AOO build, especially
individual module build, to avoid the same issue in the future?Thanks.

./configure --with-dmake-url="
http://dmake.apache-extras.org.codespot.com/files/dmake-4.12.1.tar.bz2"; \
  --with-epm-url="
http://ftp.easysw.com/pub/epm/3.7/epm-3.7-source.tar.gz"; \
  --disable-mozilla --disable-build-mozilla
--enable-verbose --enable-category-b \
  --enable-minimizer --enable-presenter-console
--enable-wiki-publisher --disable-odk

On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 3:28 AM, Pavel Janík  wrote:

> Hi!
>
> On Dec 3, 2012, at 4:18 PM, chengjh wrote:
>
> > I committed some changes to solve the found warnings...Please help to
> > verify again..And I will have a check to the whole sw module to see
> whether
> > any missed warning is still existing.thanks.
>
> thanks. The module is almost clean now.
>
> I only see:
>
> sw/source/filter/ww8/ww8par3.cxx:1125: warning: comparison is always true
> due to limited range of data type
>
> SwNumRule* WW8ListManager::GetNumRule(sal_uInt16 i)
> {
> if ( i >= 0 && i < maLSTInfos.size() )
>
>
> surely i>=0 when it is unsigned.
> --
> Pavel Janík
>
>
>
>


-- 

Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng

Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)

[Keith N. McKenna]

Rob Weir wrote:

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Keith N. McKenna
 wrote:

Rob Weir wrote:


On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna
 wrote:


Rob Weir wrote:



On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti 
wrote:



On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote:




[Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ.





I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an
"OpenOffice FAQ" easily reachable by search engines at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know
whether
it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so).

Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it
from
the current site?



The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results.  That
is valuable and worth preserving.

But the current FAQ contents are out of date.  They would need a lot
of work to update/correct them.

Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the
static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to
maintain.   Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML
definition lists () would be easier and could be maintained via
the CMS web interface.

There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ

These also appear to be unmaintained.  But I think the wiki version
would be easier to maintain.

So one possible resolution could be:

1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on
the wiki

2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki

3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question)

4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that
directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's.


-Rob
-Rob


Regards,
 Andrea.





Rob;

I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged
as
needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and
clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way
we
decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it
is
already categorized with a toc on the main page.



The other FAQ on the website is also categorized:
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html

So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and
consolidate.

In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here.
But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers
to do the work.  So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a
+1 from me.  I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from
the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ
for the project.

Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs:

http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html

Maybe a simplifying assumption could be:

1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product
and the project

2) We have the "internal" project-facing FAQ's on
openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format.

-Rob


Regards
Keith





Rob;

Though your simplifying assumption appears on the surface to be a good
compromise the process engineer in me says I see a potential maintenance
disaster looming. It creates essentially two different processes with
different tools to accomplish the same basic task something that I prefer to
avoid if possible. By using one or the other you cut down on the training
necessary to bring new people up to speed and you centralize the maintenance
and lessen the chance that something slips under the radar.



We already have different tools and different processes:  static HTML,
static mdtext and wiki.  I'm proposing reducing it from 3 to 2.

Agreed, all I am saying is that the more ways there are to do the same 
thing the greater both the possibility and the probability of 
maintainability headaches.



As far as process goes, I think the product-related questions will
generally be updated by those interested in documentation and support.


Agreed. One reason that I tend toward using the wiki for these is that 
it could attract volunteers to help update and even add new ones that 
may be hesitant about editing a web page.



  But the project-related questions -- the ones currently on
openoffice.apache.org -- will probably be updated by the PMC.  I think
those questions, which deal with project membership, process
definition, etc., are quasi-official in nature and it is not a bad
thing if editing them is harder and more restricted than editing a
public wiki.



I agree here also. I do believe that there are ways to lock down 
sections of the wiki also. So either way is doable.



And let's not forget the harsh transition that some has navigating
from an openoffice.apache.org web page to the wiki.  The look is
different and there is no context or reverse navigation.  The user has
been teleported into another galaxy.

Th

Re: www.apache.org/projects has no AOO ??

[janI]

Thanks.

On 4 December 2012 00:39, Kay Schenk  wrote:

>
>
> On 12/03/2012 02:44 PM, janI wrote:
>
>> Thanks for enlightening me, may I politely ask is that something for a
>> committer FAQ, or is it too special ?
>>
>> jan I.
>>
>
> We should probably include it in something like that. We have a Developer
> FAQ that doesn't get into  interacting with INFRA since this doesn't come
> up a lot, but some tidbits like this should definitely be included. :)
>
> I will make a mental note to update:
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/**openofficeorg/developer-faqs.**html
>
>
>
>>
>> On 3 December 2012 23:07, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On 12/03/2012 11:51 AM, janI wrote:
>>>
>>>  what is TLP ?


>>> == Top Level Project ==
>>>
>>> We are still in "moving/setup" mode.
>>>
>>> As near as I can tell, the svn trees (source, web sites) have been moved
>>> but some of the underpinnings of the web sites are still not complete to
>>> use the CMS. The project website 
>>> (incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg
>>> 
>>> >)
>>>
>>> for sure has not been moved where it needs to go yet.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  I know we use bugzilla for our own bugs in AOO, but I thought I had to
 use
 AOO when I open a JIRA ticket, where I want Infra to make some changes
 for
 me.


>>> correct...and what you say IS somewhat confusing. Normally, I just leave
>>> the JIRA ticket assigned to INFRA, i.e. use INFRA as the project. I think
>>> this means "assigned to", i.e. who will do it, rather than who it's for.
>>> Maybe? Anyway, this is usually what I do.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  Jan I.


 On 3 December 2012 20:47, Dave Fisher  wrote:

   The transition to TLP is not complete. We do not use JIRA. We have our

> bugzilla instance
>
> Regards,
> Save
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 3, 2012, at 1:19 PM, janI  wrote:
>
>   When I look in www.apache.org projects, take indexes, I cannot find:
>
>>Apache OpenOffice
>>OpenOffice
>> or
>>OOO
>>
>> The same goes for the JIRA issues system.
>>
>> Should it not be there ?
>> (or does our project have another code)
>>
>> Jan.
>>
>>
>
>
  --
>>> --**--**
>>>
>>> 
>>> 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 woman to expect the man to build the world
>  she wants, rather than to create it herself?”
> -- Anais Nin
>

Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)

[Marcus (OOo)]

Am 12/03/2012 11:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Keith N. McKenna
  wrote:

Rob Weir wrote:


On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna
  wrote:


Rob Weir wrote:



On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti
wrote:



On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote:




[Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ.





I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an
"OpenOffice FAQ" easily reachable by search engines at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know
whether
it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so).

Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it
from
the current site?



The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results.  That
is valuable and worth preserving.

But the current FAQ contents are out of date.  They would need a lot
of work to update/correct them.

Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the
static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to
maintain.   Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML
definition lists () would be easier and could be maintained via
the CMS web interface.

There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ

These also appear to be unmaintained.  But I think the wiki version
would be easier to maintain.

So one possible resolution could be:

1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on
the wiki

2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki

3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question)

4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that
directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's.


-Rob
-Rob


Regards,
 Andrea.





Rob;

I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged
as
needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and
clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way
we
decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it
is
already categorized with a toc on the main page.



The other FAQ on the website is also categorized:
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html

So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and
consolidate.

In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here.
But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers
to do the work.  So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a
+1 from me.  I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from
the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ
for the project.

Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs:

http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html

Maybe a simplifying assumption could be:

1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product
and the project

2) We have the "internal" project-facing FAQ's on
openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format.

-Rob


Regards
Keith





Rob;

Though your simplifying assumption appears on the surface to be a good
compromise the process engineer in me says I see a potential maintenance
disaster looming. It creates essentially two different processes with
different tools to accomplish the same basic task something that I prefer to
avoid if possible. By using one or the other you cut down on the training
necessary to bring new people up to speed and you centralize the maintenance
and lessen the chance that something slips under the radar.



We already have different tools and different processes:  static HTML,
static mdtext and wiki.  I'm proposing reducing it from 3 to 2.

As far as process goes, I think the product-related questions will
generally be updated by those interested in documentation and support.
  But the project-related questions -- the ones currently on
openoffice.apache.org -- will probably be updated by the PMC.  I think
those questions, which deal with project membership, process
definition, etc., are quasi-official in nature and it is not a bad
thing if editing them is harder and more restricted than editing a
public wiki.

And let's not forget the harsh transition that some has navigating
from an openoffice.apache.org web page to the wiki.  The look is
different and there is no context or reverse navigation.  The user has
been teleported into another galaxy.

I sometimes wonder whether we should move *all* of the
openoffice.apache.org website contents onto the www.openoffice.org
website, and work to unify the look and feel of the other pieces, a
larger reworking of:

1) Move openoffice.apache.org onto www.openoffice.org

2) Move all CWiki pages into MWiki

3) Setup redirect of blog from blogs.apache.org/ooo to blog.openoffice.org

What we have now is very fragmented.  But that is a topic for another day.

Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)

[Marcus (OOo)]

Am 12/03/2012 11:11 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Marcus (OOo)  wrote:

Am 12/03/2012 09:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:


On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna
   wrote:


Rob Weir wrote:



On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti
wrote:



On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote:




[Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ.





I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an
"OpenOffice FAQ" easily reachable by search engines at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know
whether
it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so).

Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it
from
the current site?



The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results.  That
is valuable and worth preserving.

But the current FAQ contents are out of date.  They would need a lot
of work to update/correct them.

Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the
static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to
maintain.   Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML
definition lists () would be easier and could be maintained via
the CMS web interface.

There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ

These also appear to be unmaintained.  But I think the wiki version
would be easier to maintain.

So one possible resolution could be:

1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on
the wiki

2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki

3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question)

4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that
directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's.


-Rob
-Rob


Regards,
 Andrea.





Rob;

I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged
as
needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and
clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way
we
decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it
is
already categorized with a toc on the main page.



The other FAQ on the website is also categorized:
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html

So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and
consolidate.

In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here.
But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers
to do the work.  So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a
+1 from me.  I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from
the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ
for the project.

Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs:

http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html

Maybe a simplifying assumption could be:

1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product
and the project

2) We have the "internal" project-facing FAQ's on
openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format.



I also would like to see FAQs in the Wiki, for both parts. FAQs have the
attribute that they are never complete, need to be updated regularily and
nearly anybody has something to add.



A website in mdtext is also easy to update and anyone can update it.
In some sense it is even easier than the wiki, since with the
anonymous mode an account registration is not even needed, unlike the
wiki,


I don't want to talk bad about the anonymous feature of the CMS. 
However, it's not widely known how to use it but I think how to use and 
change a wikipage is known better.



I'd also disagree with the belief that FAQs need to be frequently
changed.  They only need to be frequently *asked*.  For example, the
question about OpenOffice on iPad only needs to be answered once.  it
does not require frequent community enhancement.


Right, the better word is "extend", to add more content.


So, it should be the best if indeed anybody can do the update. That's best
done within the Wiki. Mistakes can be corrected fast and bad changes
reverted easily.



The same is true of the website.

But let's be honest:  the FAQ's on the wiki have been neglected for a
long time.  Technological concerns are not the reason for this, since
they are already on the wiki.  Our problems are elsewhere.


It seems nobody wanted to do the work that is needed to keep it 
up-to-date. ;-)



My preference for the mdtext is it is easier to style and looks
better.  Wikis are dog butt ugly, IMHO.  Fine for collaborating on
text, but for final publication they are ugly.  IMHO.


I doubt that we need pretty styling here. The users want information for 
their question(s). It's not the primary goal to present it most pretty 
and nice but competent and complete.


Furthermore, I support the standpoint of Keith: Re-new both FAQs in the 
*same*

Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)

[Marcus (OOo)]

Am 12/03/2012 11:35 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Marcus (OOo)  wrote:

Am 12/03/2012 09:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:


On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna
   wrote:


Rob Weir wrote:



On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti
wrote:



On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote:




[Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ.





I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an
"OpenOffice FAQ" easily reachable by search engines at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know
whether
it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so).

Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it
from
the current site?



The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results.  That
is valuable and worth preserving.

But the current FAQ contents are out of date.  They would need a lot
of work to update/correct them.

Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the
static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to
maintain.   Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML
definition lists () would be easier and could be maintained via
the CMS web interface.

There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ

These also appear to be unmaintained.  But I think the wiki version
would be easier to maintain.

So one possible resolution could be:

1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on
the wiki

2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki

3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question)

4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that
directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's.


-Rob
-Rob


Regards,
 Andrea.





Rob;

I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged
as
needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and
clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way
we
decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it
is
already categorized with a toc on the main page.



The other FAQ on the website is also categorized:
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html

So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and
consolidate.

In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here.
But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers
to do the work.  So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a
+1 from me.  I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from
the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ
for the project.

Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs:

http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html

Maybe a simplifying assumption could be:

1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product
and the project

2) We have the "internal" project-facing FAQ's on
openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format.



I also would like to see FAQs in the Wiki, for both parts. FAQs have the
attribute that they are never complete, need to be updated regularily and
nearly anybody has something to add.



A website in mdtext is also easy to update and anyone can update it.
In some sense it is even easier than the wiki, since with the
anonymous mode an account registration is not even needed, unlike the
wiki,

I'd also disagree with the belief that FAQs need to be frequently
changed.  They only need to be frequently *asked*.  For example, the
question about OpenOffice on iPad only needs to be answered once.  it
does not require frequent community enhancement.


So, it should be the best if indeed anybody can do the update. That's best
done within the Wiki. Mistakes can be corrected fast and bad changes
reverted easily.



The same is true of the website.

But let's be honest:  the FAQ's on the wiki have been neglected for a
long time.  Technological concerns are not the reason for this, since
they are already on the wiki.  Our problems are elsewhere.

My preference for the mdtext is it is easier to style and looks
better.  Wikis are dog butt ugly, IMHO.  Fine for collaborating on
text, but for final publication they are ugly.  IMHO.



For reference and comparison, look at the support page that Firefox uses:

http://support.mozilla.org/en-US/home

Their "hot topics" is analogous to FAQs.

This is a clean, attractive page, free of distractions, easy to use.
I don't think we get there with a wiki.


Indeed, it looks nice. But I don't think that we need that much of styling.

Marcus

Re: www.apache.org/projects has no AOO ??

[Kay Schenk]

On 12/03/2012 02:44 PM, janI wrote:

Thanks for enlightening me, may I politely ask is that something for a
committer FAQ, or is it too special ?

jan I.


We should probably include it in something like that. We have a 
Developer FAQ that doesn't get into  interacting with INFRA since this 
doesn't come up a lot, but some tidbits like this should definitely be 
included. :)


I will make a mental note to update:

http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/developer-faqs.html





On 3 December 2012 23:07, Kay Schenk  wrote:




On 12/03/2012 11:51 AM, janI wrote:


what is TLP ?



== Top Level Project ==

We are still in "moving/setup" mode.

As near as I can tell, the svn trees (source, web sites) have been moved
but some of the underpinnings of the web sites are still not complete to
use the CMS. The project website 
(incubator.apache.org/**openofficeorg)
for sure has not been moved where it needs to go yet.




I know we use bugzilla for our own bugs in AOO, but I thought I had to use
AOO when I open a JIRA ticket, where I want Infra to make some changes for
me.



correct...and what you say IS somewhat confusing. Normally, I just leave
the JIRA ticket assigned to INFRA, i.e. use INFRA as the project. I think
this means "assigned to", i.e. who will do it, rather than who it's for.
Maybe? Anyway, this is usually what I do.




Jan I.


On 3 December 2012 20:47, Dave Fisher  wrote:

  The transition to TLP is not complete. We do not use JIRA. We have our

bugzilla instance

Regards,
Save

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 3, 2012, at 1:19 PM, janI  wrote:

  When I look in www.apache.org projects, take indexes, I cannot find:

   Apache OpenOffice
   OpenOffice
or
   OOO

The same goes for the JIRA issues system.

Should it not be there ?
(or does our project have another code)

Jan.







--
--**--**

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 woman to expect the man to build the world
 she wants, rather than to create it herself?”
-- Anais Nin

Re: www.apache.org/projects has no AOO ??

[janI]

Thanks for enlightening me, may I politely ask is that something for a
committer FAQ, or is it too special ?

jan I.


On 3 December 2012 23:07, Kay Schenk  wrote:

>
>
> On 12/03/2012 11:51 AM, janI wrote:
>
>> what is TLP ?
>>
>
> == Top Level Project ==
>
> We are still in "moving/setup" mode.
>
> As near as I can tell, the svn trees (source, web sites) have been moved
> but some of the underpinnings of the web sites are still not complete to
> use the CMS. The project website 
> (incubator.apache.org/**openofficeorg)
> for sure has not been moved where it needs to go yet.
>
>
>
>> I know we use bugzilla for our own bugs in AOO, but I thought I had to use
>> AOO when I open a JIRA ticket, where I want Infra to make some changes for
>> me.
>>
>
> correct...and what you say IS somewhat confusing. Normally, I just leave
> the JIRA ticket assigned to INFRA, i.e. use INFRA as the project. I think
> this means "assigned to", i.e. who will do it, rather than who it's for.
> Maybe? Anyway, this is usually what I do.
>
>
>
>> Jan I.
>>
>>
>> On 3 December 2012 20:47, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>
>>  The transition to TLP is not complete. We do not use JIRA. We have our
>>> bugzilla instance
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Save
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Dec 3, 2012, at 1:19 PM, janI  wrote:
>>>
>>>  When I look in www.apache.org projects, take indexes, I cannot find:
   Apache OpenOffice
   OpenOffice
 or
   OOO

 The same goes for the JIRA issues system.

 Should it not be there ?
 (or does our project have another code)

 Jan.

>>>
>>>
>>
> --
> --**--**
> 
> 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
>

Fisheye setup?

[Kay Schenk]

I don't know who did the initial setup for our fisheye instance --

https://fisheye6.atlassian.com/browse/ooo

The last activity on "trunk/main" via this interface seems to be Nov 24.

Does the fisheye instance need editing do the recent svn move?

Since I don't download the complete source, I use this a lot to find 
stuff. :/


--

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: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Marcus (OOo)  wrote:
>> Am 12/03/2012 09:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna
>>>   wrote:

 Rob Weir wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an
>> "OpenOffice FAQ" easily reachable by search engines at
>> http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know
>> whether
>> it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so).
>>
>> Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it
>> from
>> the current site?
>>
>
> The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results.  That
> is valuable and worth preserving.
>
> But the current FAQ contents are out of date.  They would need a lot
> of work to update/correct them.
>
> Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the
> static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to
> maintain.   Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML
> definition lists () would be easier and could be maintained via
> the CMS web interface.
>
> There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki:
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ
>
> These also appear to be unmaintained.  But I think the wiki version
> would be easier to maintain.
>
> So one possible resolution could be:
>
> 1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at
> http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on
> the wiki
>
> 2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki
>
> 3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question)
>
> 4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that
> directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's.
>
>
> -Rob
> -Rob
>
>> Regards,
>> Andrea.
>
>
>
 Rob;

 I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged
 as
 needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and
 clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way
 we
 decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it
 is
 already categorized with a toc on the main page.

>>>
>>> The other FAQ on the website is also categorized:
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html
>>>
>>> So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and
>>> consolidate.
>>>
>>> In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here.
>>> But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers
>>> to do the work.  So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a
>>> +1 from me.  I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from
>>> the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ
>>> for the project.
>>>
>>> Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs:
>>>
>>> http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html
>>>
>>> http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html
>>>
>>> http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html
>>>
>>> Maybe a simplifying assumption could be:
>>>
>>> 1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product
>>> and the project
>>>
>>> 2) We have the "internal" project-facing FAQ's on
>>> openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format.
>>
>>
>> I also would like to see FAQs in the Wiki, for both parts. FAQs have the
>> attribute that they are never complete, need to be updated regularily and
>> nearly anybody has something to add.
>>
>
> A website in mdtext is also easy to update and anyone can update it.
> In some sense it is even easier than the wiki, since with the
> anonymous mode an account registration is not even needed, unlike the
> wiki,
>
> I'd also disagree with the belief that FAQs need to be frequently
> changed.  They only need to be frequently *asked*.  For example, the
> question about OpenOffice on iPad only needs to be answered once.  it
> does not require frequent community enhancement.
>
>> So, it should be the best if indeed anybody can do the update. That's best
>> done within the Wiki. Mistakes can be corrected fast and bad changes
>> reverted easily.
>>
>
> The same is true of the website.
>
> But let's be honest:  the FAQ's on the wiki have been neglected for a
> long time.  Technological concerns are not the reason for this, since
> they are already on the wiki.  Our problems are elsewhere.
>
> My preference for the mdtext is it is easier to style and looks
> better.  Wikis are dog butt ugly, IMHO.  Fine for collaborating on
> text, but for fi

Re: Gallery extension from Symphony ressources

[Regina Henschel]

Hi Marcus,

Marcus (OOo) schrieb:

Am 12/03/2012 05:59 PM, schrieb Regina Henschel:

Hi all,

Armin Le Grand schrieb:

Hi Kevin and Marcus,

let's wait and see if Regina may know/find a place in the office where
this is needed.


I see that the folder htmlexpo is used in File > Wizards > Web Page..

But I do not see any of the selected pictures in the result of the
Wizard. Does someone know, where these picture should appear in the
result of the Wizard? Or has some function be removes from the wizard
some time ago, without removing the selection?


Your can also export a presentation into HTML file. IHMO some homepage
pics are also used to represent the move forward/backward/etc functions.


File > Wizards > Web Page... is very different from File > Export > HTML 
of a presentation.


The name "Web Page..." is confusing. It does a conversion of a set of 
documents from your hard disk to a selected format. This can be HTML, 
but conversion to PDF is possible too. In addition an index page in html 
is produced, which links to the converted documents.


The File > Export > HTML transforms the slides of an opened presentation 
to a set of html pages, which are linked in a chain. The icons for the 
buttons are neither taken from the folder htmlexpo nor from the 
"Homepage" theme (www-graf folder), but they are in 
\Basis\share\config\wizard\web\buttons.


Kind regards
Regina



Marcus




My suggestion is to remove the folder in the build, but provide a zipped
version of the folder (=80KB) somewhere for download. So if someone
really searches for it, we can give him a download link.

Problem is that the gallery is used as kinda 'graphic

ressource holder' from some office modules, so some themes *have* to
stay. These are normally hidden, but as seen with the rulers - don't
have to be...


For example the bullets are used not only in numbering and outline but
as data point pictures in charts too.

Kind regards
Regina

Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)

[Kay Schenk]

On 12/03/2012 01:51 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:

Rob Weir wrote:

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna
 wrote:

Rob Weir wrote:


On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti 
wrote:


On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote:



[Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ.




I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately,
there's an
"OpenOffice FAQ" easily reachable by search engines at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know
whether
it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so).

Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it
from
the current site?



The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results.  That
is valuable and worth preserving.

But the current FAQ contents are out of date.  They would need a lot
of work to update/correct them.

Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the
static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to
maintain.   Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML
definition lists () would be easier and could be maintained via
the CMS web interface.

There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ

These also appear to be unmaintained.  But I think the wiki version
would be easier to maintain.

So one possible resolution could be:

1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on
the wiki

2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki

3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question)

4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that
directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's.


-Rob
-Rob


Regards,
Andrea.




Rob;

I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were
tagged as
needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and
clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the
way we
decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain
and it is
already categorized with a toc on the main page.



The other FAQ on the website is also categorized:
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html

So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and
consolidate.

In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here.
But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers
to do the work.  So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a
+1 from me.  I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from
the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ
for the project.

Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs:

http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html

Maybe a simplifying assumption could be:

1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product
and the project


This seems reasonable to me.

Maybe it's just me, but I can't get any any output from:

http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ

Looking at the source, this seems to be a customized Google search that 
was once in play, and now doesn't work.


I don't really know much about MW but I'm wondering if there's some sort 
of built it internal search (or an external function that could be 
installed) with it that could use doc categories or something to make an 
internal search work.





2) We have the "internal" project-facing FAQ's on
openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format.

-Rob


Regards
Keith





Rob;

Though your simplifying assumption appears on the surface to be a good
compromise the process engineer in me says I see a potential maintenance
disaster looming. It creates essentially two different processes with
different tools to accomplish the same basic task something that I
prefer to avoid if possible. By using one or the other you cut down on
the training necessary to bring new people up to speed and you
centralize the maintenance and lessen the chance that something slips
under the radar.

I already know what kind of shape the documentation section of the wiki
is in. Let me take a look at the FAQ's on the web site and see how far
out of date they are. It may be that rewriting the user ones in dtet may
make more sense.

Regards
Keith





--

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: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)

[Keith N. McKenna]

janI wrote:

+1 to the comments from andrea, seen from that point wiki is really better
than a semi-static MDTEXT,. I only have one worry, how do we keep the local
sites in sync ?

If we use wiki, we need to find a way where it is easy just to translate
the changes and more importantly be aware of a necessity for translation,
"watch" is to me NOT the right choice.


Jan I.

That question hopefully can be answered by someone with experience in 
translating of documentation from the English Language Wiki to one of 
the Native Language areas of the wiki. No matter which way we go there 
is going to be a need to keep multiple language areas in sync. It also 
works the other way around. If a change is made on say the Danish page, 
how is that translated and synced to the English page?


The question should be what process and tools are going to give us a 
sustainable and maintainable set of FAQ's across all languages.


Regards
Keith



On 3 December 2012 22:49, Marcus (OOo)  wrote:


Am 12/03/2012 09:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:

  On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna

  wrote:


Rob Weir wrote:



On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti
wrote:



On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote:




[Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ.





I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an
"OpenOffice FAQ" easily reachable by search engines at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.**htmland 
quite outdated (I don't know
whether
it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so).

Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it
from
the current site?



The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results.  That
is valuable and worth preserving.

But the current FAQ contents are out of date.  They would need a lot
of work to update/correct them.

Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the
static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to
maintain.   Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML
definition lists () would be easier and could be maintained via
the CMS web interface.

There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Documentation/FAQ

These also appear to be unmaintained.  But I think the wiki version
would be easier to maintain.

So one possible resolution could be:

1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.**htmland 
copy them into new FAQ items on
the wiki

2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki

3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question)

4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that
directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's.


-Rob
-Rob

  Regards,

 Andrea.




  Rob;


I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged
as
needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and
clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way
we
decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and
it is
already categorized with a toc on the main page.



The other FAQ on the website is also categorized:
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.**html 

So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and
consolidate.

In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here.
But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers
to do the work.  So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a
+1 from me.  I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from
the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ
for the project.

Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs:

http://openoffice.apache.org/**community-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/**developer-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/**pmc-faqs.html

Maybe a simplifying assumption could be:

1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product
and the project

2) We have the "internal" project-facing FAQ's on
openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format.



I also would like to see FAQs in the Wiki, for both parts. FAQs have the
attribute that they are never complete, need to be updated regularily and
nearly anybody has something to add.

So, it should be the best if indeed anybody can do the update. That's best
done within the Wiki. Mistakes can be corrected fast and bad changes
reverted easily.

My 2 ct.

Marcus

Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Keith N. McKenna
 wrote:
> Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Rob Weir wrote:


 On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti 
 wrote:
>
>
> On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> [Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ.
>
>
>
>
> I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an
> "OpenOffice FAQ" easily reachable by search engines at
> http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know
> whether
> it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so).
>
> Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it
> from
> the current site?
>

 The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results.  That
 is valuable and worth preserving.

 But the current FAQ contents are out of date.  They would need a lot
 of work to update/correct them.

 Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the
 static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to
 maintain.   Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML
 definition lists () would be easier and could be maintained via
 the CMS web interface.

 There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki:
 http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ

 These also appear to be unmaintained.  But I think the wiki version
 would be easier to maintain.

 So one possible resolution could be:

 1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at
 http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on
 the wiki

 2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki

 3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question)

 4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that
 directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's.


 -Rob
 -Rob

> Regards,
> Andrea.



>>> Rob;
>>>
>>> I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged
>>> as
>>> needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and
>>> clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way
>>> we
>>> decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it
>>> is
>>> already categorized with a toc on the main page.
>>>
>>
>> The other FAQ on the website is also categorized:
>> http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html
>>
>> So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and
>> consolidate.
>>
>> In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here.
>> But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers
>> to do the work.  So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a
>> +1 from me.  I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from
>> the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ
>> for the project.
>>
>> Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs:
>>
>> http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html
>>
>> http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html
>>
>> http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html
>>
>> Maybe a simplifying assumption could be:
>>
>> 1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product
>> and the project
>>
>> 2) We have the "internal" project-facing FAQ's on
>> openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>> Regards
>>> Keith
>>>
>>>
>>
> Rob;
>
> Though your simplifying assumption appears on the surface to be a good
> compromise the process engineer in me says I see a potential maintenance
> disaster looming. It creates essentially two different processes with
> different tools to accomplish the same basic task something that I prefer to
> avoid if possible. By using one or the other you cut down on the training
> necessary to bring new people up to speed and you centralize the maintenance
> and lessen the chance that something slips under the radar.
>

We already have different tools and different processes:  static HTML,
static mdtext and wiki.  I'm proposing reducing it from 3 to 2.

As far as process goes, I think the product-related questions will
generally be updated by those interested in documentation and support.
 But the project-related questions -- the ones currently on
openoffice.apache.org -- will probably be updated by the PMC.  I think
those questions, which deal with project membership, process
definition, etc., are quasi-official in nature and it is not a bad
thing if editing them is harder and more restricted than editing a
public wiki.

And let's not forget the harsh transition that some has navigating
from an openoffice.apache.org web page to the wiki.  The look is
different and there is no context or reverse navigation.  The user has
been teleported into another galaxy.

I sometimes

Re: [Proposal] Create new mailing list: d...@openoffice.apache.org

[Albino Biasutti Neto]

Hi.

2012/12/3 Rob Weir :
> Name:  d...@openoffice.apache.org   OR  d...@openoffice.apache.org  (I
> don't have a strong preference for the name)

docs [at] openoffice.apache.org

> Moderators:  Please respond if you can volunteer as moderator.  We
> should aim for 2 or 3 geographically dispersed.

Me. :-)

-- 
Albino

Re: Unsubscribe in Commits

[Albino Biasutti Neto]

Hi

2012/12/3 Andrea Pescetti :
>> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/mailing-lists.html#commits-mailing-list
> Thanks, fixed in SVN. Will appear online when the site is published and
> moved out of the incubator.

I try change in cms, but because some procedures that need to be made
couldn 't.

-- 
Albino

Re: www.apache.org/projects has no AOO ??

[Kay Schenk]

On 12/03/2012 11:51 AM, janI wrote:

what is TLP ?


== Top Level Project ==

We are still in "moving/setup" mode.

As near as I can tell, the svn trees (source, web sites) have been moved 
but some of the underpinnings of the web sites are still not complete to 
use the CMS. The project website (incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg) 
for sure has not been moved where it needs to go yet.




I know we use bugzilla for our own bugs in AOO, but I thought I had to use
AOO when I open a JIRA ticket, where I want Infra to make some changes for
me.


correct...and what you say IS somewhat confusing. Normally, I just leave 
the JIRA ticket assigned to INFRA, i.e. use INFRA as the project. I 
think this means "assigned to", i.e. who will do it, rather than who 
it's for. Maybe? Anyway, this is usually what I do.




Jan I.


On 3 December 2012 20:47, Dave Fisher  wrote:


The transition to TLP is not complete. We do not use JIRA. We have our
bugzilla instance

Regards,
Save

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 3, 2012, at 1:19 PM, janI  wrote:


When I look in www.apache.org projects, take indexes, I cannot find:
  Apache OpenOffice
  OpenOffice
or
  OOO

The same goes for the JIRA issues system.

Should it not be there ?
(or does our project have another code)

Jan.






--

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: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Marcus (OOo)  wrote:
> Am 12/03/2012 09:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>
>> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna
>>   wrote:
>>>
>>> Rob Weir wrote:


 On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti
 wrote:
>
>
> On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> [Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ.
>
>
>
>
> I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an
> "OpenOffice FAQ" easily reachable by search engines at
> http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know
> whether
> it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so).
>
> Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it
> from
> the current site?
>

 The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results.  That
 is valuable and worth preserving.

 But the current FAQ contents are out of date.  They would need a lot
 of work to update/correct them.

 Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the
 static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to
 maintain.   Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML
 definition lists () would be easier and could be maintained via
 the CMS web interface.

 There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki:
 http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ

 These also appear to be unmaintained.  But I think the wiki version
 would be easier to maintain.

 So one possible resolution could be:

 1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at
 http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on
 the wiki

 2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki

 3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question)

 4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that
 directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's.


 -Rob
 -Rob

> Regards,
> Andrea.



>>> Rob;
>>>
>>> I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged
>>> as
>>> needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and
>>> clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way
>>> we
>>> decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it
>>> is
>>> already categorized with a toc on the main page.
>>>
>>
>> The other FAQ on the website is also categorized:
>> http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html
>>
>> So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and
>> consolidate.
>>
>> In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here.
>> But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers
>> to do the work.  So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a
>> +1 from me.  I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from
>> the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ
>> for the project.
>>
>> Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs:
>>
>> http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html
>>
>> http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html
>>
>> http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html
>>
>> Maybe a simplifying assumption could be:
>>
>> 1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product
>> and the project
>>
>> 2) We have the "internal" project-facing FAQ's on
>> openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format.
>
>
> I also would like to see FAQs in the Wiki, for both parts. FAQs have the
> attribute that they are never complete, need to be updated regularily and
> nearly anybody has something to add.
>

A website in mdtext is also easy to update and anyone can update it.
In some sense it is even easier than the wiki, since with the
anonymous mode an account registration is not even needed, unlike the
wiki,

I'd also disagree with the belief that FAQs need to be frequently
changed.  They only need to be frequently *asked*.  For example, the
question about OpenOffice on iPad only needs to be answered once.  it
does not require frequent community enhancement.

> So, it should be the best if indeed anybody can do the update. That's best
> done within the Wiki. Mistakes can be corrected fast and bad changes
> reverted easily.
>

The same is true of the website.

But let's be honest:  the FAQ's on the wiki have been neglected for a
long time.  Technological concerns are not the reason for this, since
they are already on the wiki.  Our problems are elsewhere.

My preference for the mdtext is it is easier to style and looks
better.  Wikis are dog butt ugly, IMHO.  Fine for collaborating on
text, but for final publication they are ugly.  IMHO.

-Rob

> My 2 ct.
>
> Marcus

Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)

[janI]

+1 to the comments from andrea, seen from that point wiki is really better
than a semi-static MDTEXT,. I only have one worry, how do we keep the local
sites in sync ?

If we use wiki, we need to find a way where it is easy just to translate
the changes and more importantly be aware of a necessity for translation,
"watch" is to me NOT the right choice.


Jan I.


On 3 December 2012 22:49, Marcus (OOo)  wrote:

> Am 12/03/2012 09:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>
>  On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna
>>   wrote:
>>
>>> Rob Weir wrote:
>>>

 On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti
 wrote:

>
> On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> [Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ.
>>
>
>
>
> I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an
> "OpenOffice FAQ" easily reachable by search engines at
> http://www.openoffice.org/faq.**htmland
>  quite outdated (I don't know
> whether
> it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so).
>
> Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it
> from
> the current site?
>
>
 The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results.  That
 is valuable and worth preserving.

 But the current FAQ contents are out of date.  They would need a lot
 of work to update/correct them.

 Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the
 static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to
 maintain.   Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML
 definition lists () would be easier and could be maintained via
 the CMS web interface.

 There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki:
 http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Documentation/FAQ

 These also appear to be unmaintained.  But I think the wiki version
 would be easier to maintain.

 So one possible resolution could be:

 1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at
 http://www.openoffice.org/faq.**htmland
  copy them into new FAQ items on
 the wiki

 2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki

 3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question)

 4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that
 directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's.


 -Rob
 -Rob

  Regards,
> Andrea.
>


  Rob;
>>>
>>> I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged
>>> as
>>> needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and
>>> clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way
>>> we
>>> decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and
>>> it is
>>> already categorized with a toc on the main page.
>>>
>>>
>> The other FAQ on the website is also categorized:
>> http://www.openoffice.org/faq.**html 
>>
>> So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and
>> consolidate.
>>
>> In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here.
>> But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers
>> to do the work.  So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a
>> +1 from me.  I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from
>> the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ
>> for the project.
>>
>> Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs:
>>
>> http://openoffice.apache.org/**community-faqs.html
>>
>> http://openoffice.apache.org/**developer-faqs.html
>>
>> http://openoffice.apache.org/**pmc-faqs.html
>>
>> Maybe a simplifying assumption could be:
>>
>> 1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product
>> and the project
>>
>> 2) We have the "internal" project-facing FAQ's on
>> openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format.
>>
>
> I also would like to see FAQs in the Wiki, for both parts. FAQs have the
> attribute that they are never complete, need to be updated regularily and
> nearly anybody has something to add.
>
> So, it should be the best if indeed anybody can do the update. That's best
> done within the Wiki. Mistakes can be corrected fast and bad changes
> reverted easily.
>
> My 2 ct.
>
> Marcus
>

Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)

[Keith N. McKenna]

Rob Weir wrote:

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna
 wrote:

Rob Weir wrote:


On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti 
wrote:


On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote:



[Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ.




I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an
"OpenOffice FAQ" easily reachable by search engines at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know
whether
it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so).

Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it
from
the current site?



The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results.  That
is valuable and worth preserving.

But the current FAQ contents are out of date.  They would need a lot
of work to update/correct them.

Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the
static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to
maintain.   Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML
definition lists () would be easier and could be maintained via
the CMS web interface.

There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ

These also appear to be unmaintained.  But I think the wiki version
would be easier to maintain.

So one possible resolution could be:

1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on
the wiki

2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki

3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question)

4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that
directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's.


-Rob
-Rob


Regards,
Andrea.




Rob;

I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged as
needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and
clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way we
decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it is
already categorized with a toc on the main page.



The other FAQ on the website is also categorized:
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html

So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and
consolidate.

In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here.
But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers
to do the work.  So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a
+1 from me.  I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from
the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ
for the project.

Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs:

http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html

Maybe a simplifying assumption could be:

1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product
and the project

2) We have the "internal" project-facing FAQ's on
openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format.

-Rob


Regards
Keith





Rob;

Though your simplifying assumption appears on the surface to be a good 
compromise the process engineer in me says I see a potential maintenance 
disaster looming. It creates essentially two different processes with 
different tools to accomplish the same basic task something that I 
prefer to avoid if possible. By using one or the other you cut down on 
the training necessary to bring new people up to speed and you 
centralize the maintenance and lessen the chance that something slips 
under the radar.


I already know what kind of shape the documentation section of the wiki 
is in. Let me take a look at the FAQ's on the web site and see how far 
out of date they are. It may be that rewriting the user ones in dtet may 
make more sense.


Regards
Keith

Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)

[Marcus (OOo)]

Am 12/03/2012 09:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna
  wrote:

Rob Weir wrote:


On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti
wrote:


On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote:



[Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ.




I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an
"OpenOffice FAQ" easily reachable by search engines at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know
whether
it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so).

Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it
from
the current site?



The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results.  That
is valuable and worth preserving.

But the current FAQ contents are out of date.  They would need a lot
of work to update/correct them.

Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the
static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to
maintain.   Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML
definition lists () would be easier and could be maintained via
the CMS web interface.

There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ

These also appear to be unmaintained.  But I think the wiki version
would be easier to maintain.

So one possible resolution could be:

1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on
the wiki

2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki

3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question)

4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that
directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's.


-Rob
-Rob


Regards,
Andrea.




Rob;

I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged as
needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and
clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way we
decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it is
already categorized with a toc on the main page.



The other FAQ on the website is also categorized:
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html

So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and
consolidate.

In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here.
But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers
to do the work.  So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a
+1 from me.  I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from
the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ
for the project.

Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs:

http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html

Maybe a simplifying assumption could be:

1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product
and the project

2) We have the "internal" project-facing FAQ's on
openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format.


I also would like to see FAQs in the Wiki, for both parts. FAQs have the 
attribute that they are never complete, need to be updated regularily 
and nearly anybody has something to add.


So, it should be the best if indeed anybody can do the update. That's 
best done within the Wiki. Mistakes can be corrected fast and bad 
changes reverted easily.


My 2 ct.

Marcus

Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 3:04 PM, janI  wrote:
> When we change FAQ (and I really like the idea of using MDTEXT), we should
> make it easy to translate for all the local sites, and not only the first
> time, but more importantly to stay up to date with the translation.
>
> Do we currently have any tools to "watch" a mdtext file, so when the
> english version is changed the local translators are notified ? If not we
> should think of a mechanism, since especially FAQ are of interest in all
> languages.
>

On Windows there is this CommitMonitor tool:
http://tools.tortoisesvn.net/CommitMonitor.html

Also, you can "roll your own" with email filters on messages sent to
the commit list.

-Rob

> Jan I.
>
>
> On 3 December 2012 20:54, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>
>> Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote:

>
> [Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ.
>


 I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an
 "OpenOffice FAQ" easily reachable by search engines at
 http://www.openoffice.org/faq.**htmland
  quite outdated (I don't know whether
 it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so).

 Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it
 from
 the current site?


>>> The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results.  That
>>> is valuable and worth preserving.
>>>
>>> But the current FAQ contents are out of date.  They would need a lot
>>> of work to update/correct them.
>>>
>>> Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the
>>> static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to
>>> maintain.   Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML
>>> definition lists () would be easier and could be maintained via
>>> the CMS web interface.
>>>
>>> There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki:
>>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Documentation/FAQ
>>>
>>> These also appear to be unmaintained.  But I think the wiki version
>>> would be easier to maintain.
>>>
>>> So one possible resolution could be:
>>>
>>> 1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/faq.**html 
>>> and copy them into new FAQ items on
>>> the wiki
>>>
>>> 2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki
>>>
>>> 3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question)
>>>
>>> 4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that
>>> directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's.
>>>
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>>  Regards,
Andrea.

>>>
>>>  Rob;
>>
>> I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged
>> as needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and
>> clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way we
>> decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it
>> is already categorized with a toc on the main page.
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
>>
>>
>>

Re: [User Docs] End of effort to get AOO v3.4 Getting Started Guide finished

[Keith N. McKenna]

Rob Weir wrote:

On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 11:12 PM, Keith N. McKenna
 wrote:

After 3 months of frustration it is time to end the effort to get The
Getting Started Guide that had been started for AOO 3.4 completed. Despite
repeated requests for help on the ODFAuthors list it is apparent that either
the Authors that had been working on Open Office docs are either no longer
interested or are working strictly on the LO books.

Alexandro Colorado made an attempt at getting the Base Guide done but was
not able to get any responses to his requests for comments on his markups
and changes and decided to put it on hold until he did. As far as I know he
is still waiting.

One other volunteer stepped up from an inquiry on this list and gave
valuable help. Prabha again thank you very much for your work and I hope
that you will get involved with the defining of a new documentation project.

With only 2 people actively working it is not possible to give the work the
quality review and editing that it deserves to have the Open Office name
attached to it.

Reluctantly unless someone with the requisite skills in technical writing
and publishing that I do not have can lend a hand I feel it is best to end
the effort and not waste anymore of anyone's time.

I will continue to contribute where I can, but that is difficult or someone
who is not a developer.



Let me describe a possible future, and maybe you (and others) can help
influence it.  I'm not a documentation expert but I can help some.
But mostly I can help on the recruitment side.

Imagine we do the following:

1) Create a new d...@openoffice.apache.org list

2) We write an "Introduction to Documentation" page for our
orientation modules:
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/orientation/index.html.  It
would be a single page, a high level overview of how documentation
fits into the overall project, what tools and methods we use (or have
available to us), etc.

3) We write a blog post for the project blog, where we issue a "call
for documentation volunteers"

4) We promote that blog post via social networks, and via a prominent
banner on the www.openoffice.org webpage.

5) If we do the above, I think that within 2 weeks we will have 20
people posting to to our new Doc mailing list, offering to help with
the documentation.  We've seen similar results with Marketing and QA.
  They will have different skill levels, degrees of enthusiasm and time
to contribute.This will be the critical time for the doc project.
We would need several experienced members of the project, on the doc
list, able to answer questions and help the new volunteers.  If we
look too chaotic at this point we will lose many of the 20.

I can help drive steps 1-4, but I cannot do 5 by myself.  I'd need the
commitment of 3-4 other project members to help mentor the new
volunteers, to volunteer as list moderators, and to help encourage the
relaunched documentation project to develop a documentation plan for
AOO 4.0.

Does anyone want to help with this?

-Rob



Rob;

I would be very interested in helping in any way that I can. I firmly 
believe that good documentation is a must for any user centric software 
product.


Although I try whenever possible to read the lists via gmane's nntp feed 
I would be willing to help with moderating the list.


Regards
Keith

Re: Gallery extension from Symphony ressources

[Marcus (OOo)]

Am 12/03/2012 05:59 PM, schrieb Regina Henschel:

Hi all,

Armin Le Grand schrieb:

Hi Kevin and Marcus,

let's wait and see if Regina may know/find a place in the office where
this is needed.


I see that the folder htmlexpo is used in File > Wizards > Web Page..

But I do not see any of the selected pictures in the result of the
Wizard. Does someone know, where these picture should appear in the
result of the Wizard? Or has some function be removes from the wizard
some time ago, without removing the selection?


Your can also export a presentation into HTML file. IHMO some homepage 
pics are also used to represent the move forward/backward/etc functions.


Marcus




My suggestion is to remove the folder in the build, but provide a zipped
version of the folder (=80KB) somewhere for download. So if someone
really searches for it, we can give him a download link.

Problem is that the gallery is used as kinda 'graphic

ressource holder' from some office modules, so some themes *have* to
stay. These are normally hidden, but as seen with the rulers - don't
have to be...


For example the bullets are used not only in numbering and outline but
as data point pictures in charts too.

Kind regards
Regina

Re: Unsubscribe in Commits

[Andrea Pescetti]

Albino Biasutti Neto wrote:

2012/12/3 Andrea Pescetti:

There's a typo here: commmits ->  commits...

You should edit the page AOO for mailing:
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/mailing-lists.html#commits-mailing-list


Thanks, fixed in SVN. Will appear online when the site is published and 
moved out of the incubator.


Regards,
  Andrea.

Re: Gallery extension from Symphony ressources

[Marcus (OOo)]

Am 12/03/2012 10:34 AM, schrieb Armin Le Grand:

Hi Kevin and Marcus,

let's wait and see if Regina may know/find a place in the office where
this is needed. Problem is that the gallery is used as kinda 'graphic
ressource holder' from some office modules, so some themes *have* to
stay. These are normally hidden, but as seen with the rulers - don't
have to be...


With Regina second answer I think, too, it will become more difficult 
than thought first, to redure/delete outdated stuff. ;-(


Marcus




On 03.12.2012 01:57, Kevin Grignon wrote:

Agreed. Homepage elements are web 1.0. Let's remove them.

Kevin

On Dec 1, 2012, at 5:12 AM, "Marcus (OOo)"  wrote:


Am 11/30/2012 01:50 PM, schrieb Armin Le Grand:

Hi List,

to keep you up-to date (also in #121407#):

I have the first working version. Added themes are:

arrows (merged with existing)
bullets
computers
diagrams
education
environment
finance
gallery_sound
gallery_system
people
sounds
symbols
transportation
txtshapes

Install set sizes (Windows):
original: 122 MB (128.229.180 bytes)
modified: 142 MB (149.436.536 bytes)

Thus, it costs currently ca. 20 MB. I am right now using pngcrush to
reduce all contained *.png's old and new ones. Lets see what we can do.
It will get smaller. I also check if the ressources are available as
vector format (this would be optimal), but it does not look good up to
now. Let's see, I will report on reduced sizes when achieved...

Suggested from Kevin: remove theme 'rulers'. Comments on that?

Maybe they look really like from the past century. It's always
somewhat a kind of taste. But then we should also look at the
"Homepage" theme.

When reducing the pictures in themes or deleting some completely
would give some additional reducing.

Marcus

Re: Gallery extension from Symphony ressources

[Marcus (OOo)]

Am 12/03/2012 10:28 AM, schrieb Armin Le Grand:

Hi Regina,

On 30.11.2012 17:32, Regina Henschel wrote:

Hi Armin,

Armin Le Grand schrieb:

Hi List,

to keep you up-to date (also in #121407#):

I have the first working version. Added themes are:

arrows (merged with existing)
bullets
computers
diagrams
education
environment
finance
gallery_sound
gallery_system
people
sounds
symbols
transportation
txtshapes

Install set sizes (Windows):
original: 122 MB (128.229.180 bytes)
modified: 142 MB (149.436.536 bytes)


The StarOffice 8 gallery has 39MB, with folder "flags" of 6MB. Most of
the clips in *.wmf


Yes, vector data is superiour :-) I try to get the Symphony stuff as
vector data, but it's not sure if this is still available...





Thus, it costs currently ca. 20 MB. I am right now using pngcrush to
reduce all contained *.png's old and new ones. Lets see what we can do.
It will get smaller.


Does pngcrush reduce the color depth of the png's? Most of the
cliparts do not need 24bit.


No. It does *not* change the quality at all, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pngcrush.



I also check if the ressources are available as

vector format (this would be optimal), but it does not look good up to
now. Let's see, I will report on reduced sizes when achieved...

Suggested from Kevin: remove theme 'rulers'. Comments on that?


What about Insert > Horizontal ruler in Writer? It uses the rulers
from \Basis\share\gallery\rulers.


Regina, you are my hero :-)
Yes, checked, and - indeed - uses the gallery theme rulers. Thus, this
question is answered :-)


Wow, great find, Regina!

Marcus

Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Keith N. McKenna
 wrote:
> Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote:


 [Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an
>>> "OpenOffice FAQ" easily reachable by search engines at
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know
>>> whether
>>> it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so).
>>>
>>> Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it
>>> from
>>> the current site?
>>>
>>
>> The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results.  That
>> is valuable and worth preserving.
>>
>> But the current FAQ contents are out of date.  They would need a lot
>> of work to update/correct them.
>>
>> Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the
>> static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to
>> maintain.   Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML
>> definition lists () would be easier and could be maintained via
>> the CMS web interface.
>>
>> There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki:
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ
>>
>> These also appear to be unmaintained.  But I think the wiki version
>> would be easier to maintain.
>>
>> So one possible resolution could be:
>>
>> 1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at
>> http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on
>> the wiki
>>
>> 2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki
>>
>> 3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question)
>>
>> 4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that
>> directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's.
>>
>>
>> -Rob
>> -Rob
>>
>>> Regards,
>>>Andrea.
>>
>>
> Rob;
>
> I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged as
> needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and
> clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way we
> decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it is
> already categorized with a toc on the main page.
>

The other FAQ on the website is also categorized:
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html

So whatever direction we start from we'll probably want to update and
consolidate.

In my personal opinion, mdtext on the website is a good solution here.
But my opinion takes a back seat when someone else actually volunteers
to do the work.  So if you prefer the wiki for this, then you have a
+1 from me.  I'd just recommend that you fold in anything good from
the existing website into the wiki, so we have can have a single FAQ
for the project.

Oh, actually we have a few other FAQs:

http://openoffice.apache.org/community-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/developer-faqs.html

http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html

Maybe a simplifying assumption could be:

1) We make the MWiki FAQ's be the user-facing FAQs about the product
and the project

2) We have the "internal" project-facing FAQ's on
openoffice.apache.org website, in their current mdtext format.

-Rob

> Regards
> Keith
>
>

Re: Documentation Recruitment (was: Please add me to The OpenOffice.org Documentation Project list)

[Keith N. McKenna]

Kay Schenk wrote:



On 12/01/2012 12:52 PM, Guy Waterval wrote:

Hi Rob,
Hi all,

2012/12/1 Rob Weir 


On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Guy Waterval 
wrote:

Hi Rob,
Hi all,

2012/11/30 Rob Weir 

[...]



That would be the point of a call for volunteers then, wouldn't it?
Bring in more volunteers with the skills needed to create an outline,
etc.  There are independent books written on OpenOffice and certainly
Microsoft Office all the time.  There are many people who have the
skills needed.  All we need to do is ask.

The goal should be (IMHO) to reach a critical mass of volunteers where
the tasks are not only doable, but fun.



My personal opinion is that the way proposed by Ricardo, with an Apache
license, is actually the more innovative and realistic we have for an
online documentation at this time. His approach has the merit of

suggesting

a sustainable solution for the project and which can grow with it. So,

the

reflexion should be more oriented in finding a way to help him to
develop
his game, if desired..


The nature of things will lead to either:

1) We define the documentation plan, at least to the level of a list
of deliverables, a new d...@openoffice.apache.org mailing list, a
workflow, a technological approach (what formats and templates, etc.)
and a means of tracking status (page on the wiki) and *then* do a call
for volunteers.  If we do this then new volunteers will naturally
adapt to the workflow and process that already is in-progress,



I think that a d...@openoffice.apache.org mailing list and the acceptation
of the Alv2.0 for the docs are absolutely necessary.


+1 from me on this also...

@Keith, I applaud the efforts you've undertaken.

Off and on for months, I've tried to find a public archive for the ODF
Authors list to see what's going on. Unfortunately, this search was in
vain.

Re your earlier comments about an "outline". Yes, we need this but I'm
not sure if you meant this literally. Don't we *have* and outline? I'm
confused. maybe you meant something else -- some templates?

So, again, we're back at licensing issues it would seem.

It is time to bring this under this project's umbrella it would seem.



Kay;

I believe the outline that Rob originally referred to and that I 
responded to was an overall outline for what a documentation project 
looked like. This is something we really do not have and I a not 
qualified to do. It really needs an experienced documentation person. As 
far as what I tried to do with the Getting Started Guide, there are 
already chapters created that need to be reviewed and polished. So in 
that sense that "outline" does exist.

As far as I know there is no public archive of the ODFAuthors list.

I am all for getting a documentation project running in house. In the 
long run it makes more sense. All I attempted to do was to fill a 
perceived need in the shortest tie period possible consistent with 
quality goals.


Regards
Keith

#1 has my preference. It's not obligatory a totally fixed approach but it
allows to create a basis and to begin something. We have already
something
on the table and Ricardo and collegues are competent, certainly opened
and
motivated. Why not to try the way they have began. Nobody is excluded. It
allows to regroup all people who are interested in an apache
documentation
project and avoids to discourage others, who are investing their time and
energy aside the group, to find finally a home where they could really
get
support and express their qualities. Why not to build a winning team with
the people here in the group?



or

2) We do a call for volunteers with nothing more than a new
d...@openoffice.apache.org mailing list, and hash out the details on
that list with the new volunteers.

So if someone has strong views on how things should be done, then they
really need to step up and define #1.  Otherwise, a recruitment
activity will lead to a larger group of documentation volunteers who
will have a mind of their own and could take this in other directions.
  This isn't necessarily a bad thing, of course.


@Rob --

I think defining #1 is a priority. I can't add much to this since I'm
actually pretty content with the online Help. I don't know who uses the
external documentation or what the expectations are.





#2 is a little the "big bang" method. Difficult to make a choice in this
case, only suggestions (probably one approach pro player), nothing
concrete
on the table. The risk is to stay blocked as it was the case up to now.




Another consideration:  It is easier to find (and engage with)
volunteers who step into an ongoing activity like #1.  But it is
easier to attract an alpha "documentation architect" if things are not
already defined.



It's the loto game. You have to find a Zorro who accepts to work as
volunteer (and freely). I don't think that you would have more chance
with
#2, which represents a big charge. Moreover, giving priority to this
method
could perhaps demotivate some members in this group.

Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)

[janI]

When we change FAQ (and I really like the idea of using MDTEXT), we should
make it easy to translate for all the local sites, and not only the first
time, but more importantly to stay up to date with the translation.

Do we currently have any tools to "watch" a mdtext file, so when the
english version is changed the local translators are notified ? If not we
should think of a mechanism, since especially FAQ are of interest in all
languages.

Jan I.


On 3 December 2012 20:54, Keith N. McKenna wrote:

> Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote:
>>>

 [Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ.

>>>
>>>
>>> I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an
>>> "OpenOffice FAQ" easily reachable by search engines at
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/faq.**htmland 
>>> quite outdated (I don't know whether
>>> it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so).
>>>
>>> Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it
>>> from
>>> the current site?
>>>
>>>
>> The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results.  That
>> is valuable and worth preserving.
>>
>> But the current FAQ contents are out of date.  They would need a lot
>> of work to update/correct them.
>>
>> Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the
>> static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to
>> maintain.   Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML
>> definition lists () would be easier and could be maintained via
>> the CMS web interface.
>>
>> There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki:
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Documentation/FAQ
>>
>> These also appear to be unmaintained.  But I think the wiki version
>> would be easier to maintain.
>>
>> So one possible resolution could be:
>>
>> 1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at
>> http://www.openoffice.org/faq.**html and 
>> copy them into new FAQ items on
>> the wiki
>>
>> 2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki
>>
>> 3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question)
>>
>> 4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that
>> directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's.
>>
>>
>> -Rob
>> -Rob
>>
>>  Regards,
>>>Andrea.
>>>
>>
>>  Rob;
>
> I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged
> as needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review and
> clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the way we
> decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to maintain and it
> is already categorized with a toc on the main page.
>
> Regards
> Keith
>
>
>

Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)

[Keith N. McKenna]

Rob Weir wrote:

On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:

On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote:


[Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ.



I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an
"OpenOffice FAQ" easily reachable by search engines at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know whether
it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so).

Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it from
the current site?



The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results.  That
is valuable and worth preserving.

But the current FAQ contents are out of date.  They would need a lot
of work to update/correct them.

Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the
static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to
maintain.   Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML
definition lists () would be easier and could be maintained via
the CMS web interface.

There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ

These also appear to be unmaintained.  But I think the wiki version
would be easier to maintain.

So one possible resolution could be:

1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at
http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on
the wiki

2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki

3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question)

4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that
directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's.


-Rob
-Rob


Regards,
   Andrea.



Rob;

I have been updating some of the FAQ's on the wiki site that were tagged 
as needing help. I am more than willing to start a comprehensive review 
and clean-up of the User FAQ's on the documentation wiki if that is the 
way we decide to go. The advantage is that the wiki is easier to 
maintain and it is already categorized with a toc on the main page.


Regards
Keith

Re: www.apache.org/projects has no AOO ??

[janI]

what is TLP ?

I know we use bugzilla for our own bugs in AOO, but I thought I had to use
AOO when I open a JIRA ticket, where I want Infra to make some changes for
me.

Jan I.


On 3 December 2012 20:47, Dave Fisher  wrote:

> The transition to TLP is not complete. We do not use JIRA. We have our
> bugzilla instance
>
> Regards,
> Save
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 3, 2012, at 1:19 PM, janI  wrote:
>
> > When I look in www.apache.org projects, take indexes, I cannot find:
> >  Apache OpenOffice
> >  OpenOffice
> > or
> >  OOO
> >
> > The same goes for the JIRA issues system.
> >
> > Should it not be there ?
> > (or does our project have another code)
> >
> > Jan.
>

Re: www.apache.org/projects has no AOO ??

[Dave Fisher]

The transition to TLP is not complete. We do not use JIRA. We have our bugzilla 
instance

Regards,
Save

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 3, 2012, at 1:19 PM, janI  wrote:

> When I look in www.apache.org projects, take indexes, I cannot find:
>  Apache OpenOffice
>  OpenOffice
> or
>  OOO
> 
> The same goes for the JIRA issues system.
> 
> Should it not be there ?
> (or does our project have another code)
> 
> Jan.

Re: WaE: sw/source/filter/ww8 compiler warnings

[Pavel Janík]

Hi!

On Dec 3, 2012, at 4:18 PM, chengjh wrote:

> I committed some changes to solve the found warnings...Please help to
> verify again..And I will have a check to the whole sw module to see whether
> any missed warning is still existing.thanks.

thanks. The module is almost clean now.

I only see:

sw/source/filter/ww8/ww8par3.cxx:1125: warning: comparison is always true due 
to limited range of data type

SwNumRule* WW8ListManager::GetNumRule(sal_uInt16 i)
{
if ( i >= 0 && i < maLSTInfos.size() )


surely i>=0 when it is unsigned.
-- 
Pavel Janík

Re: AOO.Next IBM Priorities

[vineet sood]

+1

On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 12:39 AM, Rob Weir  wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Donald Harbison 
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Steve Lee 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Steve Lee
> >> OpenDirective - opendirective.com
> >> On Nov 2, 2012 7:59 AM, "Andre Fischer"  wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On 01.11.2012 17:45, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> A quick note, wearing my "IBM hat".
> >> >>
> >> >> We (IBM) have consulted with customers, internal users, other IBM
> >> product
> >> >> teams, on what our (IBM's) development priorities should be for the
> next
> >> >> AOO release.  Obviously, we're not the only ones with priorities or
> >> >> interests or opinions.  We don't make AOO decisions by ourselves.
>  But
> >> we
> >> >> want to be transparent about what our own priorities are, for our
> >> >> employees participating in the AOO community, and what they will be
> >> >> focusing on.   As we did with AOO 3.4.0 and 3.4.1, we'll be putting
> the
> >> >> details onto the wiki over the next couple of weeks.  You'll hear
> more
> >> at
> >> >> ApacheCon, but I wanted you to hear it hear first.
> >> >>
> >> >> Our top priorities:
> >> >>
> >> >> -- Improve the install and deployment experience, especially by
> >> supporting
> >> >> digital signatures on installs, and introducing a new incremental
> update
> >> >> feature, so users are not required to download and install a full
> image
> >> >> for just a minor update.
> >> >>
> >> >> -- A major UI enhancement, a sidebar framework for the editors,
> ported
> >> >> over from Symphony, and including an API.  If you recall, Symphony
> won
> >> >> quite a lot of praise for its UI, and much of this was due to the
> >> sidebar
> >> >> panel.  I think we can make a good argument that this approach, say
> >> >> compared to the MS Office "ribbon" is a better use of screen
> >> real-estate,
> >> >> especially as we see more frequent use of wide screen displays.
> >> >>
> >> >> -- Improved Table of Contents in Writer
> >> >>
> >> >> -- Improved system integration on Windows and MacOS, including
> possible
> >> >> adoption of "gestures".
> >> >>
> >> >> -- IAccessible2 bridge, ported over from Symphony, to improve
> >> >> accessibility.  This is a major effort, but very important.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I will be talking about IAccessible2 as stand in for Steve Yin at the
> >> ApacheCon.
> >> > Please meet me there at 11:45am on Nov 6 (Level 1 Left).
> >>
> >> Andre, sorry to mid your talk but I will check the slides. I have 2
> points
> >> of information regarding the usefulness of the  IAccessible2 work.
> Neither
> >> are new but I thought worth restating now to support it being a
> priority..
> >>
> >> 1: I just had a conversation with one of developers of NVDA, the popular
> >> screen reader for blind access on Windows. He said right now the Windows
> >> Accessibility story is "terrible" in OSS office solutions. To repeat a
> >> previous observation, there is a real demand for this from the
> >> Accessibility community. This need is also wider than the those using
> >> assistive technology who have visual impairments.
> >>
> >
> > Yes, I think we all violently agree that this gap needs to be addressed
> > successfully in the  AOO 4.x stream. I have consulted with our IBM
> Software
> > Distinguished Engineer for Accessibility on this. He has excellent
> contact
> > in university and at NVDA. I propose that we form an A11Y Working Group
> > within our project here in order to give this dedicated focus. One of the
> > challenges will be the need to finance some additional work. I doubt that
> > we'll be able to close all our gaps with 100% volunteer effort.
> >
> > Do you support the concept of an A11Y WG?  We can use the wiki that Steve
> > Yin has already started as a base for our documents. Do you think it's
> > overkill to request a mailing list dedicated to A11Y be set up?
> >
> >
>
> If we get more than one person doing accessibility then that might be
> something to consider.  But right now creating a new list would only
> put this topic "out of sight, out of mind".  So I would not favor it.
> Our measure of importance on the topic should be how much we do, not
> how much we talk about it.
>
> Let's reserve dedicated lists for real efforts, and continue to
> socialize sub-critical-mass interests on the dev list.  That is better
> for recruitment.
>
> -Rob
>
>
> >>
> >> 2: I also spotted Hubert Duerr's talk on automated testing in the
> ApacheCon
> >> programme and thought it worth mentioning that Accessibility APIs
> provides
> >> a powerful way to automate testing of and via the user interface. At
> least
> >> 2 Linux desktop testing frameworks take this approach using AT/API
> which is
> >> similar to IA2. I'm sure appealing to the testing market was the reason
> >> Microsoft named their updated Accessibility API "User Interface
> Automation,
> >> UIA"
> >>
> >> Steve Lee
> >> Open Directive
> >>
> >> >> -- Closer integration of clipart and template

Re: AOO.Next IBM Priorities

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Donald Harbison  wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Steve Lee  wrote:
>
>> Steve Lee
>> OpenDirective - opendirective.com
>> On Nov 2, 2012 7:59 AM, "Andre Fischer"  wrote:
>> >
>> > On 01.11.2012 17:45, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
>> >>
>> >> A quick note, wearing my "IBM hat".
>> >>
>> >> We (IBM) have consulted with customers, internal users, other IBM
>> product
>> >> teams, on what our (IBM's) development priorities should be for the next
>> >> AOO release.  Obviously, we're not the only ones with priorities or
>> >> interests or opinions.  We don't make AOO decisions by ourselves.  But
>> we
>> >> want to be transparent about what our own priorities are, for our
>> >> employees participating in the AOO community, and what they will be
>> >> focusing on.   As we did with AOO 3.4.0 and 3.4.1, we'll be putting the
>> >> details onto the wiki over the next couple of weeks.  You'll hear more
>> at
>> >> ApacheCon, but I wanted you to hear it hear first.
>> >>
>> >> Our top priorities:
>> >>
>> >> -- Improve the install and deployment experience, especially by
>> supporting
>> >> digital signatures on installs, and introducing a new incremental update
>> >> feature, so users are not required to download and install a full image
>> >> for just a minor update.
>> >>
>> >> -- A major UI enhancement, a sidebar framework for the editors, ported
>> >> over from Symphony, and including an API.  If you recall, Symphony won
>> >> quite a lot of praise for its UI, and much of this was due to the
>> sidebar
>> >> panel.  I think we can make a good argument that this approach, say
>> >> compared to the MS Office "ribbon" is a better use of screen
>> real-estate,
>> >> especially as we see more frequent use of wide screen displays.
>> >>
>> >> -- Improved Table of Contents in Writer
>> >>
>> >> -- Improved system integration on Windows and MacOS, including possible
>> >> adoption of "gestures".
>> >>
>> >> -- IAccessible2 bridge, ported over from Symphony, to improve
>> >> accessibility.  This is a major effort, but very important.
>> >
>> >
>> > I will be talking about IAccessible2 as stand in for Steve Yin at the
>> ApacheCon.
>> > Please meet me there at 11:45am on Nov 6 (Level 1 Left).
>>
>> Andre, sorry to mid your talk but I will check the slides. I have 2 points
>> of information regarding the usefulness of the  IAccessible2 work. Neither
>> are new but I thought worth restating now to support it being a priority..
>>
>> 1: I just had a conversation with one of developers of NVDA, the popular
>> screen reader for blind access on Windows. He said right now the Windows
>> Accessibility story is "terrible" in OSS office solutions. To repeat a
>> previous observation, there is a real demand for this from the
>> Accessibility community. This need is also wider than the those using
>> assistive technology who have visual impairments.
>>
>
> Yes, I think we all violently agree that this gap needs to be addressed
> successfully in the  AOO 4.x stream. I have consulted with our IBM Software
> Distinguished Engineer for Accessibility on this. He has excellent contact
> in university and at NVDA. I propose that we form an A11Y Working Group
> within our project here in order to give this dedicated focus. One of the
> challenges will be the need to finance some additional work. I doubt that
> we'll be able to close all our gaps with 100% volunteer effort.
>
> Do you support the concept of an A11Y WG?  We can use the wiki that Steve
> Yin has already started as a base for our documents. Do you think it's
> overkill to request a mailing list dedicated to A11Y be set up?
>
>

If we get more than one person doing accessibility then that might be
something to consider.  But right now creating a new list would only
put this topic "out of sight, out of mind".  So I would not favor it.
Our measure of importance on the topic should be how much we do, not
how much we talk about it.

Let's reserve dedicated lists for real efforts, and continue to
socialize sub-critical-mass interests on the dev list.  That is better
for recruitment.

-Rob


>>
>> 2: I also spotted Hubert Duerr's talk on automated testing in the ApacheCon
>> programme and thought it worth mentioning that Accessibility APIs provides
>> a powerful way to automate testing of and via the user interface. At least
>> 2 Linux desktop testing frameworks take this approach using AT/API which is
>> similar to IA2. I'm sure appealing to the testing market was the reason
>> Microsoft named their updated Accessibility API "User Interface Automation,
>> UIA"
>>
>> Steve Lee
>> Open Directive
>>
>> >> -- Closer integration of clipart and template libraries with user
>> >> experience.
>> >>
>> >> -- Update branding and visual styling, contemporary and compelling,
>> fresh
>> >> and relevant.
>> >>
>> >> -- Social integration, allow our users to quickly and easily share their
>> >> thoughts in a way that compliment their commercial social behavio

Re: [Proposal] Create new mailing list: d...@openoffice.apache.org

[Dave Barton]

 Original Message  
From: Rob Weir 
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 13:14:46 -0500

> This idea has come up on another thread, where we've been discussed
> the future of the documentation effort and a future call for
> volunteers.  We'd like a dedicated list for these efforts.
> 
> Name:  d...@openoffice.apache.org   OR  d...@openoffice.apache.org  (I
> don't have a strong preference for the name)
> 
> Moderators:  Please respond if you can volunteer as moderator.  We
> should aim for 2 or 3 geographically dispersed.
> 
> I'll wait 72 hours, and if no objections we can ask Andrea to submit
> the form for the new list creation.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -Rob

Hi Rob,

I am currently at UTC +1 if you want me to moderate the (long overdue)
documentation list. For reasons I might explain at another time,
moderation is all can contribute to the project for the time being.
Although I will try to mentor/guide any newcomers who want to work on
user documentation.

Regards
Dave

Re: AOO.Next IBM Priorities

[Donald Harbison]

On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Steve Lee  wrote:

> Steve Lee
> OpenDirective - opendirective.com
> On Nov 2, 2012 7:59 AM, "Andre Fischer"  wrote:
> >
> > On 01.11.2012 17:45, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
> >>
> >> A quick note, wearing my "IBM hat".
> >>
> >> We (IBM) have consulted with customers, internal users, other IBM
> product
> >> teams, on what our (IBM's) development priorities should be for the next
> >> AOO release.  Obviously, we're not the only ones with priorities or
> >> interests or opinions.  We don't make AOO decisions by ourselves.  But
> we
> >> want to be transparent about what our own priorities are, for our
> >> employees participating in the AOO community, and what they will be
> >> focusing on.   As we did with AOO 3.4.0 and 3.4.1, we'll be putting the
> >> details onto the wiki over the next couple of weeks.  You'll hear more
> at
> >> ApacheCon, but I wanted you to hear it hear first.
> >>
> >> Our top priorities:
> >>
> >> -- Improve the install and deployment experience, especially by
> supporting
> >> digital signatures on installs, and introducing a new incremental update
> >> feature, so users are not required to download and install a full image
> >> for just a minor update.
> >>
> >> -- A major UI enhancement, a sidebar framework for the editors, ported
> >> over from Symphony, and including an API.  If you recall, Symphony won
> >> quite a lot of praise for its UI, and much of this was due to the
> sidebar
> >> panel.  I think we can make a good argument that this approach, say
> >> compared to the MS Office "ribbon" is a better use of screen
> real-estate,
> >> especially as we see more frequent use of wide screen displays.
> >>
> >> -- Improved Table of Contents in Writer
> >>
> >> -- Improved system integration on Windows and MacOS, including possible
> >> adoption of "gestures".
> >>
> >> -- IAccessible2 bridge, ported over from Symphony, to improve
> >> accessibility.  This is a major effort, but very important.
> >
> >
> > I will be talking about IAccessible2 as stand in for Steve Yin at the
> ApacheCon.
> > Please meet me there at 11:45am on Nov 6 (Level 1 Left).
>
> Andre, sorry to mid your talk but I will check the slides. I have 2 points
> of information regarding the usefulness of the  IAccessible2 work. Neither
> are new but I thought worth restating now to support it being a priority..
>
> 1: I just had a conversation with one of developers of NVDA, the popular
> screen reader for blind access on Windows. He said right now the Windows
> Accessibility story is "terrible" in OSS office solutions. To repeat a
> previous observation, there is a real demand for this from the
> Accessibility community. This need is also wider than the those using
> assistive technology who have visual impairments.
>

Yes, I think we all violently agree that this gap needs to be addressed
successfully in the  AOO 4.x stream. I have consulted with our IBM Software
Distinguished Engineer for Accessibility on this. He has excellent contact
in university and at NVDA. I propose that we form an A11Y Working Group
within our project here in order to give this dedicated focus. One of the
challenges will be the need to finance some additional work. I doubt that
we'll be able to close all our gaps with 100% volunteer effort.

Do you support the concept of an A11Y WG?  We can use the wiki that Steve
Yin has already started as a base for our documents. Do you think it's
overkill to request a mailing list dedicated to A11Y be set up?


>
> 2: I also spotted Hubert Duerr's talk on automated testing in the ApacheCon
> programme and thought it worth mentioning that Accessibility APIs provides
> a powerful way to automate testing of and via the user interface. At least
> 2 Linux desktop testing frameworks take this approach using AT/API which is
> similar to IA2. I'm sure appealing to the testing market was the reason
> Microsoft named their updated Accessibility API "User Interface Automation,
> UIA"
>
> Steve Lee
> Open Directive
>
> >> -- Closer integration of clipart and template libraries with user
> >> experience.
> >>
> >> -- Update branding and visual styling, contemporary and compelling,
> fresh
> >> and relevant.
> >>
> >> -- Social integration, allow our users to quickly and easily share their
> >> thoughts in a way that compliment their commercial social behavior.
> >> Explore the integration of consumer service-specific capabilities as
> well
> >> as generic Share... actions.
> >>
> >> -- And many other smaller items
> >>
> >> Obviously the release date for this cannot be pinned down so early, and
> >> releasing is PMC decision, not an IBM one.  But we think that this work
> >> could be completed and tested for a release in the March/April 2013
> >> time-frame.  And the scope of the release might be significant enough to
> >> warrant a "4.0" designation.
> >>
> >> In any case, we'll soon set up a page on the wiki to collect these
> items.
> >> As always, I invite you to add your ow

www.apache.org/projects has no AOO ??

[janI]

When I look in www.apache.org projects, take indexes, I cannot find:
  Apache OpenOffice
  OpenOffice
or
  OOO

The same goes for the JIRA issues system.

Should it not be there ?
(or does our project have another code)

Jan.

[Proposal] Create new mailing list: d...@openoffice.apache.org

[Rob Weir]

This idea has come up on another thread, where we've been discussed
the future of the documentation effort and a future call for
volunteers.  We'd like a dedicated list for these efforts.

Name:  d...@openoffice.apache.org   OR  d...@openoffice.apache.org  (I
don't have a strong preference for the name)

Moderators:  Please respond if you can volunteer as moderator.  We
should aim for 2 or 3 geographically dispersed.

I'll wait 72 hours, and if no objections we can ask Andrea to submit
the form for the new list creation.

Regards,

-Rob

Re: Documentation Recruitment (was: Please add me to The OpenOffice.org Documentation Project list)

[Kay Schenk]

On 12/01/2012 12:52 PM, Guy Waterval wrote:

Hi Rob,
Hi all,

2012/12/1 Rob Weir 


On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Guy Waterval 
wrote:

Hi Rob,
Hi all,

2012/11/30 Rob Weir 

[...]



That would be the point of a call for volunteers then, wouldn't it?
Bring in more volunteers with the skills needed to create an outline,
etc.  There are independent books written on OpenOffice and certainly
Microsoft Office all the time.  There are many people who have the
skills needed.  All we need to do is ask.

The goal should be (IMHO) to reach a critical mass of volunteers where
the tasks are not only doable, but fun.



My personal opinion is that the way proposed by Ricardo, with an Apache
license, is actually the more innovative and realistic we have for an
online documentation at this time. His approach has the merit of

suggesting

a sustainable solution for the project and which can grow with it. So,

the

reflexion should be more oriented in finding a way to help him to develop
his game, if desired..


The nature of things will lead to either:

1) We define the documentation plan, at least to the level of a list
of deliverables, a new d...@openoffice.apache.org mailing list, a
workflow, a technological approach (what formats and templates, etc.)
and a means of tracking status (page on the wiki) and *then* do a call
for volunteers.  If we do this then new volunteers will naturally
adapt to the workflow and process that already is in-progress,



I think that a d...@openoffice.apache.org mailing list and the acceptation
of the Alv2.0 for the docs are absolutely necessary.


+1 from me on this also...

@Keith, I applaud the efforts you've undertaken.

Off and on for months, I've tried to find a public archive for the ODF 
Authors list to see what's going on. Unfortunately, this search was in vain.


Re your earlier comments about an "outline". Yes, we need this but I'm 
not sure if you meant this literally. Don't we *have* and outline? I'm 
confused. maybe you meant something else -- some templates?


So, again, we're back at licensing issues it would seem.

It is time to bring this under this project's umbrella it would seem.


#1 has my preference. It's not obligatory a totally fixed approach but it
allows to create a basis and to begin something. We have already something
on the table and Ricardo and collegues are competent, certainly opened and
motivated. Why not to try the way they have began. Nobody is excluded. It
allows to regroup all people who are interested in an apache documentation
project and avoids to discourage others, who are investing their time and
energy aside the group, to find finally a home where they could really get
support and express their qualities. Why not to build a winning team with
the people here in the group?



or

2) We do a call for volunteers with nothing more than a new
d...@openoffice.apache.org mailing list, and hash out the details on
that list with the new volunteers.

So if someone has strong views on how things should be done, then they
really need to step up and define #1.  Otherwise, a recruitment
activity will lead to a larger group of documentation volunteers who
will have a mind of their own and could take this in other directions.
  This isn't necessarily a bad thing, of course.


@Rob --

I think defining #1 is a priority. I can't add much to this since I'm 
actually pretty content with the online Help. I don't know who uses the 
external documentation or what the expectations are.






#2 is a little the "big bang" method. Difficult to make a choice in this
case, only suggestions (probably one approach pro player), nothing concrete
on the table. The risk is to stay blocked as it was the case up to now.




Another consideration:  It is easier to find (and engage with)
volunteers who step into an ongoing activity like #1.  But it is
easier to attract an alpha "documentation architect" if things are not
already defined.



It's the loto game. You have to find a Zorro who accepts to work as
volunteer (and freely). I don't think that you would have more chance with
#2, which represents a big charge. Moreover, giving priority to this method
could perhaps demotivate some members in this group.




Of course, these are not hard rules, but are considerations and
tendencies.  There are no right answers.  With QA we did a call for
volunteers that was more like #1.  With marketing it is more like #2.
Translation is in the middle, with an existing workflow, but one that
is being improved by new volunteers,

In any case, I think that a new doc mailing list will be essential for
any approach, since new doc volunteers would be deterred by the
traffic on the dev list.


A new doc mailing list is absolutely necessary. It could offer an
alternative to the odf authors solution, as this group is the documentation
area of LibreOffice. Even if people are totally correct there, we have to
be realistic, the conditions are not good there for people working on an
apache documentatio

[CMS PATCH]

[Dave Barton]

Clone URL (Committers only):
https://cms.apache.org/redirect?new=bmcs;action=diff;uri=http://openofficeorg.apache.org/openofficeorg%2Fmailing-lists.mdtext



Index: trunk/content/openofficeorg/mailing-lists.mdtext
===
--- trunk/content/openofficeorg/mailing-lists.mdtext(revision 1416599)
+++ trunk/content/openofficeorg/mailing-lists.mdtext(working copy)
@@ -170,7 +170,7 @@
 average of 10 posts/day.
 
   - Subscribe: [commits-subscr...@openoffice.apache.org][27]
-  - Unsubscribe: [commmits-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org][28]
+  - Unsubscribe: [commits-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org][28]
   - Archives
 - [Markmail][29]
 - [Apache][54] (posts before November 2012 are [archived here][30])

Re: FAQ page (Re: IPAD)

[Rob Weir]

On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 8:07 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> Or write the new FAQ in mdtext and remove the old.
>

That could work as well.  Easier to maintain than HTML.  It could even
have a specialized nav for the various FAQ categories.

Almost anything would be an improvement from what we have right now:
two separate FAQ sites, neither one maintained.

-Rob


> Regards,
> Dave
>
> Sent from my iPhone on the road.
>
> On Dec 2, 2012, at 3:41 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
>>> On 26/11/2012 Rob Weir wrote:

 [Can I install Openoffice on my IPAD?] I nominate this for an FAQ.
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree. But where is our FAQ page currently? Unfortunately, there's an
>>> "OpenOffice FAQ" easily reachable by search engines at
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and quite outdated (I don't know whether
>>> it's reachable from the home page, but it doesn't seem so).
>>>
>>> Time to make a new FAQ available or update the old one and link to it from
>>> the current site?
>>>
>>
>> The current location of the FAQ is prominent in search results.  That
>> is valuable and worth preserving.
>>
>> But the current FAQ contents are out of date.  They would need a lot
>> of work to update/correct them.
>>
>> Although the FAQ's are presented in a way that is OK for the user, the
>> static HTML source is structured in a way that will be painful to
>> maintain.   Getting a cleaner structure, for example using HTML
>> definition lists () would be easier and could be maintained via
>> the CMS web interface.
>>
>> There is another set of FAQ's on the documentation wiki:
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ
>>
>> These also appear to be unmaintained.  But I think the wiki version
>> would be easier to maintain.
>>
>> So one possible resolution could be:
>>
>> 1) Take anything of use from the FAQ's at
>> http://www.openoffice.org/faq.html and copy them into new FAQ items on
>> the wiki
>>
>> 2) Update the other FAQ's on the wiki
>>
>> 3) Add new items to the wiki FAQ (like the iPAD question)
>>
>> 4) Delete the old FAQ directory and replace with a single page that
>> directs the reader to the wiki FAQ's.
>>
>>
>> -Rob
>> -Rob
>>
>>> Regards,
>>>  Andrea.

Re: [User Docs] End of effort to get AOO v3.4 Getting Started Guide finished

[Guy Waterval]

Hi Donald,

2012/12/3 Donald Whytock 

> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:53 AM, Guy Waterval 
> wrote:
> > Why not publish the documentation directly on Wikipédia, with a double
> > licence, ALv2.0 and GFDL, for instance?  Is it impossible for questions
> of
> > licences, organization, political reasons  Wikipédia has a  lot of
> good
> > contributors in different languages, a big visibility, you can do
> > documentation and marketing at the same time
>
> Wikipedia doesn't really like that sort of thing:
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_manual.2C_guidebook.2C_textbook.2C_or_scientific_journal
>
> Is there maybe some other public venue for manuals?
>

Wikibooks, but it does not seem so attractive.
There is also the problem of the license, of course. Not sure they could
accept an ALV2.0 with their own licences.
I think the best solution is the wiki here for an original documentation.
After, there is always the possibility to build a more classic version
(book) with people who are interested in this type of documentation. A
documentation project is always difficult to start. I don't know why, but
it's a fact.

A+
-- 
gw


>
>

Re: [User Docs] End of effort to get AOO v3.4 Getting Started Guide finished

[Rob Weir]

On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:38 AM, Stan Helton  wrote:
> I am disappointed to see this. I tried to volunteer for this kind of thing
> and did not receive a response a few months ago. It is a little frustrating
> to see the first comment one of ending the initiative. If I can help I would
> certainly like to.
>
> I am a part-time programmer and a writer. How can I help? What is the most
> pressing need? I believe I have the requisite technical and publishing
> skills to advance this part of the project.
>

We're not ending an initiative.  We're talking about recruiting more
documentation volunteers and taking on a more ambitious initiative.

-Rob


> Stan Helton
> Trying to volunteer, but a little frustrated in finding the right position
> in the team.
>
>
>
> On 12/1/2012 10:12 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>>
>> After 3 months of frustration it is time to end the effort to get The
>> Getting Started Guide that had been started for AOO 3.4 completed. Despite
>> repeated requests for help on the ODFAuthors list it is apparent that either
>> the Authors that had been working on Open Office docs are either no longer
>> interested or are working strictly on the LO books.
>>
>> Alexandro Colorado made an attempt at getting the Base Guide done but was
>> not able to get any responses to his requests for comments on his markups
>> and changes and decided to put it on hold until he did. As far as I know he
>> is still waiting.
>>
>> One other volunteer stepped up from an inquiry on this list and gave
>> valuable help. Prabha again thank you very much for your work and I hope
>> that you will get involved with the defining of a new documentation project.
>>
>> With only 2 people actively working it is not possible to give the work
>> the quality review and editing that it deserves to have the Open Office name
>> attached to it.
>>
>> Reluctantly unless someone with the requisite skills in technical writing
>> and publishing that I do not have can lend a hand I feel it is best to end
>> the effort and not waste anymore of anyone's time.
>>
>> I will continue to contribute where I can, but that is difficult or
>> someone who is not a developer.
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith N. McKenna
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Courtesy is the grease that keeps the wheels of civilization turning. Robert
> Heinlein

Re: [User Docs] End of effort to get AOO v3.4 Getting Started Guide finished

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 1:24 AM, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak
 wrote:
>
> On 12/02/2012 10:29 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> I can help drive steps 1-4, but I cannot do 5 by myself. I'd need the
>> commitment of 3-4 other project members to help mentor the new volunteers,
>> to volunteer as list moderators, and to help encourage the relaunched
>> documentation project to develop a documentation plan for AOO 4.0. Does
>> anyone want to help with this? -Rob
>
> I am not currently a list moderator, but am willing to become one. What does
> it entail?
>

Moderator responsibilities are:


-Review messages that have been held for moderation, reject spam
posts and allow the valid messages through.

-Assist users who are having difficulties subscribing or
unsubscribing from the list.

-Provide reports to the PMC on request, on the number of current
subscribers.

-For private lists, approve subscription requests for authorized
subscribers only.

-When needed, escalate technical issues to Infra and privacy
issues to the PMC.


95% of the time it is just the first item.


-Rob



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

Re: MacOSX: problems deploying an extension in shared mode

[Rony G. Flatscher (Apache)]

At ApacheCon Europe it turned out that one is able to deploy the oxt-extension
("ScriptProviderForooRexx.oxt") in user mode successfully!

The same extension cannot be successfully deployed in shared mode on MacOSX as 
described, even
running unopkg as super user manually.

Therefore I just added the oxt to the issue at
 as an attachment, such 
that it becomes
possible to test this "stand-alone", i.e. without a need to install the entire 
BSF4ooRexx package.

---rony



On 24.07.2012 20:08, Rony G. Flatscher (Apache) wrote:
> On 22.07.2012 14:07, Rony G. Flatscher (Apache) wrote:
>> In the context of creating a new version of BSF4ooRexx for MacOSX as well
>> ()
>> the automatic installation of an oxt-extension to AOO 3.4.0 to add ooRexx as 
>> a macro language
>> directly to AOO, there are errors with the MacOSX version.
>>
>> If you download the package from the above link you'll get ooRexx and 
>> BSF4ooRexx for MacOSX in
>> 32-Bit (as OOo is still 32-bit on MacOSX) installed and both ooRexx and 
>> BSF4ooRexx (a Rexx function
>> package camouflaging Java as the dynamically typed ooRexx) are operational.
>>
>> Unfortunately, the OOo extension named "ScriptProviderForooRexx.oxt" cannot 
>> be added to the MacOSX
>> AOO 3.4 installation using "unopkg"! Here a few infos to the locations and 
>> the scripts that are run
>> as sudo with the error message:
>>
>> wu114123:sources rony$ *ls -al 
>> /Applications/OpenOffice.org.app/Contents/program/unopkg**
>> lrwxr-xr-x@ 1 rony  admin 10 Apr 19 08:28 
>> /Applications/OpenOffice.org.app/Contents/program/unopkg -> unopkg.bin
>> -r-xr-xr-x@ 1 rony  admin  13568 Apr 19 08:28 
>> /Applications/OpenOffice.org.app/Contents/program/unopkg.bin
>>
>>
>>
>> wu114123:sources rony$ *ls -al 
>> /System/Library/Frameworks/BSF4ooRexx.framework/Libraries/ScriptProviderForooRexx.oxt*
>> -rwxrwxrwx  1 root  wheel  330778 Jun 15 17:24 
>> /System/Library/Frameworks/BSF4ooRexx.framework/Libraries/ScriptProviderForooRexx.oxt
>>
>>
>>
>> wu114123:sources rony$ *sudo 
>> /Applications/OpenOffice.org.app/Contents/program/unopkg add --shared 
>> /System/Library/Frameworks/BSF4ooRexx.framework/Libraries/ScriptProviderForooRexx.oxt*
>>
>> *ERROR: Error binding package: 
>> vnd.sun.star.expand:$UNO_SHARED_PACKAGES_CACHE/uno_packages/Qpgmug_/ScriptProviderForooRexx.oxt*
>>Cause: an error occured during file opening
>>
>> unopkg failed.
>>
>> There is no directory named "Qpgmug_" in the shared cache directory; not 
>> sure why.
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Trying to do the same from AOO's "Tools -> Extension Manager" is not 
>> successful either, if intending
>> to install for "All users" with the scarce error message "an error occured 
>> during file opening".
>>
>> However adding this extension via AOO's "Tools -> Extension Manager" for 
>> "Only for me" works o.k.!
>> Restarting AOO, and the extension is available and operational allowing 
>> ooRexx to be used as a macro
>> language!
>>
>> Using the user extension has another irregularity: if using for the 
>> first time in a totally
>> fresh AOO session "Tools -> Macros -> Run Macro" and then executing any 
>> ooRexx macro will yield
>> an error ("unable to load language"). However, if first doing a "Tools 
>> -> Macros -> Organize
>> Macros -> ooRexx" and editing any ooRexx macro and running it via the 
>> edit window menu, ooRexx
>> can be later found via "Tools -> Macros -> Run Macro" as well.
>>
>> [Using the oxt-extension on Windows and Linux with AOO, OOo, LO works in 
>> shared mode, and AFAIK
>> there are no anomalities that I know of.]
>>
>> Any ideas, what might be wrong, what I could do?
>> [To duplicate: just install the MacOSX package and then run the above 
>> commands from a command line
>> to see for yourself.]
>>
>> TIA for any hints, ideas and suggestions,
>>
>> ---rony
> Just tested this with the developer snapshot build 3.4.1 for English (en-US), 
> r1364591
> 
> with the same behaviour..
>
> Filed a new issue such that this remains documented:
> .
>
> ---rony
>
>

Re: Gallery extension from Symphony ressources

[Regina Henschel]

Hi all,

Armin Le Grand schrieb:

 Hi Kevin and Marcus,

let's wait and see if Regina may know/find a place in the office where
this is needed.


I see that the folder htmlexpo is used in File > Wizards > Web Page..

But I do not see any of the selected pictures in the result of the 
Wizard. Does someone know, where these picture should appear in the 
result of the Wizard? Or has some function be removes from the wizard 
some time ago, without removing the selection?


My suggestion is to remove the folder in the build, but provide a zipped 
version of the folder (=80KB) somewhere for download. So if someone 
really searches for it, we can give him a download link.


 Problem is that the gallery is used as kinda 'graphic

ressource holder' from some office modules, so some themes *have* to
stay. These are normally hidden, but as seen with the rulers - don't
have to be...


For example the bullets are used not only in numbering and outline but 
as data point pictures in charts too.


Kind regards
Regina

Re: [User Docs] End of effort to get AOO v3.4 Getting Started Guide finished

[Donald Whytock]

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:53 AM, Guy Waterval  wrote:
> Why not publish the documentation directly on Wikipédia, with a double
> licence, ALv2.0 and GFDL, for instance?  Is it impossible for questions of
> licences, organization, political reasons  Wikipédia has a  lot of good
> contributors in different languages, a big visibility, you can do
> documentation and marketing at the same time

Wikipedia doesn't really like that sort of thing:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_manual.2C_guidebook.2C_textbook.2C_or_scientific_journal

Is there maybe some other public venue for manuals?

Don

Re: [User Docs] End of effort to get AOO v3.4 Getting Started Guide finished

[Keith N. McKenna]

Stan Helton wrote:

I am disappointed to see this. I tried to volunteer for this kind of
thing and did not receive a response a few months ago. It is a little
frustrating to see the first comment one of ending the initiative. If I
can help I would certainly like to.

I am a part-time programmer and a writer. How can I help? What is the
most pressing need? I believe I have the requisite technical and
publishing skills to advance this part of the project.

Stan Helton
Trying to volunteer, but a little frustrated in finding the right
position in the team.



Stan;

First off let me apologize for missing your message volunteering. I seem 
to remember having an e-mail forwarded to me from the ODFAuthors site on 
someone wanting to volunteer. Unfortunately it was caught up in in a 
problem on my system and got lost in the recovery.


I you are still interested the state of the effort at this point is all 
but one or 2 chapters have been reviewed and need the touch of an 
experienced writer or editor to merge the proposed comments and changes; 
then polish them for possible publication or a second review effort.


I would like nothing better than to get this back on track so that there 
is at least a Getting Started Guide available or the lateset 3.x version.


If you are interested we can discuss this further in a separate thread.

Regards
Keith


On 12/1/2012 10:12 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:

After 3 months of frustration it is time to end the effort to get The
Getting Started Guide that had been started for AOO 3.4 completed.
Despite repeated requests for help on the ODFAuthors list it is
apparent that either the Authors that had been working on Open Office
docs are either no longer interested or are working strictly on the LO
books.

Alexandro Colorado made an attempt at getting the Base Guide done but
was not able to get any responses to his requests for comments on his
markups and changes and decided to put it on hold until he did. As far
as I know he is still waiting.

One other volunteer stepped up from an inquiry on this list and gave
valuable help. Prabha again thank you very much for your work and I
hope that you will get involved with the defining of a new
documentation project.

With only 2 people actively working it is not possible to give the
work the quality review and editing that it deserves to have the Open
Office name attached to it.

Reluctantly unless someone with the requisite skills in technical
writing and publishing that I do not have can lend a hand I feel it is
best to end the effort and not waste anymore of anyone's time.

I will continue to contribute where I can, but that is difficult or
someone who is not a developer.

Regards
Keith N. McKenna

Re: Unprocessed solaris bugs

[Pedro Giffuni]

Hi;

I went ahead and reviewed some of them... not all.

Pedro.


- Original Message -
> From: Jürgen Schmidt 
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Cc: 
> Sent: Monday, December 3, 2012 10:42 AM
> Subject: Re: Unprocessed solaris bugs
> 
> On 12/3/12 3:55 PM, Jean-Louis 'Hans' Fuchs wrote:
>>  Hello
>> 
>>  I have reported the following bugs in april:
>> 
>>  https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120751
>>  https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119253
>>  https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119252
>>  https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119250
>>  https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119249
>>  https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119251
>> 
>>  None of these have been processed, we still have to patch most of these.
>>  How can we proceed to complete these issues?
> 
> I assume the reason is simply because they felt out of scope ;-)
> 
> I will take a look on it asap and when they are all for Solaris only and
> don#t conflict on other platforms I see not problem to include them.
> 
> Juergen
> 
> 
>> 
>>  Best,
>>     Jean-Louis
>> 
>

Re: Unprocessed solaris bugs

[Jürgen Schmidt]

On 12/3/12 3:55 PM, Jean-Louis 'Hans' Fuchs wrote:
> Hello
> 
> I have reported the following bugs in april:
> 
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120751
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119253
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119252
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119250
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119249
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119251
> 
> None of these have been processed, we still have to patch most of these.
> How can we proceed to complete these issues?

I assume the reason is simply because they felt out of scope ;-)

I will take a look on it asap and when they are all for Solaris only and
don#t conflict on other platforms I see not problem to include them.

Juergen


> 
> Best,
>Jean-Louis
> 

[QA Report] Weekly Defect Analysis Report

[Ji Yan]

I post weekly defect analysis report[1]. Please review.

[1] http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/QA/Report/DefectStatus/201212

-- 


Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji

Re: [proposal/question] wiki.openoffice.org future: mediaWiki or Apache JSPWiki.

[Dave Fisher]

Sorry to top post. Jspwiki has been in the incubator for a few years. There is 
no guarantee it will ever graduate. They have not switched completely to ASF 
infrastructure. Please look in the general@i.a.o archives and the incubator 
board reports.

While this discussion is good lets not be hasty.

Best Regards,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 3, 2012, at 10:04 AM, C  wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 3:43 PM, imacat  wrote:
 Which tweaks?
 
>>> If I knew then I could include it in the new version, problem is that a.o.
>>> imicat tells that there have been made modifications, and none of it seems
>>> to be documented.
>> 
>>There are 2 ways to find it out:
>> 
>> 1. Ask Terry Ellison himself.  He left his e-mail in the user database.
>> 
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/User:TerryE
> 
> Terry wasn't so involved in the Wiki - that was my mess (at least when
> it was hosted at Sun/Oracle).  TerryE was heavily involved with the
> User Forum rollout and sustaining maintenance.
> 
> Tweaks/changes on the Solaris Zone were documented (changes outside of
> the standard Solaris Zone config that was in place at the Sun Data
> Centre in Hamburg).  Server tweaks since moving to Ubuntu on Apache...
> no idea.  I was not involved in that.
> 
> 
>> 2. A more strict method:  Untar a fresh-new MediaWiki 1.15, and run
>> diff to find out what is changed.  Applied the changes to MediaWiki 1.16
>> *on a test site* to see if they work.  If they work, do the same on the
>> live site and update the symbolic link to point to the patched MediaWiki
>> 1.16.  This is how I did when upgrading my lab's WordPress from its
>> tweaked older version.
> 
> Any updates I did were pretty basic.  A new copy of MWiki was
> downloaded. The database was backed up. The standard OOoWikiSkin was
> copied over which included the footer tweaks (as documented at the
> time) included, and the Google Analytics (also documented). The Wiki
> was upgraded using the PHP scripting provided with MWiki and it was
> brought online on the testing domain. The extensions/content were
> tested and when all was working the new Wiki was brought online on the
> main domain.  (the details were a bit more complex, but this covers
> most of the high level steps that I used to do with each MWiki engine
> update).
> 
> No core functionality tweaks were made at any point in the core MWiki
> PHP code (none that I was ever aware of or can remember).  Standing up
> a new Wiki on a new MWiki engine was primarily a task of making sure
> the old extensions still worked or were updated ot current versions
> compatible with the new MWiki core.  Any obsolete extensions woudl be
> removed (happened once in a while but the impact was always small).
> 
> There was a lot of discussion around doing work on the caching
> configurations on the webserver side, but nothing was ever really done
> there.
> 
> Clayton

[QA Report] Weekly QA Status Update

[Ji Yan]

Hi all,

  I post QA status report for last week[1], please review.

  I'd thanks for following volunteer who help on defect verification and
test execution QA task recently:

*louqle* helped on task Issue 121359
  and Issue 121365


*Rob Weir* helped on verify defect Issue 35763


*gbolssens* helped on test cases execution



[1] http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/QA/Report/WeeklyReport/201212
-- 


Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji

Re: WaE: sw/source/filter/ww8 compiler warnings

[chengjh]

Hi Pavel,

I committed some changes to solve the found warnings...Please help to
verify again..And I will have a check to the whole sw module to see whether
any missed warning is still existing.thanks.

On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 3:54 AM, Pavel Janík  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> current trunk issues few warnings in sw/source/filter/ww8:
>
> cc1plus: warnings being treated as errors
> /Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/sw/source/filter/ww8/ww8par3.cxx:
> In member function ‘SwNumRule* WW8ListManager::GetNumRule(int)’:
> /Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/sw/source/filter/ww8/ww8par3.cxx:1125:
> warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions
> make: *** [/Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/solver/350/
> unxmacxi.pro/workdir/CxxObject/sw/source/filter/ww8/ww8par3.o] Error 1
>
> cc1plus: warnings being treated as errors
> /Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:
> In member function ‘void WW8_WrtBookmarks::MoveFieldMarks(sal_uLong,
> sal_uLong)’:
> /Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:317:
> warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions
> /Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:
> In member function ‘int WW8Export::CollectGrfsOfBullets() const’:
> /Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:1452:
> warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions
> /Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:
> In member function ‘int WW8Export::GetGrfIndex(const SvxBrushItem&)’:
> /Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:1535:
> warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions
> make: *** [/Users/pavel/BUILD/BuildDir/ooo_trunk_src/solver/350/
> unxmacxi.pro/workdir/CxxObject/sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.o] Error 1
>
> The following patch "fixes" these issues, but I'd like to see author
> committing the change:
>
> ===
> --- wrtww8.cxx  (revision 1415339)
> +++ wrtww8.cxx  (working copy)
> @@ -314,7 +314,7 @@
>  {
>  if (aItr->second)
>  {
> -if (aItr->second->first == nFrom)
> +if (aItr->second->first == static_cast(nFrom))
>  {
>  aItr->second->second.first = true;
>  aItr->second->first = nTo;
> @@ -1449,7 +1449,7 @@
> if ( pGrf )
> {
> bool bHas = false;
> -   for (int i = 0; i <
> m_vecBulletPic.size(); ++i)
> +   for (unsigned int i = 0; i <
> m_vecBulletPic.size(); ++i)
> {
> if
> (m_vecBulletPic[i]->GetChecksum() == pGrf->GetChecksum())
> {
> @@ -1532,7 +1532,7 @@
> int nIndex = -1;
> if ( rBrush.GetGraphic() )
> {
> -   for (int i = 0; i < m_vecBulletPic.size(); ++i)
> +   for (unsigned int i = 0; i < m_vecBulletPic.size(); ++i)
> {
> if (m_vecBulletPic[i]->GetChecksum() ==
> rBrush.GetGraphic()->GetChecksum())
> {
> Index: ww8par3.cxx
> ===
> --- ww8par3.cxx (revision 1415339)
> +++ ww8par3.cxx (working copy)
> @@ -1122,7 +1122,7 @@
>
>  SwNumRule* WW8ListManager::GetNumRule(int i)
>  {
> -   if ( i >= 0 && i < maLSTInfos.size() )
> +   if ( i >= 0 && static_cast(i) < maLSTInfos.size() )
> return maLSTInfos[i]->pNumRule;
> else
> return 0;
>
>
> --
> Pavel Janík
>
>
>
>


-- 

Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng

Re: [proposal/question] wiki.openoffice.org future: mediaWiki or Apache JSPWiki.

[C]

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 3:43 PM, imacat  wrote:
>>> Which tweaks?
>>>
>> If I knew then I could include it in the new version, problem is that a.o.
>> imicat tells that there have been made modifications, and none of it seems
>> to be documented.
>
> There are 2 ways to find it out:
>
>  1. Ask Terry Ellison himself.  He left his e-mail in the user database.
>
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/User:TerryE

Terry wasn't so involved in the Wiki - that was my mess (at least when
it was hosted at Sun/Oracle).  TerryE was heavily involved with the
User Forum rollout and sustaining maintenance.

Tweaks/changes on the Solaris Zone were documented (changes outside of
the standard Solaris Zone config that was in place at the Sun Data
Centre in Hamburg).  Server tweaks since moving to Ubuntu on Apache...
no idea.  I was not involved in that.


>  2. A more strict method:  Untar a fresh-new MediaWiki 1.15, and run
> diff to find out what is changed.  Applied the changes to MediaWiki 1.16
> *on a test site* to see if they work.  If they work, do the same on the
> live site and update the symbolic link to point to the patched MediaWiki
> 1.16.  This is how I did when upgrading my lab's WordPress from its
> tweaked older version.

Any updates I did were pretty basic.  A new copy of MWiki was
downloaded. The database was backed up. The standard OOoWikiSkin was
copied over which included the footer tweaks (as documented at the
time) included, and the Google Analytics (also documented). The Wiki
was upgraded using the PHP scripting provided with MWiki and it was
brought online on the testing domain. The extensions/content were
tested and when all was working the new Wiki was brought online on the
main domain.  (the details were a bit more complex, but this covers
most of the high level steps that I used to do with each MWiki engine
update).

No core functionality tweaks were made at any point in the core MWiki
PHP code (none that I was ever aware of or can remember).  Standing up
a new Wiki on a new MWiki engine was primarily a task of making sure
the old extensions still worked or were updated ot current versions
compatible with the new MWiki core.  Any obsolete extensions woudl be
removed (happened once in a while but the impact was always small).

There was a lot of discussion around doing work on the caching
configurations on the webserver side, but nothing was ever really done
there.

Clayton

Unprocessed solaris bugs

[Jean-Louis 'Hans' Fuchs]

Hello

I have reported the following bugs in april:

https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120751
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119253
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119252
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119250
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119249
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119251

None of these have been processed, we still have to patch most of 
these. How can we proceed to complete these issues?


Best,
   Jean-Louis

--
Adfinis SyGroup AG
Jean-Louis 'Hans' Fuchs, Software Engineer

Keltenstrasse 98 | CH-3018 Bern
Tel.: +41 31 550 31 11

Re: [proposal/question] wiki.openoffice.org future: mediaWiki or Apache JSPWiki.

[imacat]

於 2012年12月03日 21:48, janI 提到:
> On 3 December 2012 13:20, Alexandro Colorado  wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:35 AM, janI  wrote:
>>
>>> I agree on a lot of the things.
>>>
>>> BUT do not forget that a lot of questions/problems also applies to an
>>> upgrade.
>>>
>>> - User interface will change slightly
>>> - Data loss is not acceptlable but the UTF8 conversion might have a side
>>> effect on some browsers
>>> - The tweaks in the current mwiki, will not automatically be present
>> after
>>> an upgrade.
>>>
>>
>> Which tweaks?
>>
> If I knew then I could include it in the new version, problem is that a.o.
> imicat tells that there have been made modifications, and none of it seems
> to be documented.

There are 2 ways to find it out:

 1. Ask Terry Ellison himself.  He left his e-mail in the user database.

http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/User:TerryE

 2. A more strict method:  Untar a fresh-new MediaWiki 1.15, and run
diff to find out what is changed.  Applied the changes to MediaWiki 1.16
*on a test site* to see if they work.  If they work, do the same on the
live site and update the symbolic link to point to the patched MediaWiki
1.16.  This is how I did when upgrading my lab's WordPress from its
tweaked older version.

-- 
Best regards,
imacat ^_*' 
PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc

<> News: http://www.wov.idv.tw/
Tavern IMACAT's http://www.imacat.idv.tw/
Woman in FOSS in Taiwan http://wofoss.blogspot.com/
OpenOffice http://www.openoffice.org/
EducOO/OOo4Kids Taiwan http://www.educoo.tw/
Greenfoot Taiwan http://greenfoot.westart.tw/



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [proposal/question] wiki.openoffice.org future: mediaWiki or Apache JSPWiki.

[janI]

On 3 December 2012 13:20, Alexandro Colorado  wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:35 AM, janI  wrote:
>
> > I agree on a lot of the things.
> >
> > BUT do not forget that a lot of questions/problems also applies to an
> > upgrade.
> >
> > - User interface will change slightly
> > - Data loss is not acceptlable but the UTF8 conversion might have a side
> > effect on some browsers
> > - The tweaks in the current mwiki, will not automatically be present
> after
> > an upgrade.
> >
>
> Which tweaks?
>
If I knew then I could include it in the new version, problem is that a.o.
imicat tells that there have been made modifications, and none of it seems
to be documented.

The same goes by the way for all configurations, they are not documented,
so I have to do compare.


>
>
> > - we do not know if the extensions will work (in the same way) in the new
> > version.
> >
>
> Have you done the research or you are just speculating? Which extensions
> hasn't been updated to the current version? any similar extension?
>
I have done some research, but not to the full extent, that will be done
when we start upgrading.

I see no need to do it, before we start the upgrade. To me that is only one
checkpoint in a long list, we have to work through when upgrading.



>
>
> > - there are no "the wiki", there are and will always be different systems
> > out there.
> >
>
> For the most part mediawiki is the most popular wiki out there and it's
> markup the more widely spread among floss projects that I know off.
>
I might be, I have seen no statistics to support the statement, and some of
the big wikis seems not to use mediawiki.

Important is that the markup language is spread to other project, that
would make a change easier  But since the idea has already got a -1 its
dead.

Jan I.

>
>
> >
> > The argument about the text is very valid, but I think that the new
> version
> > also offers new facilities, and hope that all old facilities are
> unchanged
> > (but there are no quarantees).
> >
> > My intention was simply to make the community aware of the possibility.
> > Because at this point in time I see the upgrade as also being quite a
> > hurdle.
> >
> > Jan I.
> >
> > On 3 December 2012 06:49, C  wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 11:35 PM, janI  wrote:
> > > > JSPwiki just announced a new version:
> > > >
> > > > http://incubator.apache.org/jspwiki/
> > > >
> > > > since it is a apache project, should we consider upgrading to jspwiki
> > > > instead of continuing with mediawiki ?
> > > >
> > > > The upgrade will almost for sure be harder, but to me it seems
> > beneficial
> > > > to use products from our own "family", that way we help them and they
> > > > hopefully help us. I am also confident that it can be done without
> data
> > > > loss, which is an absolute no-go to me, we will not accept data loss.
> > > >
> > > > If it is decided to go down this path, I will contact jspWiki and get
> > > > involved with their work so we have a real influence on how the wiki
> > > > software evolves (especially in regard of spam control).
> > >
> > > While certainly possible to convert from one wiki syntax to another,
> > > it's no small feat... and that's if the source wiki uses only standard
> > > syntax for the source Wiki.
> > >
> > > The current MediWiki implementation has a significant number of pages
> > > that rely on extensions for their content. To have a successful
> > > conversion, you are looking at needing to rewrite thousands of Wiki
> > > pages.  Not necessarily to have 1:1 conversion, but simply to ensure
> > > that the information is still presented in a logical manner (I'm
> > > thinking of the documentation pages for example).
> > >
> > > Before anyone should really consider this, you need to gather up a
> > > sizable collection of dedicated volunteers who are willing to sift
> > > through every wiki page and validate the content, fix the broken
> > > content, correct conversion errors, and reconnect the information
> > > flow.
> > >
> > > You also will need to account for custom written extensions and the
> > > functionality (although simple) they provide.
> > >
> > > It's a very big job to convert even a small number of pages
> > >
> > > Clayton
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Alexandro Colorado
> Apache OpenOffice Contributor
> http://es.openoffice.org
>

Re: Sidebar

[Andre Fischer]

On 02.12.2012 19:11, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

On 30/11/2012 Andre Fischer wrote:

I will be working on the implementation of the
sidebar. In the hope of motivating others (you) to join me, I have
created a wiki page that gives a first and rough outline of the work
that has to be done and the API and code that already exists and
(hopefully) can be reused or adapted:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Sidebar


Thanks Andre, it seems that tasks are still very broad, so I guess 
that this call is mainly aimed at existing or full-time developers, 
but if you identify small self-contained tasks where new developers 
could be involved please advertise them, since they might be useful in 
a future call for developers or for FOSDEM.


Good idea, I will do that.  I just wanted to make sure that nobody feels 
not invited.


By the way, I have activated the existing but unfinished sidebar 
implementation that was discontinued shortly before OpenOffice came to 
Apache.  You can find developer builds for Linux, Mac and Windows.  
Please see the "Status" section on 
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Sidebar (near the top).  There you can 
also see screenshots of that sidebar implementation.


Please do not use these developer snapshots for anything other than 
analysis of the sidebar.  There appear to be some serious bugs. They are 
meant as living demos of an unfinished feature.


Regards,
Andre



Regards,
  Andrea.

Re: Unsubscribe in Commits

[Albino Biasutti Neto]

Hi

2012/12/3 Andrea Pescetti :
> Albino B Neto wrote:
>>
>> Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
>>   commmits-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> There's a typo here: commmits -> commits...

Thanks.

You should edit the page AOO for mailing:

http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/mailing-lists.html#commits-mailing-list

-- 
Albino

Re: [proposal/question] wiki.openoffice.org future: mediaWiki or Apache JSPWiki.

[Alexandro Colorado]

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:35 AM, janI  wrote:

> I agree on a lot of the things.
>
> BUT do not forget that a lot of questions/problems also applies to an
> upgrade.
>
> - User interface will change slightly
> - Data loss is not acceptlable but the UTF8 conversion might have a side
> effect on some browsers
> - The tweaks in the current mwiki, will not automatically be present after
> an upgrade.
>

Which tweaks?


> - we do not know if the extensions will work (in the same way) in the new
> version.
>

Have you done the research or you are just speculating? Which extensions
hasn't been updated to the current version? any similar extension?


> - there are no "the wiki", there are and will always be different systems
> out there.
>

For the most part mediawiki is the most popular wiki out there and it's
markup the more widely spread among floss projects that I know off.


>
> The argument about the text is very valid, but I think that the new version
> also offers new facilities, and hope that all old facilities are unchanged
> (but there are no quarantees).
>
> My intention was simply to make the community aware of the possibility.
> Because at this point in time I see the upgrade as also being quite a
> hurdle.
>
> Jan I.
>
> On 3 December 2012 06:49, C  wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 11:35 PM, janI  wrote:
> > > JSPwiki just announced a new version:
> > >
> > > http://incubator.apache.org/jspwiki/
> > >
> > > since it is a apache project, should we consider upgrading to jspwiki
> > > instead of continuing with mediawiki ?
> > >
> > > The upgrade will almost for sure be harder, but to me it seems
> beneficial
> > > to use products from our own "family", that way we help them and they
> > > hopefully help us. I am also confident that it can be done without data
> > > loss, which is an absolute no-go to me, we will not accept data loss.
> > >
> > > If it is decided to go down this path, I will contact jspWiki and get
> > > involved with their work so we have a real influence on how the wiki
> > > software evolves (especially in regard of spam control).
> >
> > While certainly possible to convert from one wiki syntax to another,
> > it's no small feat... and that's if the source wiki uses only standard
> > syntax for the source Wiki.
> >
> > The current MediWiki implementation has a significant number of pages
> > that rely on extensions for their content. To have a successful
> > conversion, you are looking at needing to rewrite thousands of Wiki
> > pages.  Not necessarily to have 1:1 conversion, but simply to ensure
> > that the information is still presented in a logical manner (I'm
> > thinking of the documentation pages for example).
> >
> > Before anyone should really consider this, you need to gather up a
> > sizable collection of dedicated volunteers who are willing to sift
> > through every wiki page and validate the content, fix the broken
> > content, correct conversion errors, and reconnect the information
> > flow.
> >
> > You also will need to account for custom written extensions and the
> > functionality (although simple) they provide.
> >
> > It's a very big job to convert even a small number of pages
> >
> > Clayton
> >
>



-- 
Alexandro Colorado
Apache OpenOffice Contributor
http://es.openoffice.org

Re: Unsubscribe in Commits

[Andrea Pescetti]

Albino B Neto wrote:

Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
  commmits-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org


There's a typo here: commmits -> commits...

Andrea

Re: CMS diff:

[Shenfeng Liu]

Yan Ji,
  I can not commit it, probably due to the issue caused by the website
migration that discussed in another mail thread.

- Shenfeng (Simon)


2012/12/3 Ji Yan 

> I've updated the defect.txt file with latest defect status including open
> and fixed in last month. Could anybody help commit it? thx
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 9:41 PM, Yan Ji  wrote:
>
> > Clone URL (Committers only):
> >
> >
> https://cms.apache.org/redirect?new=anonymous;action=diff;uri=http://ooo-site.apache.org/stats%2Fdefects.txt
> >
> > Yan Ji
> >
> > Index: trunk/content/stats/defects.txt
> > ===
> > --- trunk/content/stats/defects.txt (revision 1416085)
> > +++ trunk/content/stats/defects.txt (working copy)
> > @@ -17,3 +17,4 @@
> >  2012-09-01,2161,597
> >  2012-10-01,2444,718
> >  2012-11-01,2576,756
> > +2012-12-01,2680,780
> > \ No newline at end of file
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
>
> Thanks & Best Regards, Yan Ji
>

Re: An official Git-Mirror?

[Herbert Duerr]

On 02.12.2012 11:17, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

On 30/11/2012 Herbert Duerr wrote:

It would all be much simpler if we had an official git-mirror [1] of our
svn-repository.


OK, this will also make contributing easier for the new developers who
know only git, since they will be able to checkout (clone) only trunk,
branches and tags and submit patches with git format-patch. So they
won't need to learn (or endure, depending on the individual
inclinations) SVN to help.


One problem could be that we are not using a standard layout, not only 
because of the extra directories such as ooo-site, trunk-orig, etc. but 
also because we have both one- and two-deep directory levels in 
branches/ such as branches/AOO34/ and branches/alg/aw080/. Eventually 
these have to be consolidated to e.g. alg_aw080.


The status of the Git-Mirroring request can be followed at
  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5590

Herbert

Re: Gallery extension from Symphony ressources

[Armin Le Grand]

Hi List,

After using pngcrush the install set is

original: 122 MB (128.229.180 bytes)
modified: 139 MB (146.700.786 bytes)

3 MB less, still 17 MB to go. This is an increase of 14% roughly. Cheking 
better thumbnails now...

Sincerely,
Armin
--
ALG

Re: [User Docs] End of effort to get AOO v3.4 Getting Started Guide finished

[Guy Waterval]

Hi Rob,
Hi all,

2012/12/2 Rob Weir 

>
> Let me describe a possible future, and maybe you (and others) can help
> influence it.  I'm not a documentation expert but I can help some.
> But mostly I can help on the recruitment side.
>
> Imagine we do the following:
>
> 1) Create a new d...@openoffice.apache.org list
>

It would be OK for me to participate, but not as a moderator, due to my too
basic English.
I profit from this post to perhaps commit a sacrilege ;-)
Why not publish the documentation directly on Wikipédia, with a double
licence, ALv2.0 and GFDL, for instance?  Is it impossible for questions of
licences, organization, political reasons  Wikipédia has a  lot of good
contributors in different languages, a big visibility, you can do
documentation and marketing at the same time

A+
-- 
gw

Re: Gallery extension from Symphony ressources

[Armin Le Grand]

Hi Kevin and Marcus,

let's wait and see if Regina may know/find a place in the office where 
this is needed. Problem is that the gallery is used as kinda 'graphic 
ressource holder' from some office modules, so some themes *have* to 
stay. These are normally hidden, but as seen with the rulers - don't 
have to be...


On 03.12.2012 01:57, Kevin Grignon wrote:

Agreed. Homepage elements are web 1.0. Let's remove them.

Kevin

On Dec 1, 2012, at 5:12 AM, "Marcus (OOo)"  wrote:


Am 11/30/2012 01:50 PM, schrieb Armin Le Grand:

Hi List,

to keep you up-to date (also in #121407#):

I have the first working version. Added themes are:

arrows (merged with existing)
bullets
computers
diagrams
education
environment
finance
gallery_sound
gallery_system
people
sounds
symbols
transportation
txtshapes

Install set sizes (Windows):
original: 122 MB (128.229.180 bytes)
modified: 142 MB (149.436.536 bytes)

Thus, it costs currently ca. 20 MB. I am right now using pngcrush to
reduce all contained *.png's old and new ones. Lets see what we can do.
It will get smaller. I also check if the ressources are available as
vector format (this would be optimal), but it does not look good up to
now. Let's see, I will report on reduced sizes when achieved...

Suggested from Kevin: remove theme 'rulers'. Comments on that?

Maybe they look really like from the past century. It's always somewhat a kind of taste. 
But then we should also look at the "Homepage" theme.

When reducing the pictures in themes or deleting some completely would give 
some additional reducing.

Marcus

Re: Gallery extension from Symphony ressources

[Armin Le Grand]

Hi Regina,

On 30.11.2012 17:32, Regina Henschel wrote:

Hi Armin,

Armin Le Grand schrieb:

 Hi List,

to keep you up-to date (also in #121407#):

I have the first working version. Added themes are:

arrows (merged with existing)
bullets
computers
diagrams
education
environment
finance
gallery_sound
gallery_system
people
sounds
symbols
transportation
txtshapes

Install set sizes (Windows):
original: 122 MB (128.229.180 bytes)
modified: 142 MB (149.436.536 bytes)


The StarOffice 8 gallery has 39MB, with folder "flags" of 6MB. Most of 
the clips in *.wmf


Yes, vector data is superiour :-) I try to get the Symphony stuff as 
vector data, but it's not sure if this is still available...






Thus, it costs currently ca. 20 MB. I am right now using pngcrush to
reduce all contained *.png's old and new ones. Lets see what we can do.
It will get smaller.


Does pngcrush reduce the color depth of the png's? Most of the 
cliparts do not need 24bit.


No. It does *not* change the quality at all, see 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pngcrush.




 I also check if the ressources are available as

vector format (this would be optimal), but it does not look good up to
now. Let's see, I will report on reduced sizes when achieved...

Suggested from Kevin: remove theme 'rulers'. Comments on that?


What about Insert > Horizontal ruler in Writer? It uses the rulers 
from \Basis\share\gallery\rulers.


Regina, you are my hero :-)
Yes, checked, and - indeed - uses the gallery theme rulers. Thus, this 
question is answered :-)




Kind regards
Regina


Sincerely,
Armin
--
ALG

Unsubscribe in Commits

[Albino B Neto]

Hi

A problem to unsubscribe from the list.

Read down:

===
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem 
Date: Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 7:21 AM
Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
To: bino...@gmail.com


Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:

 commmits-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org

Technical details of permanent failure:
Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected by the
recipient domain. We recommend contacting the other email provider for
further information about the cause of this error. The error that the
other server returned was: 550 550 mail to
commmits-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org not accepted here (state
13).

- Original message -

DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:sender:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject
 :from:to:content-type;
bh=vhTQmHflwsgFmitNknvGdYjXU1jIfMEXfwHoUzpUg+M=;
b=ql/Lw4rGVVNtlNdZKBkvLl1rhvyWQYGpbUE6hTWqlysi2HFEcETcJVnlomwMJA5BB/
 L61NX/GzYiYS58XaBv36so1vwDEwhZjhKodzrA4a62EIFP/4iI1lQXfZ5Lne/Lc2EQsR
 FGKIYTojgEl8HMn18Isp1EFEAR1YxYtpOfKCCdgtBbbd/VxZBhLQNPfzjCYeN10S1H14
 EQUXBnvEldpcLQafT5KT+HG1lYyTjDpElGbtBuMyYwA2VUY50Z7mC1wgUFvoQRrBskFE
 MEIsdcgOaZy7bAkNX++l650PzDqsj0r+tzshcwgeRoTRZhW56QpQ9ERoC8MHo6OHBAsn
 NMpQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.170.72 with SMTP id ak8mr5529161igc.49.1354526467539; Mon,
 03 Dec 2012 01:21:07 -0800 (PST)
Sender: bino...@gmail.com
Received: by 10.64.0.44 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 01:21:07 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 07:21:07 -0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 3jIZZi5mUz1VlYExdkJACUN4WcM
Message-ID: 
Subject:
From: Albino B Neto 
To: commmits-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

===


-- 
Albino

Re: [proposal/question] wiki.openoffice.org future: mediaWiki or Apache JSPWiki.

[janI]

I agree on a lot of the things.

BUT do not forget that a lot of questions/problems also applies to an
upgrade.

- User interface will change slightly
- Data loss is not acceptlable but the UTF8 conversion might have a side
effect on some browsers
- The tweaks in the current mwiki, will not automatically be present after
an upgrade.
- we do not know if the extensions will work (in the same way) in the new
version.
- there are no "the wiki", there are and will always be different systems
out there.

The argument about the text is very valid, but I think that the new version
also offers new facilities, and hope that all old facilities are unchanged
(but there are no quarantees).

My intention was simply to make the community aware of the possibility.
Because at this point in time I see the upgrade as also being quite a
hurdle.

Jan I.

On 3 December 2012 06:49, C  wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 11:35 PM, janI  wrote:
> > JSPwiki just announced a new version:
> >
> > http://incubator.apache.org/jspwiki/
> >
> > since it is a apache project, should we consider upgrading to jspwiki
> > instead of continuing with mediawiki ?
> >
> > The upgrade will almost for sure be harder, but to me it seems beneficial
> > to use products from our own "family", that way we help them and they
> > hopefully help us. I am also confident that it can be done without data
> > loss, which is an absolute no-go to me, we will not accept data loss.
> >
> > If it is decided to go down this path, I will contact jspWiki and get
> > involved with their work so we have a real influence on how the wiki
> > software evolves (especially in regard of spam control).
>
> While certainly possible to convert from one wiki syntax to another,
> it's no small feat... and that's if the source wiki uses only standard
> syntax for the source Wiki.
>
> The current MediWiki implementation has a significant number of pages
> that rely on extensions for their content. To have a successful
> conversion, you are looking at needing to rewrite thousands of Wiki
> pages.  Not necessarily to have 1:1 conversion, but simply to ensure
> that the information is still presented in a logical manner (I'm
> thinking of the documentation pages for example).
>
> Before anyone should really consider this, you need to gather up a
> sizable collection of dedicated volunteers who are willing to sift
> through every wiki page and validate the content, fix the broken
> content, correct conversion errors, and reconnect the information
> flow.
>
> You also will need to account for custom written extensions and the
> functionality (although simple) they provide.
>
> It's a very big job to convert even a small number of pages
>
> Clayton
>

Re: My mwiki account appears to have vanished

[janI]

Just a word of caution, if (as in this case) an account is deleted wrongly
then I can only restore it as long as no new account is created with the
same name.

Jan.

On 3 December 2012 08:01, Keith N. McKenna wrote:

> Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote:
>
>> On 12/02/2012 09:31 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>>
>>> Evening;
>>>
>>> I just tried to log in to my mwiki account and was informed by a very
>>> polite error message that I no longer exist.(See Below)
>>>
>>>  Login error
 There is no user by the name "KNMcKenna". Check your spelling.

>>>
>>> I know that I logged in last week. Could this account have been
>>> deleted in the recent maintenance to clear up the spam attack?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Keith
>>>
>>>  I cannot comment on where your account went, but in case new account
>> creation is still disabled, I went ahead and created an account for you.
>> You should receive a randomly generated password (if I did everything
>> correctly, Helen gave me a bit of a tutorial on that)...
>>
>> Let me know if your account does not come through!
>>
>>  Thank you Andrew the account came through with flying colours. Profile,
> talk and contribs pages all as they were before.
>
> Regards
> Keith
>
>