http://whyopencomputing.ch/
Hi all, For a couple of days, there is a lot of advertising in my country for a new company that wants to offer preinstalled PC with Ubuntu : http://whyopencomputing.ch/ As I do not work with Linux, I wonder if a AOO 4.0 packet is planned for Ubuntu. If this is the case, and if you do agree, I could try to contact this company to attract its attention to the AOO project. Regards -- gw
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release OpenOffice 4.0 (RC)
Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat: On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said: On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacatima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed something on the Traditional Chinese version? UI translation is not complete: https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/ I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an agreement that we need 100% for a release? http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on the mailing list, and properly tagged (if it does not happen on the mailing list...). I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times we have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks. For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature is incomplete https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/ How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state? The same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this 4.0.0 RC. Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous discussion. However, there are several issues of concern: 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version released. 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is not available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their development could not be based on. I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent. If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with certain amount, could it be OK to release it? let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible. Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and we can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to support local communities. But in general we have discussed it and I would have not released German (my mother language) if the UI translation would have been not complete. Just to make sure that we need active local communities who participate in the project or at least in the translation part. It would be even better if the help would be translated as well but that is a much higher burden and we are more flexible here. Juergen Regards -- Best regards, imacat ^_*' ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc Woman's Voice 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/
Re: http://whyopencomputing.ch/
Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 09:38 schrieb Guy Waterval: Hi all, For a couple of days, there is a lot of advertising in my country for a new company that wants to offer preinstalled PC with Ubuntu : http://whyopencomputing.ch/ As I do not work with Linux, I wonder if a AOO 4.0 packet is planned for Ubuntu. If this is the case, and if you do agree, I could try to contact this company to attract its attention to the AOO project. AOO 4.0 will be available as rpm and deb and will run on Ubuntu. We can always benefit from people with more detailed distro knowledge that can help to improve the system integration. Juergen Regards -- gw
Re: autocorrect macro?
Am Freitag, 12. Juli 2013 um 22:52 schrieb The weird writer: I know this is a developer’s email list, but I'm a user and since this list is filled with developers I’d like to suggest a macro. I want to be able to import autocorrect entries from Microsoft word to open office. I’d gladly donate to this project or even purchase this functionality for a small fee, but as I have cerebral palsy I use AutoCorrect as an accessibility tool and I don’t want to manually import a bunch of entries, I’d say 1 thousand. Is this being developed, will it EVER be in a release of open office or do I have to look towards libre office? To ensure that I understand you correct, you are asking for a tool or whatever to convert your local personal dictionary from word into a form that can be used on OpenOffice, correct? Sounds like an interesting extension project and yes you are correct to ask here on the list for such things. It's always good if users bring up real use cases of their daily work ... I can't promise anything but who knows ... Juergen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release OpenOffice 4.0 (RC)
Dňa Sun, 14 Jul 2013 09:42:03 +0200 Juergen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com napísal: Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat: On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said: On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacatima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed something on the Traditional Chinese version? UI translation is not complete: https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/ I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an agreement that we need 100% for a release? http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on the mailing list, and properly tagged (if it does not happen on the mailing list...). I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times we have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks. For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature is incomplete https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/ How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state? The same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this 4.0.0 RC. Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous discussion. However, there are several issues of concern: 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version released. 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is not available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their development could not be based on. I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent. If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with certain amount, could it be OK to release it? let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible. Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and we can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to support local communities. But in general we have discussed it and I would have not released German (my mother language) if the UI translation would have been not complete. Just to make sure that we need active local communities who participate in the project or at least in the translation part. Hi Juergen, Yust today German translation is done. I and French community made some changes in translations. Did you think about rebuilding some (sk, fr, de maybe cn) binaries ? - Michal Hriň It would be even better if the help would be translated as well but that is a much higher burden and we are more flexible here. Juergen Regards -- Best regards, imacat ^_*' ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw PGP Key http://www.imacat.idv.tw/me/pgpkey.asc Woman's Voice 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/ -- Táto správa bola vytvorená poštovým klientom v prehliadači Opera: http://www.opera.com/mail/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: autocorrect macro?
Hello, From: The weird writer [mailto:weirdwriter9...@gmail.com] I know this is a developer’s email list, but I'm a user and since this list is filled with developers I’d like to suggest a macro. I want to be able to import autocorrect entries from Microsoft word to open office. I’d gladly donate to this project or even purchase this functionality for a small fee, but as I have cerebral palsy I use AutoCorrect as an accessibility tool and I don’t want to manually import a bunch of entries, I’d say 1 thousand. I do not know the exact format of your AutoCorrect entries, but on my website you can find a small macro that is suitable for importing simple list of AutoCorrect entries (respectively dictionary entries), see: Wortliste in vorhandenes Wörterbuch übernehmen http://www.calc-info.de/makros.htm#wortliste The import format must be a simple txt file with one word per line, for example: apple lemon orange Strawberry ... Yes, 1000 Entries are not a problem. Is this being developed, will it EVER be in a release of open office or do I have to look towards libre office? I do not think that this is the correct statement to promote the development of OpenOffice. If you mean to put pressure on volunteers, please change immediately to libre office. Or do I misunderstand your statement? Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: upgrades on Linux...
I installed the RC on top of a dev version and had to use the --force-all parameter with dpkg (else broken pipe error message). Rather strange. I tried the import of my old 3.4 profile and it worked rather well. Of course the toolbars of my extensions were disabled but I could access the macros through the AOO macro dialog. The recent files list was blank however (there are entries in the former registrymodifications.xcu file). Hagar Le 14/07/2013 00:09, Kay Schenk a écrit : Has anyone installed in Linux over old 3.4 yet? Please let us know how that went if you did. Also, if you have and keep LO, what happened with that situation? Thanks. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Apache OpenOffice Wiki e-mail address confirmation
Req. is cancelled. rgds jan I. On 10 July 2013 01:13, Tina Mcafee gallopinggilb...@gmail.com wrote: I did not request a MediaWikI code expired Please send another link to cancel this. Thank you On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 12:25 AM, MediaWiki Mail dev@openoffice.apache.orgwrote: Someone, probably you, from IP address 68.103.170.127, has registered an account Seeker with this e-mail address on Apache OpenOffice Wiki. To confirm that this account really does belong to you and activate e-mail features on Apache OpenOffice Wiki, open this link in your browser: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Special:ConfirmEmail/abf5f4132524342949430ec24d3c9762 If you did *not* register the account, follow this link to cancel the e-mail address confirmation: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Special:InvalidateEmail/abf5f4132524342949430ec24d3c9762 This confirmation code will expire at 06:25, 24 February 2013. -- Tina McAfee
Contact message (from Peter Morgan)
Just to comment on your Wiki page about helping market OpenOffice... 1) worth getting the URL correct (http:// not http:/ ) for those who copy it and then wonder why it won't work. Yes, some will be able to correct this, but it reflects badly on your site/software at the same time. 2) on the basis of guesswork - my assumption is that Content is available under . should have included a link to Creative Commons (or similar) I will be promoting OpenOffice in my own way via UK web sites aimed at thousands of small businesses... Best wishes, Peter Morgan. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: upgrades on Linux...
On Sun, 14 Jul 2013 12:53:13 +0200 Hagar Delest hagar.del...@laposte.net wrote: I installed the RC on top of a dev version and had to use the --force-all parameter with dpkg (else broken pipe error message). Rather strange. I tried the import of my old 3.4 profile and it worked rather well. Of course the toolbars of my extensions were disabled but I could access the macros through the AOO macro dialog. The recent files list was blank however (there are entries in the former registrymodifications.xcu file). Hagar Le 14/07/2013 00:09, Kay Schenk a écrit : Has anyone installed in Linux over old 3.4 yet? Please let us know how that went if you did. Also, if you have and keep LO, what happened with that situation? Thanks. I installed AOO 4 RC over an earlier dev version (on Xubuntu 12.10) and all was well, with earlier recent files showing. No need for any fiddling. Will be trying other machines (mostly similar OS) later in the week and will advise if any difficulties. -- Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: upgrades on Linux...
On 2013-07-14, at 10:37 , Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote: On Sun, 14 Jul 2013 12:53:13 +0200 Hagar Delest hagar.del...@laposte.net wrote: I installed the RC on top of a dev version and had to use the --force-all parameter with dpkg (else broken pipe error message). Rather strange. I tried the import of my old 3.4 profile and it worked rather well. Of course the toolbars of my extensions were disabled but I could access the macros through the AOO macro dialog. The recent files list was blank however (there are entries in the former registrymodifications.xcu file). Hagar Le 14/07/2013 00:09, Kay Schenk a écrit : Has anyone installed in Linux over old 3.4 yet? Please let us know how that went if you did. Also, if you have and keep LO, what happened with that situation? Thanks. I installed AOO 4 RC over an earlier dev version (on Xubuntu 12.10) and all was well, with earlier recent files showing. No need for any fiddling. Will be trying other machines (mostly similar OS) later in the week and will advise if any difficulties. -- Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie The most problematical has been, for me ands others, Ubuntu (latest). Thanks louis - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release OpenOffice 4.0 (RC)
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat: On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said: On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed something on the Traditional Chinese version? UI translation is not complete: https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/ I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an agreement that we need 100% for a release? http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on the mailing list, and properly tagged (if it does not happen on the mailing list...). I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times we have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks. For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature is incomplete https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/ How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state? The same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this 4.0.0 RC. Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous discussion. However, there are several issues of concern: 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version released. 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is not available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their development could not be based on. I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent. If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with certain amount, could it be OK to release it? let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible. Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and we can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to support local communities. There is obviously some tension in our goals here: 1) We want to release the good work that is already done, so users who can enjoy the new features, bug fixes, interop improvements, etc. 2) We also have some languages that are almost done and don't want to miss the train. IMHO the way to resolve this tension is to let the current 4.0 train leave the station, but announce another train is leaving soon. Maybe we can set a goal of September 16th for either a 4.0.1 (if we're making code changes for a new critical bug) or a language update of 4.0.0 (if there are only new translations). Hopefully we all remember that we did this with AOO 3.4.1 as well, adding more languages after we released. From what I can tell there is a steady stream of interest in translating AOO to other languages. There will always be another language that is almost ready. That is what success looks like. We need to handle new translations when they are ready. We can't hold up the train, but we also can't make volunteers wait too long for the next train. So how does September 16th sound for releasing additional languages? Is that enough time? -Rob This seems quite reasonable to me. We need a little time for regrouping, and dealing with perhaps some minor issues that might pop up from the 4.0 release. Re the old stated policy on : http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements If this no longer our policy, we should definitely change this. But...I think we should first discuss the policy. What levels of translation do we feel are acceptable if not at 100%. What do we absolutely require to be translated? Menus vs help files, for example. Once we determine translation thresholds, we should include the policy on the Native Language page on the project web site: http://openoffice.apache.org/native-lang.html But in general we have discussed it and I would have not released German (my mother language) if the UI translation would have been not complete. Just to make sure that we need active local communities who participate in the project or at least in the
Re: autocorrect macro?
yes, that is what I am asking. this is a page about autocorrect... http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word-help/autocorrect-spelling-and-insert-text-and-symbols-HA010354277.aspx and here is a macro to export autocorrect entries from microsoft word. http://word.mvps.org/faqs/customization/exportautocorrect.htm I want a way to import all of these autocorrect entries into Open Office. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: upgrades on Linux...
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:53 AM, Hagar Delest hagar.del...@laposte.netwrote: I installed the RC on top of a dev version and had to use the --force-all parameter with dpkg (else broken pipe error message). Rather strange. This happened because build numbers were the same. The svn revisions were different, but actual build number was the same. I tried the import of my old 3.4 profile and it worked rather well. Of course the toolbars of my extensions were disabled but I could access the macros through the AOO macro dialog. Good! The recent files list was blank however (there are entries in the former registrymodifications.xcu file). Hagar OK, good to know. Thanks for this information. Le 14/07/2013 00:09, Kay Schenk a écrit : Has anyone installed in Linux over old 3.4 yet? Please let us know how that went if you did. Also, if you have and keep LO, what happened with that situation? Thanks. --**--**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- - MzK Success is falling nine times and getting up ten. -- Jon Bon Jovi
Re: upgrades on Linux...
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts lui...@gmail.comwrote: On 2013-07-14, at 10:37 , Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote: On Sun, 14 Jul 2013 12:53:13 +0200 Hagar Delest hagar.del...@laposte.net wrote: I installed the RC on top of a dev version and had to use the --force-all parameter with dpkg (else broken pipe error message). Rather strange. I tried the import of my old 3.4 profile and it worked rather well. Of course the toolbars of my extensions were disabled but I could access the macros through the AOO macro dialog. The recent files list was blank however (there are entries in the former registrymodifications.xcu file). Hagar Le 14/07/2013 00:09, Kay Schenk a écrit : Has anyone installed in Linux over old 3.4 yet? Please let us know how that went if you did. Also, if you have and keep LO, what happened with that situation? Thanks. I installed AOO 4 RC over an earlier dev version (on Xubuntu 12.10) and all was well, with earlier recent files showing. No need for any fiddling. Will be trying other machines (mostly similar OS) later in the week and will advise if any difficulties. -- Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie The most problematical has been, for me ands others, Ubuntu (latest). Thanks louis Louis -- Please elaborate when you get a moment. Are you linux 64-bit or 32? I thought our 64-but buildbot was all Ubuntu so, and I think this is what Arie's' 32 bit build was also, so I confess I don't know anythng about Ubuntu's 9debian) package management though. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- - MzK Success is falling nine times and getting up ten. -- Jon Bon Jovi
Re: http://whyopencomputing.ch/
Hi Juergen, 2013/7/14 Juergen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 09:38 schrieb Guy Waterval: Hi all, For a couple of days, there is a lot of advertising in my country for a new company that wants to offer preinstalled PC with Ubuntu : http://whyopencomputing.ch/ As I do not work with Linux, I wonder if a AOO 4.0 packet is planned for Ubuntu. If this is the case, and if you do agree, I could try to contact this company to attract its attention to the AOO project. AOO 4.0 will be available as rpm and deb and will run on Ubuntu. We can always benefit from people with more detailed distro knowledge that can help to improve the system integration. Message sent and response already received. Currently, they will stick to the choice of Canonical: LibreOffice. A+ -- gw
Re: Where to keep release notes?
On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Rob Weir rabas...@gmail.com wrote: On Jul 12, 2013, at 2:26 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 07/12/2013 07:18 PM, schrieb janI: On 12 July 2013 18:49, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: In the past we drafted release notes on the wiki, and then moved them to a location on the website. I'd like to challenge our thinking on this. Wouldn't it be useful to keep the release notes as a live document on the wiki, so we can easily update it with additional information on known issues as they are found, especially after release? I see your point, however I disagree. I think the release doc. for 4.0 is part of the release and should be frozen in svn like all other release artifacts. This is done by having it as a static web page. I support the doubts of Jan. The release notes should be seen as an artifact from a release as they describe this. We can also go that far that we write down the SVN revision number into the release notes. Then they are really tied strictly to this release and nothing else. And I did not mean to suggest anything else. The wiki page would be tied to a specific version of AOO, a different page for each version. But it would be updated to reflect the latest info, especially in the known problems section. We can then have a latest information, which are live in wiki. What about to put a link like this at the top of the release notes to give it more visible attention: Text: For the latest information about Apache OpenOffice 4.0 see this related Wiki page. Link: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AOO400_Lastest_Info Look at it from the perspective of the user. They want one place to go for relevant info related to the release and problems they might encounter. They don't want to hunt around for old versus new info. Those distinctions are not relevant to a new user. For example, imagine Windows 8.1 comes out and causes a problem with AOO4, but there is a good workaround that could save the user much frustration. But the release notes don't mention this. They just say Windows 8 is tested. This is not very helpful. Then new and important / noteable changes can be documented in the (more easily accessible) Wiki. My proposal was to handle this by keeping the release notes on a wiki page so such changes are seen by users with the least effort for them and us. -Rob Arguments either way it seems. Leaving them on the wiki would certainly be good especially for last minute changes -- which have happened. I guess it boils down to -- when a release is announced, where are the Release Notes of record? and if things change -- i.e. *New* Discovered Issues, as opposed to Known Issues in the Release Notes -- should this be kept as a separate entity that is not part of the Release Notes of record? OK, a lot of legal gobbly gook I guess Two separate considerations, perhaps: 1) Whether Release Notes are updated overtime, post-release, based on feedback from users and discovery of new issues? Or are they frozen-in-time, snapshots that never change, but might point to a different page that is updated. 2) What technology we use to create, publish and (if needed) update the release notes. It is possible to have a living document for Release Notes and do it entirely in HTML on the website. It is possible to do it on the wiki. It is even possible to do it on the committer-only CWiki. (Anyone remember that we have that?) NO -- I do not remember or even know anything about this. I think if we utilized that approach, maybe this is an equitable solution. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home This was created when we first started as a podling. But we never really used it. -Rob Let's just go ahead and use that area if you want to move the Release Notes. At some point, we may want to make a copy for the web -- but right now this isn't critical for me as long as the working copy is in a relatively secure area. Time to get our links finalized. I think Confluence may automatically adjust references for those working on this who have the old location bookmarked. Since we all seem to like drafting the release notes on the wiki, it might reduce the work if we just keep it there. It makes it easier for translators as well. But I'm not too concerned with the except technology used. I'm more concerned with
Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new thread. For reference here is the old policy: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements My new suggestion: 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help. 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better. 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This should be translated much better than 90%. Why? 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I don't think so. 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or better for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release. 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc. should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here. They want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated parts. And now, add your points. I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation. But I'd be open to requiring 100% for help as well. IMHO we should be raising the bar, not lowering it. If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%. There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%. It is only a question of time. I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and then release it. On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it. If it will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to release. In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that is better than releasing something only partially done. Also, there is the slippery slope here. If we allow 90% complete then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete. What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of AOO 4.0, in all languages that are close, maybe 80% or 90%. Not for release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current state and help translate. Regards, -Rob Marcus Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidtjogischm...@gmail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat: On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said: On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed something on the Traditional Chinese version? UI translation is not complete: https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/ I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an agreement that we need 100% for a release? http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on the mailing list, and properly tagged (if it does not happen on the mailing list...). I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times we have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks. For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature is incomplete https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/ How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state? The same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this 4.0.0 RC. Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous discussion. However, there are several issues of concern: 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version released. 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is not available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their development could not be based on. I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent. If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with certain amount, could it be OK to release it? let translate the UI
Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases
Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 18:37 schrieb Marcus (OOo): I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new thread. For reference here is the old policy: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements My new suggestion: 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help. 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better. 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This should be translated much better than 90%. Why? 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I don't think so. 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or better for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release. 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc. should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here. They want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated parts. And now, add your points. first of all I would like to bring the release out and then we can discuss the process for the future. For now we have defined to use 100% UI and as much as possible for Help. And I personally don't like to move back to UI less than 100%. And I see of course a big difference between UI and help. But it is not easy because useful short help is part of the Help and will be shown in the UI directly ... Long term goal should be 100% for everything and I believe it is doable with active communities. Once you have reached 100% the maintenance will be less effort. Only new features or minor rework have to be done hopefully. Juergen Marcus Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidtjogischm...@gmail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat: On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said: On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed something on the Traditional Chinese version? UI translation is not complete: https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/ I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an agreement that we need 100% for a release? http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on the mailing list, and properly tagged (if it does not happen on the mailing list...). I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times we have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks. For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature is incomplete https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/ How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state? The same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this 4.0.0 RC. Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous discussion. However, there are several issues of concern: 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version released. 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is not available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their development could not be based on. I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent. If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with certain amount, could it be OK to release it? let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible. Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and we can think
Re: upgrades on Linux...
Hello Kay, I already wrote at 29.06.2013 12:50 under Re: [RELEASE]: propose new snapshot build based on rev. 1496831 I did a test in a clean virtualbox under Debian Wheezy 32 bit. First I installed AOO 3.4.1 without problems Then I installed the developer Snapshot from 2013-06-27 with dpkg -i *.deb. This doesn't work proper. I get many errors, for example: openoffice kollidiert mit openoffice.org3 and so on I tried it also with --auto-deconfigure but this doesn't solve all problems. Kind regards Mechtilde Am 14.07.2013 00:09, schrieb Kay Schenk: Has anyone installed in Linux over old 3.4 yet? Please let us know how that went if you did. Also, if you have and keep LO, what happened with that situation? Thanks. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [VOTE]: Release OpenOffice 4.0 (RC)
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 5:11 AM, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, this is a call for vote on releasing the following release candidate as Apache OpenOffice 4.0. This will be an important release for Apache OpenOffice with bigger visible UI changes. It is a key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice. This release candidate provides the following important changes compared to former OpenOffice releases: (1) a major UI change/improvement by introducing a new sidebar concept where the idea is the comes from IBM's Symphony. It's the combination of reimplementing a complete new framework for sidebars and merging the existing sidebar in impress and code of various content panels from the Symphony grant in OpenOffice. (2) 190 fixes from Symphony are merged and integrated, mainly interoperability issues (3) 600 defects are fixed (4) many more features and improvements are integrated For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Notes. But keep in mind that the release notes are not yet final and will be updated and polished ... The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary releases for 23 languages) and further information how to verify and review Apache OpenOffice 4.0 can be found on the following wiki page: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshot The related RAT scan for this RC can be found under http://people.apache.org/~jsc/aoo-4.0.0_rat/aoo-4.0.0_rat-output.html The RC is based on the release branch AOO400, revision 1502185! Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0. The vote starts now and will be open until: UTC at noon on Monday, 15 July: 2013-07-15 12:00 UTC. But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project members. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0 [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... Verified sigs and hashes for source distributions. Reviewed clean RAT scan report. +1 Regards, -Rob - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release OpenOffice 4.0 (RC)
imacat wrote: 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source conference (COSCUP 2013,http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version released. As Juergen wrote, it is expected that we add more languages as they become ready. We'll probably add them in small batches and not one-by-one, in order to have a more efficient process. But if you reach 100% in the UI we will make sure you don't have to wait more than a few weeks to get your language officially released. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases
Am 07/14/2013 07:12 PM, schrieb Juergen Schmidt: Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 18:37 schrieb Marcus (OOo): I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new thread. For reference here is the old policy: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements My new suggestion: 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help. 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better. 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This should be translated much better than 90%. Why? 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I don't think so. 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or better for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release. 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc. should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here. They want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated parts. And now, add your points. first of all I would like to bring the release out and then we can discuss the process for the future. For now we have defined to use 100% UI and as much as possible for Help. And I personally don't like to move back to UI less than 100%. And I see of course a big difference between UI and help. But it is not easy because useful short help is part of the Help and will be shown in the UI directly ... Long term goal should be 100% for everything and I believe it is doable with active communities. Once you have reached 100% the maintenance will be less effort. Only new features or minor rework have to be done hopefully. Sorry if you have understood to apply the new policy for AOO 4.0. Of course this should not be the case. Marcus Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidtjogischm...@gmail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat: On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said: On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed something on the Traditional Chinese version? UI translation is not complete: https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/ I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an agreement that we need 100% for a release? http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on the mailing list, and properly tagged (if it does not happen on the mailing list...). I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times we have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks. For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature is incomplete https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/ How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state? The same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this 4.0.0 RC. Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous discussion. However, there are several issues of concern: 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version released. 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join our development force in order to fix some Chinese problems in governmental use. If OpenOffice 4.0 Traditional Chinese version is not available at that time, we could only give them 3.4.1, which their development could not be based on. I've asked our local community to help the translation in urgent. If we can finish the Traditional Chinese sidebar translation with certain amount, could it be OK to release it? let translate the UI First and then we can figure out what's possible. Hopefully some other languages can continue the translation as well and we can think about a language only release where I am a big fan of to support local communities. There is obviously some tension in our goals here: 1) We want to release the good work that is already done, so users who can enjoy the new features, bug fixes, interop improvements, etc. 2) We also have some languages that are almost done and don't want to miss the train. IMHO the way to resolve this tension is to
Installation on Windows 8, 64bit
Hi all, there is a mail on the German list, which describes a crash when mark something in Writer and then copy it. (Which would be a show-stopper.) The poster has deinstalled OOo3.4.1 and all previous snapshots and then installed the RC. OS is Windows 8, 64 bit. Can someone test it with this conditions? Unfortunately I haven't got Windows 8. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Where to keep release notes?
Kay Schenk wrote: On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Rob Weir rabas...@gmail.com wrote: On Jul 12, 2013, at 2:26 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 07/12/2013 07:18 PM, schrieb janI: On 12 July 2013 18:49, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: In the past we drafted release notes on the wiki, and then moved them to a location on the website. I'd like to challenge our thinking on this. Wouldn't it be useful to keep the release notes as a live document on the wiki, so we can easily update it with additional information on known issues as they are found, especially after release? I see your point, however I disagree. I think the release doc. for 4.0 is part of the release and should be frozen in svn like all other release artifacts. This is done by having it as a static web page. I support the doubts of Jan. The release notes should be seen as an artifact from a release as they describe this. We can also go that far that we write down the SVN revision number into the release notes. Then they are really tied strictly to this release and nothing else. And I did not mean to suggest anything else. The wiki page would be tied to a specific version of AOO, a different page for each version. But it would be updated to reflect the latest info, especially in the known problems section. We can then have a latest information, which are live in wiki. What about to put a link like this at the top of the release notes to give it more visible attention: Text: For the latest information about Apache OpenOffice 4.0 see this related Wiki page. Link: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AOO400_Lastest_Info Look at it from the perspective of the user. They want one place to go for relevant info related to the release and problems they might encounter. They don't want to hunt around for old versus new info. Those distinctions are not relevant to a new user. For example, imagine Windows 8.1 comes out and causes a problem with AOO4, but there is a good workaround that could save the user much frustration. But the release notes don't mention this. They just say Windows 8 is tested. This is not very helpful. Then new and important / noteable changes can be documented in the (more easily accessible) Wiki. My proposal was to handle this by keeping the release notes on a wiki page so such changes are seen by users with the least effort for them and us. -Rob Arguments either way it seems. Leaving them on the wiki would certainly be good especially for last minute changes -- which have happened. I guess it boils down to -- when a release is announced, where are the Release Notes of record? and if things change -- i.e. *New* Discovered Issues, as opposed to Known Issues in the Release Notes -- should this be kept as a separate entity that is not part of the Release Notes of record? OK, a lot of legal gobbly gook I guess Two separate considerations, perhaps: 1) Whether Release Notes are updated overtime, post-release, based on feedback from users and discovery of new issues? Or are they frozen-in-time, snapshots that never change, but might point to a different page that is updated. 2) What technology we use to create, publish and (if needed) update the release notes. It is possible to have a living document for Release Notes and do it entirely in HTML on the website. It is possible to do it on the wiki. It is even possible to do it on the committer-only CWiki. (Anyone remember that we have that?) NO -- I do not remember or even know anything about this. I think if we utilized that approach, maybe this is an equitable solution. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Wiki+Home This was created when we first started as a podling. But we never really used it. -Rob Let's just go ahead and use that area if you want to move the Release Notes. At some point, we may want to make a copy for the web -- but right now this isn't critical for me as long as the working copy is in a relatively secure area. Time to get our links finalized. I think Confluence may automatically adjust references for those working on this who have the old location bookmarked. The only problem that I see with this is that those of us that are not commiters but have worked extensively on the release notes are effectively shut out. I noticed that th overview of the dev wiki states that you must have a CLA on file. Is that a process that anyone interested can avail themselves of or is it strictly for committers? Regards Keith Since we all seem to like drafting the release notes on the wiki, it might reduce the work if we just keep it there.
Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit
Hi Regina, I reported the same thing on June 22, but I couldn't reproduce it the next day. That was not the RC of course but build 9701. I have no idea what caused it. It doesn't happen right now either, I just tried again. Max Am 14.07.2013 19:36, schrieb Regina Henschel: Hi all, there is a mail on the German list, which describes a crash when mark something in Writer and then copy it. (Which would be a show-stopper.) The poster has deinstalled OOo3.4.1 and all previous snapshots and then installed the RC. OS is Windows 8, 64 bit. Can someone test it with this conditions? Unfortunately I haven't got Windows 8. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 07/14/2013 07:11 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new thread. For reference here is the old policy: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements My new suggestion: 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help. 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better. 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This should be translated much better than 90%. Why? 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I don't think so. 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or better for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release. 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc. should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here. They want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated parts. And now, add your points. I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation. But I'd be open to requiring 100% for help as well. IMHO we should be raising the bar, not lowering it. If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%. There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%. It is only a question of time. I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and then release it. Sure, 90% was just my suggestion to raise the bar from 80%. But to stick with 100% is much easier as it's all or nothing. On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it. If it will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to release. Yes, if the language is no longer supported actively then we shouldn't release it. In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that is better than releasing something only partially done. Also, there is the slippery slope here. If we allow 90% complete then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete. But then we have to be strict as 99% is also near to 100%. ;-) What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of AOO 4.0, in all languages that are close, maybe 80% or 90%. Not for release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current state and help translate. Good point, +1. Do you think about a L10N release somewhen between releases or as a RC where it's clear from the beginning that it will not be released? In this specific case, for AOO 4.0, I'm suggesting we release any additional languages that are 100% on September 16th. This is similar to what we did for AOO 3.4.1. After that date I think we then wait for AOO 4.1. You ask about an RC where it is not clear whether it will be released? We may run into that issue if we have a beta for AOO 4.1. I don't think all translations are complete for a beta. (Or are they?) If so it is possible for a beta to include a language that never is included in the final release. This would occur if the translators do not finish the translation. This may sound cruel, but we can use this for recruitment. When we publish the beta we can note that the translation is not finished and that volunteers are welcome. Regards, -Rob Marcus Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidtjogischm...@gmail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat: On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said: On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed something on the Traditional Chinese version? UI translation is not complete: https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/ I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an agreement that we need 100% for a release? http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on the mailing list, and properly tagged (if it does not happen on the mailing list...). I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times we have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks. For this
Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release OpenOffice 4.0 (RC)
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 1:32 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote: On 14 July 2013 19:17, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: imacat wrote: 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source conference (COSCUP 2013,http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version released. As Juergen wrote, it is expected that we add more languages as they become ready. We'll probably add them in small batches and not one-by-one, in order to have a more efficient process. But if you reach 100% in the UI we will make sure you don't have to wait more than a few weeks to get your language officially released. I dont quite understand what you mean, will 4.0 have different version numbers as we add more languages ? I would be against releasing 4.0 with e.g. 8 languages, and then after a few weeks re-release it with the same version number just more languages. When 4.0 is released thats final to me, next is 4.0.1 or 4.1 Or are you talking about releasing language packs, which is quite different ? No. We're talking about not changing the AOO 4.0 code, but just binaries with the new language strings. So the version tags would not change. (Why should they if the code has not changed?). Of course, we don't re-release the existing languages. If you recall we did this exact same thing with AOO 3.4.1 when we released Danish. To do otherwise brings needless complications, such as: 1) Either re-releasing new versions for existing languages, where only the version tags have changed, but no code or language strings have changed, e.g., in Spanish, French, Italian, etc. or 2) Having much more complicated update notification logic, where now we need to track that AOO 3.4.1 Danish upgrades to AOO 4.0.1, but AOO 3.4.1 French upgrades to AOO 4.0.0. And this complication then lives on to the next release, where Danish 4.0.1 upgrades to AOO 4.1.0, but there is no French 4.0.1, etc. Remember: We can always unambiguously determine what source was used for what binary, even if we incrementally add more languages for 4.0 later. Regards, -Rob rgds jan I. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases
On Jul 14, 2013, at 11:19 AM, Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 07/14/2013 07:11 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new thread. For reference here is the old policy: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements My new suggestion: 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help. 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better. 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This should be translated much better than 90%. Why? 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I don't think so. 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or better for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release. 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc. should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here. They want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated parts. And now, add your points. I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation. But I'd be open to requiring 100% for help as well. IMHO we should be raising the bar, not lowering it. If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%. There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%. It is only a question of time. I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and then release it. Sure, 90% was just my suggestion to raise the bar from 80%. But to stick with 100% is much easier as it's all or nothing. On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it. If it will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to release. Yes, if the language is no longer supported actively then we shouldn't release it. In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that is better than releasing something only partially done. Also, there is the slippery slope here. If we allow 90% complete then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete. But then we have to be strict as 99% is also near to 100%. ;-) What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of AOO 4.0, in all languages that are close, maybe 80% or 90%. Not for release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current state and help translate. Good point, +1. Do you think about a L10N release somewhen between releases or as a RC where it's clear from the beginning that it will not be released? In this specific case, for AOO 4.0, I'm suggesting we release any additional languages that are 100% on September 16th. This is similar to what we did for AOO 3.4.1. After that date I think we then wait for AOO 4.1. I don't disagree with the policy of deadlines, but why September 16th? If some languages are ready sooner (like Traditional Chinese) it ought to be possible to have an earlier set. Perhaps we make it once a month? We also need to understand that there will be a certain length of time from a deadline to a language pack release. Is it one week? You ask about an RC where it is not clear whether it will be released? We may run into that issue if we have a beta for AOO 4.1. I don't think all translations are complete for a beta. (Or are they?) If so it is possible for a beta to include a language that never is included in the final release. This would occur if the translators do not finish the translation. This may sound cruel, but we can use this for recruitment. When we publish the beta we can note that the translation is not finished and that volunteers are welcome. I think that we should be careful to have a UI and Help freeze in advance of releases in order to give plenty of time for language teams to assure that they can meet our high standard of 100%. If we are going to co-ordinate many small teams then we need to establish schedules and try to commit to them. (As Jürgen has done for this RC.) Regards, Dave Regards, -Rob Marcus Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidtjogischm...@gmail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat: On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said: On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel
Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new thread. For reference here is the old policy: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements My new suggestion: 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help. 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better. 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This should be translated much better than 90%. Why? 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I don't think so. 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or better for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release. 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc. should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here. They want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated parts. And now, add your points. I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation. But I'd be open to requiring 100% for help as well. IMHO we should be raising the bar, not lowering it. If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%. In many cases, it is probably a time factor rather than an interest factor. I'm not really familiar with the normal tracking and communication between translation volunteers and developers on this list with respect to release date targets, however. Maybe this needs improvement. There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%. It is only a question of time. I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and then release it. On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it. If it will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to release. yes, I agree. In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that is better than releasing something only partially done. Also, there is the slippery slope here. If we allow 90% complete then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete. again, agreement What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of AOO 4.0, in all languages that are close, maybe 80% or 90%. Not for release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current state and help translate. h...I don't know how this would mesh with Apache release policy. I guess what you're saying is they could be handled like development snapshots, but ultimately fail the release test? We need to investigate this. Regards, -Rob Marcus Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidtjogischm...@gmail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat: On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said: On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed something on the Traditional Chinese version? UI translation is not complete: https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/ I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an agreement that we need 100% for a release? http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on the mailing list, and properly tagged (if it does not happen on the mailing list...). I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times we have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks. For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature is incomplete https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/ How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state? The same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this 4.0.0 RC. Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous discussion. However, there are several issues of concern: 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on
Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Jul 14, 2013, at 11:19 AM, Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 07/14/2013 07:11 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new thread. For reference here is the old policy: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements My new suggestion: 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help. 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better. 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This should be translated much better than 90%. Why? 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I don't think so. 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or better for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release. 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc. should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here. They want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated parts. And now, add your points. I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation. But I'd be open to requiring 100% for help as well. IMHO we should be raising the bar, not lowering it. If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%. There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%. It is only a question of time. I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and then release it. Sure, 90% was just my suggestion to raise the bar from 80%. But to stick with 100% is much easier as it's all or nothing. On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it. If it will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to release. Yes, if the language is no longer supported actively then we shouldn't release it. In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that is better than releasing something only partially done. Also, there is the slippery slope here. If we allow 90% complete then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete. But then we have to be strict as 99% is also near to 100%. ;-) What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of AOO 4.0, in all languages that are close, maybe 80% or 90%. Not for release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current state and help translate. Good point, +1. Do you think about a L10N release somewhen between releases or as a RC where it's clear from the beginning that it will not be released? In this specific case, for AOO 4.0, I'm suggesting we release any additional languages that are 100% on September 16th. This is similar to what we did for AOO 3.4.1. After that date I think we then wait for AOO 4.1. I don't disagree with the policy of deadlines, but why September 16th? If some languages are ready sooner (like Traditional Chinese) it ought to be possible to have an earlier set. Perhaps we make it once a month? My impression was that several key people are planning on taking vacation after AOO 4.0 is released. Nothing magic about the Sept 16th date. But there is something magic about August ;-) We also need to understand that there will be a certain length of time from a deadline to a language pack release. Is it one week? Right. I was suggesting that date as a release date. We'd need to work backwards to set translation deadlines, etc. You ask about an RC where it is not clear whether it will be released? We may run into that issue if we have a beta for AOO 4.1. I don't think all translations are complete for a beta. (Or are they?) If so it is possible for a beta to include a language that never is included in the final release. This would occur if the translators do not finish the translation. This may sound cruel, but we can use this for recruitment. When we publish the beta we can note that the translation is not finished and that volunteers are welcome. I think that we should be careful to have a UI and Help freeze in advance of releases in order to give plenty of time for language teams to assure that they can meet our high standard of 100%. If we are going to co-ordinate many small teams then we need to establish schedules and try to commit to them. (As Jürgen has done for this RC.) Exactly. -Rob Regards, Dave Regards, -Rob Marcus Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On
Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases
On Jul 14, 2013, at 11:33 AM, Kay Schenk wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new thread. For reference here is the old policy: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements My new suggestion: 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help. 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better. 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This should be translated much better than 90%. Why? 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I don't think so. 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or better for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release. 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc. should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here. They want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated parts. And now, add your points. I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation. But I'd be open to requiring 100% for help as well. IMHO we should be raising the bar, not lowering it. If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%. In many cases, it is probably a time factor rather than an interest factor. I'm not really familiar with the normal tracking and communication between translation volunteers and developers on this list with respect to release date targets, however. Maybe this needs improvement. There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%. It is only a question of time. I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and then release it. On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it. If it will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to release. yes, I agree. In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that is better than releasing something only partially done. Also, there is the slippery slope here. If we allow 90% complete then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete. again, agreement What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of AOO 4.0, in all languages that are close, maybe 80% or 90%. Not for release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current state and help translate. h...I don't know how this would mesh with Apache release policy. I guess what you're saying is they could be handled like development snapshots, but ultimately fail the release test? We need to investigate this. We need to VOTE to release whether or not it is an official source release or any type of binary convenience release. For the PMC vote on a language pack the bar to +1 won't be as high because the IP concerns differ. Regards, Dave Regards, -Rob Marcus Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidtjogischm...@gmail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat: On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said: On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed something on the Traditional Chinese version? UI translation is not complete: https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/ I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an agreement that we need 100% for a release? http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on the mailing list, and properly tagged (if it does not happen on the mailing list...). I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times we have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks. For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature is incomplete https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/ How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state? The same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this 4.0.0 RC. Hmm... I see the problem with side bar
Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new thread. For reference here is the old policy: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements My new suggestion: 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help. 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better. 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This should be translated much better than 90%. Why? 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I don't think so. 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or better for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release. 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc. should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here. They want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated parts. And now, add your points. I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation. But I'd be open to requiring 100% for help as well. IMHO we should be raising the bar, not lowering it. If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%. In many cases, it is probably a time factor rather than an interest factor. I'm not really familiar with the normal tracking and communication between translation volunteers and developers on this list with respect to release date targets, however. Maybe this needs improvement. There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%. It is only a question of time. I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and then release it. On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it. If it will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to release. yes, I agree. In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that is better than releasing something only partially done. Also, there is the slippery slope here. If we allow 90% complete then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete. again, agreement What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of AOO 4.0, in all languages that are close, maybe 80% or 90%. Not for release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current state and help translate. h...I don't know how this would mesh with Apache release policy. I guess what you're saying is they could be handled like development snapshots, but ultimately fail the release test? We need to investigate this. I mean treat it *exactly* like we do a dev snapshot. It is not advertised outside of the project. The only difference is it would be built with the AOO 4.0 release code revision. Or think of itas being an early build of the re-release of AOO 4.0 with additional languages. Eventually, if/when the translation is completed, we have a RC at that time, and a vote and then they are released. -Rob Regards, -Rob Marcus Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidtjogischm...@gmail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat: On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said: On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed something on the Traditional Chinese version? UI translation is not complete: https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/ I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an agreement that we need 100% for a release? http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on the mailing list, and properly tagged (if it does not happen on the mailing list...). I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times we have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks. For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature is incomplete https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/
Re: [VOTE]: Release OpenOffice 4.0 (RC)
Installed without problems, opened edited saved my usual files, all without problems or crashes. +1, lets release it. Marcus Am 07/12/2013 11:11 AM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt: Hi all, this is a call for vote on releasing the following release candidate as Apache OpenOffice 4.0. This will be an important release for Apache OpenOffice with bigger visible UI changes. It is a key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice. This release candidate provides the following important changes compared to former OpenOffice releases: (1) a major UI change/improvement by introducing a new sidebar concept where the idea is the comes from IBM's Symphony. It's the combination of reimplementing a complete new framework for sidebars and merging the existing sidebar in impress and code of various content panels from the Symphony grant in OpenOffice. (2) 190 fixes from Symphony are merged and integrated, mainly interoperability issues (3) 600 defects are fixed (4) many more features and improvements are integrated For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Notes. But keep in mind that the release notes are not yet final and will be updated and polished ... The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary releases for 23 languages) and further information how to verify and review Apache OpenOffice 4.0 can be found on the following wiki page: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshot The related RAT scan for this RC can be found under http://people.apache.org/~jsc/aoo-4.0.0_rat/aoo-4.0.0_rat-output.html The RC is based on the release branch AOO400, revision 1502185! Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0. The vote starts now and will be open until: UTC at noon on Monday, 15 July: 2013-07-15 12:00 UTC. But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project members. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0 [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases
On Jul 14, 2013, at 11:51 AM, Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new thread. For reference here is the old policy: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements My new suggestion: 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help. 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better. 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This should be translated much better than 90%. Why? 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I don't think so. 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or better for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release. 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc. should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here. They want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated parts. And now, add your points. I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation. But I'd be open to requiring 100% for help as well. IMHO we should be raising the bar, not lowering it. If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%. In many cases, it is probably a time factor rather than an interest factor. I'm not really familiar with the normal tracking and communication between translation volunteers and developers on this list with respect to release date targets, however. Maybe this needs improvement. There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%. It is only a question of time. I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and then release it. On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it. If it will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to release. yes, I agree. In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that is better than releasing something only partially done. Also, there is the slippery slope here. If we allow 90% complete then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete. again, agreement What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of AOO 4.0, in all languages that are close, maybe 80% or 90%. Not for release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current state and help translate. h...I don't know how this would mesh with Apache release policy. I guess what you're saying is they could be handled like development snapshots, but ultimately fail the release test? We need to investigate this. I mean treat it *exactly* like we do a dev snapshot. It is not advertised outside of the project. The only difference is it would be built with the AOO 4.0 release code revision. Or think of itas being an early build of the re-release of AOO 4.0 with additional languages. Eventually, if/when the translation is completed, we have a RC at that time, and a vote and then they are released. So a policy could be that we will build Dev Snapshots of Language Packs if the translation is over N%? Where N could be 80 or 75%? I think that this would encourage language communities to make the effort. Regards, Dave -Rob Regards, -Rob Marcus Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidtjogischm...@gmail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat: On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said: On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed something on the Traditional Chinese version? UI translation is not complete: https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/ I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an agreement that we need 100% for a release? http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on the mailing list, and properly tagged (if it does not happen on the mailing list...). I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times we have done releases
Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases
2013/7/14 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: I tie up to Kay's suggestion to discuss a new policy. So, new topic, new thread. For reference here is the old policy: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Release_criteria#Localization_requirements My new suggestion: 1. Don't make a difference between UI and Help. 2. Accepted translations that are 90% or better. 3. *Except* we have a big or strategic new feature like the Sidebar. This should be translated much better than 90%. Why? 1. Do we want to make differences between UI and help translation? Do average users accept English help topics for translated UI functions? I don't think so. 2. In the previous OOo project translations were accepted with 80% or better for a release. IMHO this is too low to offer a high quality release. 3. New features that are also promoted in release note, blog post, etc. should be fully translated as the attention of our users is high here. They want to give it a try and shouldn't be disappointed with not translated parts. And now, add your points. I'd prefer to keep the current rule, 100% UI translation. But I'd be open to requiring 100% for help as well. IMHO we should be raising the bar, not lowering it. If there is a community willing and able to translate to 90% then there should be community willing and able to translate to 100%. There is no technical or community reason to stop at 90%. It is only a question of time. I'd prefer we just wait for 100% translation and then release it. On the other hand, if a language is stuck at 90% and there are no active volunteers, then I don't think we should release it. If it will not get to 100%, then we're just release something that will reflect poorly on us and will slowly degenerate from release to release. In other words, if it is merely a case of waiting another month or two and then releasing a high-quality 100% translation, then I think that is better than releasing something only partially done. Also, there is the slippery slope here. If we allow 90% complete then someone will beg for 89% complete, or 88% complete. What I would favor is making builds available, maybe at the level of AOO 4.0, in all languages that are close, maybe 80% or 90%. Not for release or distribution, but to help volunteers evaluate its current state and help translate. Fully agree with everything you said. For the UI, any percentage different from 100% is problematic: for the average user it's not the same a 1% missing on an obscure database feature than a 1% missing on the sidebar. Regards Ricardo Regards, -Rob Marcus Am 07/14/2013 05:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidtjogischm...@gmail.com wrote: Am Sonntag, 14. Juli 2013 um 06:35 schrieb imacat: On 2013/07/13 20:52, Ariel Constenla-Haile said: On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:20:32PM +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote: Am 07/13/2013 05:14 AM, schrieb Ariel Constenla-Haile: On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM, imacat ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw wrote: Sorry. I did not see Traditional Chinese version. Did I missed something on the Traditional Chinese version? UI translation is not complete: https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/ I can see that 97% is translated. Not that bad. Do we have an agreement that we need 100% for a release? http://markmail.org/message/pxgvjuw2j3ukqsom Concerns should have been risen at that time, it was discussed on the mailing list, and properly tagged (if it does not happen on the mailing list...). I'm asking because I really don't know it and in former OOo times we have done releases for languages with at least 80% translated UI [1]. So, maybe a change that I haven't seen in the last weeks. For this particular case, the translation of the main 4.0.0 feature is incomplete https://translate.apache.org/zh_TW/aoo40/svx/source/sidebar/ How serious would it be to release this translation in such a state? The same applies to other languages released in 3.4.* but not in this 4.0.0 RC. Hmm... I see the problem with side bar translation. And I'm very sorry that I was in my research paper and did not notice the previous discussion. However, there are several issues of concern: 1. I am going to give a talk in our largest local open source conference (COSCUP 2013, http://coscup.org/) on 8/3, and plan to announce OpenOffice 4.0. It is the first talk after the key notes. It would be very embarrassing to announce it without a local version released. 2. There would be a large-scale deployment around August or September (6000-7000) in a government department, and they are planning to join our development
Re: [VOTE]: Release OpenOffice 4.0 (RC)
Hi, +1 ...same experience... Am 14.07.2013 20:55, schrieb Marcus (OOo): Installed without problems, opened edited saved my usual files, all without problems or crashes. +1, lets release it. Marcus Kind regards, Joost - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: autocorrect macro?
thanks for looking into this! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: autocorrect macro?
thanks for looking into this! I am eager to earn what happens - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: Release OpenOffice 4.0 (RC)
Hi, [X] 0 Don't care Regards, Michal Hriň - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit
I don't quite understand what this means: mark something in Writer and then copy it. Is this about selecting something in Writer and copying it to the clip-board? Or is there some other action that reproduces this situation. I can test this in Windows 8 x64. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Max Merbald [mailto:max.merb...@gmx.de] Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 11:01 AM To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Regina Henschel Subject: Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit Hi Regina, I reported the same thing on June 22, but I couldn't reproduce it the next day. That was not the RC of course but build 9701. I have no idea what caused it. It doesn't happen right now either, I just tried again. Max Am 14.07.2013 19:36, schrieb Regina Henschel: Hi all, there is a mail on the German list, which describes a crash when mark something in Writer and then copy it. (Which would be a show-stopper.) The poster has deinstalled OOo3.4.1 and all previous snapshots and then installed the RC. OS is Windows 8, 64 bit. Can someone test it with this conditions? Unfortunately I haven't got Windows 8. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit
Hi Dennis, Dennis E. Hamilton schrieb: I don't quite understand what this means: mark something in Writer and then copy it. Is this about selecting something in Writer and copying it to the clip-board? Yes, that do I mean. Or is there some other action that reproduces this situation. I can test this in Windows 8 x64. That is nice, please do it. The poster has done some cleanup now, installed again, and the error no longer occurs. I have ask him to tell us, what he has done, but have no answer yet. Kind regards Regina - Dennis -Original Message- From: Max Merbald [mailto:max.merb...@gmx.de] Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 11:01 AM To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Regina Henschel Subject: Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit Hi Regina, I reported the same thing on June 22, but I couldn't reproduce it the next day. That was not the RC of course but build 9701. I have no idea what caused it. It doesn't happen right now either, I just tried again. Max Am 14.07.2013 19:36, schrieb Regina Henschel: Hi all, there is a mail on the German list, which describes a crash when mark something in Writer and then copy it. (Which would be a show-stopper.) The poster has deinstalled OOo3.4.1 and all previous snapshots and then installed the RC. OS is Windows 8, 64 bit. Can someone test it with this conditions? Unfortunately I haven't got Windows 8. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit
Hello Dennis, it's as you said, you select a part in the text and then you right-click it and click copy, i. e. in my case it happened when I was trying to copy by mouse. But as I said it happened several weeks ago and it hasn't happened again since. My OS is Win8 64 bit too. Max Am 14.07.2013 22:14, schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton: I don't quite understand what this means: mark something in Writer and then copy it. Is this about selecting something in Writer and copying it to the clip-board? Or is there some other action that reproduces this situation. I can test this in Windows 8 x64. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Max Merbald [mailto:max.merb...@gmx.de] Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 11:01 AM To:dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Regina Henschel Subject: Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit Hi Regina, I reported the same thing on June 22, but I couldn't reproduce it the next day. That was not the RC of course but build 9701. I have no idea what caused it. It doesn't happen right now either, I just tried again. Max Am 14.07.2013 19:36, schrieb Regina Henschel: Hi all, there is a mail on the German list, which describes a crash when mark something in Writer and then copy it. (Which would be a show-stopper.) The poster has deinstalled OOo3.4.1 and all previous snapshots and then installed the RC. OS is Windows 8, 64 bit. Can someone test it with this conditions? Unfortunately I haven't got Windows 8. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit
Hi at all I have had a similar behavur with Win 7 64. But with select - Delete - Crash. I can verify this tomorrow morning. Greetings Raphael Am 14.07.13 22:34, schrieb Max Merbald: Hello Dennis, it's as you said, you select a part in the text and then you right-click it and click copy, i. e. in my case it happened when I was trying to copy by mouse. But as I said it happened several weeks ago and it hasn't happened again since. My OS is Win8 64 bit too. Max Am 14.07.2013 22:14, schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton: I don't quite understand what this means: mark something in Writer and then copy it. Is this about selecting something in Writer and copying it to the clip-board? Or is there some other action that reproduces this situation. I can test this in Windows 8 x64. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Max Merbald [mailto:max.merb...@gmx.de] Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 11:01 AM To:dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Regina Henschel Subject: Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit Hi Regina, I reported the same thing on June 22, but I couldn't reproduce it the next day. That was not the RC of course but build 9701. I have no idea what caused it. It doesn't happen right now either, I just tried again. Max Am 14.07.2013 19:36, schrieb Regina Henschel: Hi all, there is a mail on the German list, which describes a crash when mark something in Writer and then copy it. (Which would be a show-stopper.) The poster has deinstalled OOo3.4.1 and all previous snapshots and then installed the RC. OS is Windows 8, 64 bit. Can someone test it with this conditions? Unfortunately I haven't got Windows 8. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: Release OpenOffice 4.0 (RC)
-1 We can't release a version with a potential crash in selection copy/paste on windows 64 bit versions. Am 12.07.13 11:11, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt: Hi all, this is a call for vote on releasing the following release candidate as Apache OpenOffice 4.0. This will be an important release for Apache OpenOffice with bigger visible UI changes. It is a key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice. This release candidate provides the following important changes compared to former OpenOffice releases: (1) a major UI change/improvement by introducing a new sidebar concept where the idea is the comes from IBM's Symphony. It's the combination of reimplementing a complete new framework for sidebars and merging the existing sidebar in impress and code of various content panels from the Symphony grant in OpenOffice. (2) 190 fixes from Symphony are merged and integrated, mainly interoperability issues (3) 600 defects are fixed (4) many more features and improvements are integrated For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Notes. But keep in mind that the release notes are not yet final and will be updated and polished ... The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary releases for 23 languages) and further information how to verify and review Apache OpenOffice 4.0 can be found on the following wiki page: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshot The related RAT scan for this RC can be found under http://people.apache.org/~jsc/aoo-4.0.0_rat/aoo-4.0.0_rat-output.html The RC is based on the release branch AOO400, revision 1502185! Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0. The vote starts now and will be open until: UTC at noon on Monday, 15 July: 2013-07-15 12:00 UTC. But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project members. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0 [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: Release OpenOffice 4.0 (RC)
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 5:11 AM, Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@gmail.comwrote: Hi all, this is a call for vote on releasing the following release candidate as Apache OpenOffice 4.0. This will be an important release for Apache OpenOffice with bigger visible UI changes. It is a key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice. This release candidate provides the following important changes compared to former OpenOffice releases: (1) a major UI change/improvement by introducing a new sidebar concept where the idea is the comes from IBM's Symphony. It's the combination of reimplementing a complete new framework for sidebars and merging the existing sidebar in impress and code of various content panels from the Symphony grant in OpenOffice. (2) 190 fixes from Symphony are merged and integrated, mainly interoperability issues (3) 600 defects are fixed (4) many more features and improvements are integrated For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Notes . But keep in mind that the release notes are not yet final and will be updated and polished ... The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary releases for 23 languages) and further information how to verify and review Apache OpenOffice 4.0 can be found on the following wiki page: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshot The related RAT scan for this RC can be found under http://people.apache.org/~jsc/aoo-4.0.0_rat/aoo-4.0.0_rat-output.html The RC is based on the release branch AOO400, revision 1502185! Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0. The vote starts now and will be open until: UTC at noon on Monday, 15 July: 2013-07-15 12:00 UTC. But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project members. * [ +1 ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0* [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: upgrades on Linux...
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Mechtilde o...@mechtilde.de wrote: Hello Kay, I already wrote at 29.06.2013 12:50 under Re: [RELEASE]: propose new snapshot build based on rev. 1496831 I did a test in a clean virtualbox under Debian Wheezy 32 bit. First I installed AOO 3.4.1 without problems Then I installed the developer Snapshot from 2013-06-27 with dpkg -i *.deb. This doesn't work proper. I get many errors, for example: openoffice kollidiert mit openoffice.org3 and so on I tried it also with --auto-deconfigure but this doesn't solve all problems. Kind regards Mechtilde Thanks, Mechtilde -- It seems last revisions to fix this were imported on 2013-07-01, and supposedly addressed this. I take from your response that the RC candidate does NOT un-install 3.3 as it should? In my case, I uninstalled 3.4.1 about a month ago due to this problem, and did not reinstall it to test this. Am 14.07.2013 00:09, schrieb Kay Schenk: Has anyone installed in Linux over old 3.4 yet? Please let us know how that went if you did. Also, if you have and keep LO, what happened with that situation? Thanks. -- - MzK Success is falling nine times and getting up ten. -- Jon Bon Jovi
Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit
Hi, Regina Henschel schrieb: Hi Dennis, Dennis E. Hamilton schrieb: I don't quite understand what this means: mark something in Writer and then copy it. Is this about selecting something in Writer and copying it to the clip-board? Yes, that do I mean. Or is there some other action that reproduces this situation. I can test this in Windows 8 x64. That is nice, please do it. The poster has done some cleanup now, installed again, and the error no longer occurs. I have ask him to tell us, what he has done, but have no answer yet. I have the answer now. The mail CAL=LFEz=aGGAK1bwEGYtJdg=qxvd6n8f73gaqd2sb9pw_tn...@mail.gmail.com is not in the archive yet. If you will read the thread there, look for subject AOO400 stürzt beim kopieren ab. (Was: AOO 4.0.0 ReleaseCandidate verfügbar) from Detlef Nannen. Here a copy: quote Ich habe unter AppData\Roaming zwei OO-ConfigOrdner gelöscht, an die ich beim ersten Anlauf nicht gedacht hatte. - AppData\Roaming\3 des vorher deinstallierten AOO341 - AppData\Roaming\4 des parallell installierten AOO400-Snapshots. - Dann noch die Installationsordner unter \Program File(x86) AOO341 und AOO400-Snapshot hatte ich bereits vor der RC-Installation deinstalliert/gelöscht. Ich nehme mal an, dass Otto-Normaluser vorher keinen Snapshot installiert hatte, und somit kein Configordner \4 existiert. Bisher hatte ich die vollen Versionen immer über die alten Versionen drüberinstalliert, und mir nie ein Problem damit eingehandelt (oder bin nie darauf gestoßen). /quote And my translation: I have deleted two OO-Config Folder in AppData\Roaming which I missed in my first attempt. - AppData\Roaming\3 of the previously deinstalled AOO341 - AppData\Roaming\4 of the parallel installed AOO400-Snapshots. - And the installation folders in \Program File(x86) I had deinstalled/deleted AOO341 and AOO400-Snapshot already before RC-Installation. I assume, that an Average Joe user has not installed a snapshot previously and therefore no config folder \4 exists. Up to now I have always installed the full versions over my old versions, and never got problems (or never notice some.) Kind regards Regina Kind regards Regina - Dennis -Original Message- From: Max Merbald [mailto:max.merb...@gmx.de] Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 11:01 AM To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Regina Henschel Subject: Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit Hi Regina, I reported the same thing on June 22, but I couldn't reproduce it the next day. That was not the RC of course but build 9701. I have no idea what caused it. It doesn't happen right now either, I just tried again. Max Am 14.07.2013 19:36, schrieb Regina Henschel: Hi all, there is a mail on the German list, which describes a crash when mark something in Writer and then copy it. (Which would be a show-stopper.) The poster has deinstalled OOo3.4.1 and all previous snapshots and then installed the RC. OS is Windows 8, 64 bit. Can someone test it with this conditions? Unfortunately I haven't got Windows 8. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Irish Dictionary link (from Sandra)
I got a new machine and need to redownload all my programs and dictionaries for Open Office. I used to have your Irish dictionary, and used it frequently. But when I try to download it (and several others, though the GB English and the Spanish loaded fine) I get the following message: Server not found Firefox can't find the server at ftp.services.openoffice.org. Check the address for typing errors such as ww.example.com instead of www.example.com If you are unable to load any pages, check your computer's network connection. If your computer or network is protected by a firewall or proxy, make sure that Firefox is permitted to access the Web. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Irish Dictionary link (from Sandra)
Hi Sandra, Sandra schrieb: I got a new machine and need to redownload all my programs and dictionaries for Open Office. I used to have your Irish dictionary, and used it frequently. But when I try to download it (and several others, though the GB English and the Spanish loaded fine) I get the following message: Server not found Firefox can't find the server at ftp.services.openoffice.org. They are at http://extensions.services.openoffice.org now. The Irish dictionary is at http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/en/project/irish-language-spell-checker-thesaurus-and-hyphenation-patterns Please use the forum http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/ or the mailing-list us...@openoffice.apache.org to get support. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit
I have not been able to duplicate this. I think more information is needed on the exact failure case. (I did encounter a FirstRun OpenOffice 4.0.0 - Fatal Error but that was about dictionary extensions and apparently a bug in the dialog about dictionaries already installed and the option to replace it with the same version or not.) - Dennis -Original Message- From: Max Merbald [mailto:max.merb...@gmx.de] Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 01:34 PM To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; Dennis E. Hamilton Subject: Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit Hello Dennis, it's as you said, you select a part in the text and then you right-click it and click copy, i. e. in my case it happened when I was trying to copy by mouse. But as I said it happened several weeks ago and it hasn't happened again since. My OS is Win8 64 bit too. Max Am 14.07.2013 22:14, schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton: I don't quite understand what this means: mark something in Writer and then copy it. Is this about selecting something in Writer and copying it to the clip-board? Or is there some other action that reproduces this situation. I can test this in Windows 8 x64. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Max Merbald [mailto:max.merb...@gmx.de] Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 11:01 AM To:dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Regina Henschel Subject: Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit Hi Regina, I reported the same thing on June 22, but I couldn't reproduce it the next day. That was not the RC of course but build 9701. I have no idea what caused it. It doesn't happen right now either, I just tried again. Max Am 14.07.2013 19:36, schrieb Regina Henschel: Hi all, there is a mail on the German list, which describes a crash when mark something in Writer and then copy it. (Which would be a show-stopper.) The poster has deinstalled OOo3.4.1 and all previous snapshots and then installed the RC. OS is Windows 8, 64 bit. Can someone test it with this conditions? Unfortunately I haven't got Windows 8. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: autocorrect macro?
that Macro does not work with windows. :( - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
off topic. accessible netflix campaign now has a website.
the accessible Netflix campaign now has a fully functional website! you can view it by going to http://netflixproject.wordpress.com/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: upgrades on Linux...
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Mechtilde o...@mechtilde.de wrote: Hello Kay, I already wrote at 29.06.2013 12:50 under Re: [RELEASE]: propose new snapshot build based on rev. 1496831 I did a test in a clean virtualbox under Debian Wheezy 32 bit. First I installed AOO 3.4.1 without problems Then I installed the developer Snapshot from 2013-06-27 with dpkg -i *.deb. This doesn't work proper. I get many errors, for example: openoffice kollidiert mit openoffice.org3 and so on I tried it also with --auto-deconfigure but this doesn't solve all problems. Kind regards Mechtilde Thanks, Mechtilde -- It seems last revisions to fix this were imported on 2013-07-01, and supposedly addressed this. I take from your response that the RC candidate does NOT un-install 3.3 as it should? For what it's worth, I did test the upgrade scenarios with the RC, with OOo 3.3.0, AOO 3.4.0, AOO 3.4.1 and LO 4.0. But these were all tests on Windows. With 3.3.0, 3.4.0 and 3.4.1 upgrades the old version was correctly removed. But it does leave one empty directory behind: C:\Program Files\OpenOffice.org 3\share\uno_packages\cache\uno_packages This is a minor issue, but I'll enter a BZ issue for it. -Rob Rob -- This is a Linux specific issue: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121968 Next time, I will just keep old versions around (if I can) until RC is announced. From my personal view, knowing the directory changes, I didn't think much of having to do a manual de-installation when I couldn't upgrade so I never even brought it up. I thought we could/should just deal with in Release Notes or something. An assessment mistake on my part. In my case, I uninstalled 3.4.1 about a month ago due to this problem, and did not reinstall it to test this. Am 14.07.2013 00:09, schrieb Kay Schenk: Has anyone installed in Linux over old 3.4 yet? Please let us know how that went if you did. Also, if you have and keep LO, what happened with that situation? Thanks. -- - MzK Success is falling nine times and getting up ten. -- Jon Bon Jovi - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- - MzK Success is falling nine times and getting up ten. -- Jon Bon Jovi
Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Regina Henschel rb.hensc...@t-online.de wrote: Hi, Regina Henschel schrieb: Hi Dennis, Dennis E. Hamilton schrieb: I don't quite understand what this means: mark something in Writer and then copy it. Is this about selecting something in Writer and copying it to the clip-board? Yes, that do I mean. Or is there some other action that reproduces this situation. I can test this in Windows 8 x64. That is nice, please do it. The poster has done some cleanup now, installed again, and the error no longer occurs. I have ask him to tell us, what he has done, but have no answer yet. I have the answer now. The mail CAL=LFEz=aGGAK1bwEGYtJdg=qxvd6n8f73gaqd2sb9pw_tn...@mail.gmail.com is not in the archive yet. If you will read the thread there, look for subject AOO400 stürzt beim kopieren ab. (Was: AOO 4.0.0 ReleaseCandidate verfügbar) from Detlef Nannen. Here a copy: quote Ich habe unter AppData\Roaming zwei OO-ConfigOrdner gelöscht, an die ich beim ersten Anlauf nicht gedacht hatte. - AppData\Roaming\3 des vorher deinstallierten AOO341 - AppData\Roaming\4 des parallell installierten AOO400-Snapshots. - Dann noch die Installationsordner unter \Program File(x86) AOO341 und AOO400-Snapshot hatte ich bereits vor der RC-Installation deinstalliert/gelöscht. Ich nehme mal an, dass Otto-Normaluser vorher keinen Snapshot installiert hatte, und somit kein Configordner \4 existiert. Bisher hatte ich die vollen Versionen immer über die alten Versionen drüberinstalliert, und mir nie ein Problem damit eingehandelt (oder bin nie darauf gestoßen). /quote And my translation: I have deleted two OO-Config Folder in AppData\Roaming which I missed in my first attempt. - AppData\Roaming\3 of the previously deinstalled AOO341 - AppData\Roaming\4 of the parallel installed AOO400-Snapshots. - And the installation folders in \Program File(x86) I had deinstalled/deleted AOO341 and AOO400-Snapshot already before RC-Installation. I assume, that an Average Joe user has not installed a snapshot previously and therefore no config folder \4 exists. Up to now I have always installed the full versions over my old versions, and never got problems (or never notice some.) I'll do some testing tonight. I have two clean VM images, for Windows 8 32-bit and Windows 7 64-bit, that I can install the AOO 4.0 RC on. Since these are fresh images they don't have any residual files from previous AOO installs. I was not able to get a crash with AOO 4.0 RC on Windows 7 64-bit or Windows 8 32-bit. I tested Writer in a document with a mix of objects and formats, doing a lot of editing, formatting, copy/paste and delete operations, including formatting via the Sidepanel. This was the en-US version. So this doesn't look like a shallow crash that everyone will see. But it would be good to narrow it down.For example, has anyone seen it on a non-German version? Is that a clue? Is a particular object involved? I tried also with images, drawings, lists, tables, etc. Was anything more exotic involved? Mine was a clean new install, not an update. But it is hard to imagine a scenario where copy or delete operations behave differently depending on whether the install was an update or not. -Rob -Rob Kind regards Regina Kind regards Regina - Dennis -Original Message- From: Max Merbald [mailto:max.merb...@gmx.de] Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 11:01 AM To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Regina Henschel Subject: Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit Hi Regina, I reported the same thing on June 22, but I couldn't reproduce it the next day. That was not the RC of course but build 9701. I have no idea what caused it. It doesn't happen right now either, I just tried again. Max Am 14.07.2013 19:36, schrieb Regina Henschel: Hi all, there is a mail on the German list, which describes a crash when mark something in Writer and then copy it. (Which would be a show-stopper.) The poster has deinstalled OOo3.4.1 and all previous snapshots and then installed the RC. OS is Windows 8, 64 bit. Can someone test it with this conditions? Unfortunately I haven't got Windows 8. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: Release OpenOffice 4.0 (RC)
Raphael, Is there any specific defect about the crash in selection copy/paste on windows 64 bit that you concern? If yes, could you please tell the Bugzilla ID? Thanks! - Shenfeng (Simon) 2013/7/15 Raphael Bircher r.birc...@gmx.ch -1 We can't release a version with a potential crash in selection copy/paste on windows 64 bit versions. Am 12.07.13 11:11, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt: Hi all, this is a call for vote on releasing the following release candidate as Apache OpenOffice 4.0. This will be an important release for Apache OpenOffice with bigger visible UI changes. It is a key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice. This release candidate provides the following important changes compared to former OpenOffice releases: (1) a major UI change/improvement by introducing a new sidebar concept where the idea is the comes from IBM's Symphony. It's the combination of reimplementing a complete new framework for sidebars and merging the existing sidebar in impress and code of various content panels from the Symphony grant in OpenOffice. (2) 190 fixes from Symphony are merged and integrated, mainly interoperability issues (3) 600 defects are fixed (4) many more features and improvements are integrated For a detailed feature overview please see the release notes under https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** AOO+4.0+Release+Noteshttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Release+Notes . But keep in mind that the release notes are not yet final and will be updated and polished ... The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary releases for 23 languages) and further information how to verify and review Apache OpenOffice 4.0 can be found on the following wiki page: https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** Development+Snapshot+Builds#**DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-**AOOSnapshothttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshot The related RAT scan for this RC can be found under http://people.apache.org/~jsc/**aoo-4.0.0_rat/aoo-4.0.0_rat-**output.htmlhttp://people.apache.org/~jsc/aoo-4.0.0_rat/aoo-4.0.0_rat-output.html The RC is based on the release branch AOO400, revision 1502185! Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0. The vote starts now and will be open until: UTC at noon on Monday, 15 July: 2013-07-15 12:00 UTC. But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project members. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0 [ ] 0 Don't care [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... --**--**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org --**--**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit
Hello Rob, at the time I experienced that crash on Jun 22 in build 9701 no german version was available, just the US American. However, as I said' I haven't been able to reproduce that crash since, neither with build 9701 nor with the RC. And I don't remember which panel I may have used either. It seems it only occurs in very special circumstances. Max Am 15.07.2013 04:30, schrieb Rob Weir: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Regina Henschel rb.hensc...@t-online.de wrote: Hi, Regina Henschel schrieb: Hi Dennis, Dennis E. Hamilton schrieb: I don't quite understand what this means: mark something in Writer and then copy it. Is this about selecting something in Writer and copying it to the clip-board? Yes, that do I mean. Or is there some other action that reproduces this situation. I can test this in Windows 8 x64. That is nice, please do it. The poster has done some cleanup now, installed again, and the error no longer occurs. I have ask him to tell us, what he has done, but have no answer yet. I have the answer now. The mail CAL=LFEz=aGGAK1bwEGYtJdg=qxvd6n8f73gaqd2sb9pw_tn...@mail.gmail.com is not in the archive yet. If you will read the thread there, look for subject AOO400 stürzt beim kopieren ab. (Was: AOO 4.0.0 ReleaseCandidate verfügbar) from Detlef Nannen. Here a copy: quote Ich habe unter AppData\Roaming zwei OO-ConfigOrdner gelöscht, an die ich beim ersten Anlauf nicht gedacht hatte. - AppData\Roaming\3 des vorher deinstallierten AOO341 - AppData\Roaming\4 des parallell installierten AOO400-Snapshots. - Dann noch die Installationsordner unter \Program File(x86) AOO341 und AOO400-Snapshot hatte ich bereits vor der RC-Installation deinstalliert/gelöscht. Ich nehme mal an, dass Otto-Normaluser vorher keinen Snapshot installiert hatte, und somit kein Configordner \4 existiert. Bisher hatte ich die vollen Versionen immer über die alten Versionen drüberinstalliert, und mir nie ein Problem damit eingehandelt (oder bin nie darauf gestoßen). /quote And my translation: I have deleted two OO-Config Folder in AppData\Roaming which I missed in my first attempt. - AppData\Roaming\3 of the previously deinstalled AOO341 - AppData\Roaming\4 of the parallel installed AOO400-Snapshots. - And the installation folders in \Program File(x86) I had deinstalled/deleted AOO341 and AOO400-Snapshot already before RC-Installation. I assume, that an Average Joe user has not installed a snapshot previously and therefore no config folder \4 exists. Up to now I have always installed the full versions over my old versions, and never got problems (or never notice some.) I'll do some testing tonight. I have two clean VM images, for Windows 8 32-bit and Windows 7 64-bit, that I can install the AOO 4.0 RC on. Since these are fresh images they don't have any residual files from previous AOO installs. I was not able to get a crash with AOO 4.0 RC on Windows 7 64-bit or Windows 8 32-bit. I tested Writer in a document with a mix of objects and formats, doing a lot of editing, formatting, copy/paste and delete operations, including formatting via the Sidepanel. This was the en-US version. So this doesn't look like a shallow crash that everyone will see. But it would be good to narrow it down.For example, has anyone seen it on a non-German version? Is that a clue? Is a particular object involved? I tried also with images, drawings, lists, tables, etc. Was anything more exotic involved? Mine was a clean new install, not an update. But it is hard to imagine a scenario where copy or delete operations behave differently depending on whether the install was an update or not. -Rob -Rob Kind regards Regina Kind regards Regina - Dennis -Original Message- From: Max Merbald [mailto:max.merb...@gmx.de] Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 11:01 AM To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Regina Henschel Subject: Re: Installation on Windows 8, 64bit Hi Regina, I reported the same thing on June 22, but I couldn't reproduce it the next day. That was not the RC of course but build 9701. I have no idea what caused it. It doesn't happen right now either, I just tried again. Max Am 14.07.2013 19:36, schrieb Regina Henschel: Hi all, there is a mail on the German list, which describes a crash when mark something in Writer and then copy it. (Which would be a show-stopper.) The poster has deinstalled OOo3.4.1 and all previous snapshots and then installed the RC. OS is Windows 8, 64 bit. Can someone test it with this conditions? Unfortunately I haven't got Windows 8. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional
