Re: About reportbuilder source code
Hello, Ariel. Thank you for quick reply and detailed build switch. I'll try! Thank you. Regards, Shoichiro Yanagida 2015-03-16 10:47 GMT+09:00 Ariel Constenla-Haile : > Hello Shoichiro, > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 09:53:33AM +0900, Shoichiro Yanagida wrote: > > Hi, I'm planning on integrating some functionality of reportbuilder. > > Prior to this, I have to read and understand current source code. > > Is source code of report builder in svn the latest version > > which works with AOO 4.1.1 ? > > > > I've found two versions of oxt binary. > > One is in the official extension site, which unfortunately doesn't work > > with 4.1.1 (menus and toolbars are not shown). > > And the other is in Ariel's, which works with 4.1.1. > > I hope the version in svn is the Ariel's. > > Yes, the source code in the subversion repo is > https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/trunk/main/reportbuilder/ > Unfortunately, you need to checkout and build the whole thing. > I build with the following switches: > > --enable-report-builder \ > --with-sac-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/sac.jar \ > --with-libxml-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/libxml-1.1.7.jar \ > --with-flute-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/flute-1.1.6.jar \ > > --with-jfreereport-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/flow-engine-0.9.4.jar > \ > --with-liblayout-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/liblayout-0.2.10.jar > \ > --with-libloader-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/libloader-1.1.6.jar > \ > --with-libformula-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/libformula-1.1.7.jar > \ > > --with-librepository-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/librepository-1.1.6.jar > \ > --with-libfonts-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/libfonts-1.1.6.jar > \ > > --with-libserializer-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/libserializer-1.1.6.jar > \ > --with-libbase-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/libbase-1.1.6.jar \ > > > Regards > -- > Ariel Constenla-Haile > La Plata, Argentina >
Re: About reportbuilder source code
Hello Shoichiro, On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 09:53:33AM +0900, Shoichiro Yanagida wrote: > Hi, I'm planning on integrating some functionality of reportbuilder. > Prior to this, I have to read and understand current source code. > Is source code of report builder in svn the latest version > which works with AOO 4.1.1 ? > > I've found two versions of oxt binary. > One is in the official extension site, which unfortunately doesn't work > with 4.1.1 (menus and toolbars are not shown). > And the other is in Ariel's, which works with 4.1.1. > I hope the version in svn is the Ariel's. Yes, the source code in the subversion repo is https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/trunk/main/reportbuilder/ Unfortunately, you need to checkout and build the whole thing. I build with the following switches: --enable-report-builder \ --with-sac-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/sac.jar \ --with-libxml-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/libxml-1.1.7.jar \ --with-flute-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/flute-1.1.6.jar \ --with-jfreereport-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/flow-engine-0.9.4.jar \ --with-liblayout-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/liblayout-0.2.10.jar \ --with-libloader-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/libloader-1.1.6.jar \ --with-libformula-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/libformula-1.1.7.jar \ --with-librepository-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/librepository-1.1.6.jar \ --with-libfonts-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/libfonts-1.1.6.jar \ --with-libserializer-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/libserializer-1.1.6.jar \ --with-libbase-jar=/home/ariel/OOo/reportbuilder-deps/libbase-1.1.6.jar \ Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina signature.asc Description: Digital signature
About reportbuilder source code
Hi, I'm planning on integrating some functionality of reportbuilder. Prior to this, I have to read and understand current source code. Is source code of report builder in svn the latest version which works with AOO 4.1.1 ? I've found two versions of oxt binary. One is in the official extension site, which unfortunately doesn't work with 4.1.1 (menus and toolbars are not shown). And the other is in Ariel's, which works with 4.1.1. I hope the version in svn is the Ariel's. Regards, Shoichiro Yanagida
Re: status of ooo-extras?
Kay Schenk wrote:
On 03/15/2015 12:28 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
Are you confusing two different repositories? We have:
1) http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/trunk/ext_sources/
This is for dependencies that are under a compatible license
2) OOO Extras in its current form at Google Code or SourceForge
http://sourceforge.net/projects/oooextras.mirror/files/
This is for optional dependencies that are not under a compatible license
What I see in 2) is what we have in 1).
Well, #1 contains 28 files while #2 contains 64 files, so there is some
difference. If I understand it correctly, files in the first section of
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/trunk/main/external_deps.lst?revision=1654306&view=markup
are stored in #1 (but they may be mirrored on #2 too, contrary to what I
wrote earlier) while those in the second section ("Category B") are
stored in #2 only.
But I am mistaken in saying 2) does not contain updates to what we have
in 1). It does! I thought maybe this had not taken place just be looking
at the Modified Date.
Anyway, this space needs to be brought under the project's control (this
one or a new one without .mirror in the name) if we want to use it
permanently.
Regards,
Andrea.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: status of ooo-extras?
On 03/15/2015 12:28 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > On 15/03/2015 Kay Schenk wrote: >> There seems to be renewed interest in the SourceForge solution for >> Apache Extras from an older discussion on d...@community.apache.org. > > Yes, since we are now sure that Google Code is shutting down in early > 2016. So migration is no longer something that can happen at an > indefinite point in future. > >> From this response in that thread -- >> http://markmail.org/message/3opx3vohevs7bdzx >> it seems AOO has decided on the SF solution, yes? > > Well, you committed the change; I pointed out on this list that this > needed consensus; we had no other discussions, so we can assume lazy > consensus. Anyway, Google Code is really no longer an option. > >> If so, what do we need to do to get actual syncing to happen with >> /trunk/ext_sources? Some external sources have been updated within the >> last 2 months, and this does not seem to be reflected in the listing at: >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/oooextras.mirror/files/ > > Are you confusing two different repositories? We have: > > 1) http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/trunk/ext_sources/ > This is for dependencies that are under a compatible license > > 2) OOO Extras in its current form at Google Code or SourceForge > http://sourceforge.net/projects/oooextras.mirror/files/ > This is for optional dependencies that are not under a compatible license What I see in 2) is what we have in 1). But I am mistaken in saying 2) does not contain updates to what we have in 1). It does! I thought maybe this had not taken place just be looking at the Modified Date. So, sorry for the unnecessary yammering. :/ > > There shouldn't be common packages between the two. And I don't think we > updated anything in 2 (since the one on Google Code has been read-only > for months and the one at SourceForge only had one update, the one you > did relatively recently). We have a few to 1) (now also reflected in 2) )since last Nov. > > Regards, > Andrea. > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > -- - MzK “What is the point of being alive if you don't at least try to do something remarkable?” -- John Green, "An Abundance of Katherines" - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: status of ooo-extras?
On 15/03/2015 Kay Schenk wrote: There seems to be renewed interest in the SourceForge solution for Apache Extras from an older discussion on d...@community.apache.org. Yes, since we are now sure that Google Code is shutting down in early 2016. So migration is no longer something that can happen at an indefinite point in future. From this response in that thread -- http://markmail.org/message/3opx3vohevs7bdzx it seems AOO has decided on the SF solution, yes? Well, you committed the change; I pointed out on this list that this needed consensus; we had no other discussions, so we can assume lazy consensus. Anyway, Google Code is really no longer an option. If so, what do we need to do to get actual syncing to happen with /trunk/ext_sources? Some external sources have been updated within the last 2 months, and this does not seem to be reflected in the listing at: http://sourceforge.net/projects/oooextras.mirror/files/ Are you confusing two different repositories? We have: 1) http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/trunk/ext_sources/ This is for dependencies that are under a compatible license 2) OOO Extras in its current form at Google Code or SourceForge http://sourceforge.net/projects/oooextras.mirror/files/ This is for optional dependencies that are not under a compatible license There shouldn't be common packages between the two. And I don't think we updated anything in 2 (since the one on Google Code has been read-only for months and the one at SourceForge only had one update, the one you did relatively recently). Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: status of ooo-extras?
On 03/03/2015 03:15 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: > Do we have any further information on moving ooo-extras (backups of > external libraries) or any extras to SourceForge and what form this > might take? Latest discussion -- > > http://markmail.org/message/xfiafpfvhvbe4tiv > > We've updated at least 2 libraries already and more will likely be needed. > > In the absence of a decision on this, should we just use URL1 for these > and not include a URL2 at all? > > As I mentioned previously, I'm still been computing MD5 on the new ones > and putting them in /ext_sources. > There seems to be renewed interest in the SourceForge solution for Apache Extras from an older discussion on d...@community.apache.org. >From this response in that thread -- http://markmail.org/message/3opx3vohevs7bdzx it seems AOO has decided on the SF solution, yes? If so, what do we need to do to get actual syncing to happen with /trunk/ext_sources? Some external sources have been updated within the last 2 months, and this does not seem to be reflected in the listing at: http://sourceforge.net/projects/oooextras.mirror/files/ -- - MzK “What is the point of being alive if you don't at least try to do something remarkable?” -- John Green, "An Abundance of Katherines" - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DEVTOOLS][EXT] Update to Netbeans plugin
Hi Carl,
I have tried (yesterday) the 4.1.0 version of the plugin (update from 4.0.6) to
rebuild an extension I wrote last summer in Java. It has worked fine and I
haven't encountered any problems or unexpected behavior.
Platform:
* Netbeans 8.0.2 Patch 1
* Windows 8.1 64-bit edition
* Java 1.8.0_40 (32-bit)
* OpenOffice 4.1.1
Note however that I have been building my extension, which relies on Jackson
jars, with version 4.0.6 of the Netbeans plugin, without a problem. That
version (4.0.6) had been posted to this very mailing list by Jürgen mid-June
2014. The jars were embedded in the oxt file without any actions on my part. I
was expecting to do something, for instance add some references to files to
include somewhere but I never had to. That was a pleasant surprise, which I
believe prompted me back then (June, July or August), to update a page on the
OO Wiki to add some information about what to do in order to have dependencies
embedded in oxt files.
Anyway, what I mean is that the problem (of external jars not being available
in the build artifact) that you reported in an e-mail from October 2014, well,
it didn't occur in my case.
Thanks,
-Amenel.
De : Carl Marcum
À : a...@openoffice.apache.org; "dev@openoffice.apache.org"
Envoyé le : Mardi 10 mars 2015 11h07
Objet : Re: [DEVTOOLS][EXT] Update to Netbeans plugin
On 12/10/2014 09:10 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I ran into an issue when trying to create an UNO client application
> with the Netbeans plugin.
>
> External library jars were not added to dist/lib or the jar manifest
> during build.
>
> This problem appeared to be related to this issue [1].
>
> I have added the following to UNOClientAppProject template
> build-uno-impl.xml jar target that overrides jar target in build-impl.xml
> -do-jar-without-libraries,-do-jar-with-libraries
> This adds library jars to /dist/lib and also Class Path entries in jar
> manifest for client applications.
>
> Existing projects created prior should be able to change the jar
> target to include them.
> Line 27 in nbproject/build-uno-impl.xml
> depends="-uno-project-init,compile,-pre-jar,-do-jar-jar,-do-jar-without-libraries,-do-jar-with-libraries,-do-openoffice-manifest,-post-jar">
> manifest="${build.dir}/MANIFEST.MF" filesonly="true" compress="true"
> jarfile="${dist.jar}">
>
>
>
>
> I have updated the plugin to version 4.1.0 to better reflect the AOO
> SDK version compatibility.
>
> A compiled version can be found here [2]
>
> [1] http://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=78645
> [2]
> http://people.apache.org/~cmarcum/devtools/org-openoffice-extensions-4.1.0.nbm
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: api-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: api-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
Has anyone tried this update with an UNO client app or otherwise?
If so, on what platform?
Thanks,
Carl
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: api-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: api-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Summary
On 15/03/15 02:57, Andrew Pitonyak wrote: > Take a look at what wikipedia has to say. It looks like in the EU email > disclaimers are useless. No idea how accurate that is. Wikipedia: The home of that which people would like to be true, even in the face of objective reality which proves it to be otherwise. What he hasn't figured out yet, is that he needs to explicitly invoke the "right to be forgotten", in each individual request to each and every archive in Europe, as well as to every organization that has a presence in Europe, and also maintains a _public_ archive. If he wishes to explore the law in regards to private archives, he can do so, but it will cost him a very pretty penny, for very little, if any reward. At least, I think that it is _the right to be forgotten_ that he is trying to invoke here. There is a tie-in between those disclaimers, and the right to be forgotten, but reliance on the former to achieve the latter is a very risky business. BTW, he still doesn't appear to be using "X-No-Archive" or "X-Archive" headers. Either of which would reinforce his claim to the right to be forgotten. Furthermore some archives still honour them. jonathon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
