Reporting a problem with the OpenOffice Wiki
We can not open these page: https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Drawings/Shape_Types and https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Drawings/General_Drawing_Properties These page are so crucial to our project, we want use Openoffice to translate ppt to json, and now we blocked by shaptypes. Please fix these pages. Thanks a lot ! And we will wait for your reply :D Best regards ! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
[CWiki] Account Whitelisting
Hello, I would like to be whitelisted please. UserName: debra Real Name: Debra McClure Debra McClure McClure Technical Writing http://www.mccluretechnicalwriting.com 512.961.2852 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: How up-to-date are the specified system requirements?
On 12/30/2018 5:20 PM, Mechtilde wrote: > Hello > > Am 30.12.18 um 22:33 schrieb Peter Kovacs: >> I think the requirements are a little outdated on [1] in respect of >> Java. We should recommend actual official Version. From my understanding >> >> I think so far we recognize 1.7 and 1.8. I do not know how OpenOffice >> reacts on 1.9 and 1.10. But I hope on user side it works > 1.9 and 1.10 are outdated next months. The next LTS Version of Java is > version 11. But AOO doesn't work with Java 11 from user side. > > I don't know what we must change so AOO recognize the "Java Runtime". > >> >> With 4.2.0 the requirements on Linux will change but currently the >> agreement is to support Windows XP - Windows 10. >> >> For Mac the install requirement shall also stay stable with 10.07. >> >> On Linux side I think the requirement should be the Linux version and >> glibc of centOS 5 for 4.1.x for 4.2.x we will have to use CentOS 7, >> which sets the minimum for all other installations. > > Regards > Right now AOO on Windows requires a 32 bit version of Java for any functions that require Java. That restricts us to Java Version 1.8 as no 32 bit version of Java exists. Regards Keith signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: How up-to-date are the specified system requirements?
Hello Am 30.12.18 um 22:33 schrieb Peter Kovacs: > I think the requirements are a little outdated on [1] in respect of > Java. We should recommend actual official Version. From my understanding > > I think so far we recognize 1.7 and 1.8. I do not know how OpenOffice > reacts on 1.9 and 1.10. But I hope on user side it works 1.9 and 1.10 are outdated next months. The next LTS Version of Java is version 11. But AOO doesn't work with Java 11 from user side. I don't know what we must change so AOO recognize the "Java Runtime". > > With 4.2.0 the requirements on Linux will change but currently the > agreement is to support Windows XP - Windows 10. > > For Mac the install requirement shall also stay stable with 10.07. > > On Linux side I think the requirement should be the Linux version and > glibc of centOS 5 for 4.1.x for 4.2.x we will have to use CentOS 7, > which sets the minimum for all other installations. Regards -- Mechtilde Stehmann ## Apache OpenOffice ## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows ## Debian Developer ## PGP encryption welcome ## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: How up-to-date are the specified system requirements?
I think the requirements are a little outdated on [1] in respect of Java. We should recommend actual official Version. From my understanding I think so far we recognize 1.7 and 1.8. I do not know how OpenOffice reacts on 1.9 and 1.10. But I hope on user side it works With 4.2.0 the requirements on Linux will change but currently the agreement is to support Windows XP - Windows 10. For Mac the install requirement shall also stay stable with 10.07. On Linux side I think the requirement should be the Linux version and glibc of centOS 5 for 4.1.x for 4.2.x we will have to use CentOS 7, which sets the minimum for all other installations. [1] https://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/source/sys_reqs_aoo41.html On 30.12.18 22:03, Marcus wrote: > Am 30.12.18 um 18:18 schrieb Jörg Schmidt: >> How up to date are the informations on: >> https://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/source/sys_reqs_aoo41.html >> >> Are there any additional hints? >> >> Reason for my questions: I want to update the german installation >> manual [1] in the next days. >> >> [1] >> http://prooo-box.org/live/dokumentation/office/installations_handbuch.pdf >> > > the 4.1.x release branch is a stable one. I don't know of larger > changes that would influence the underlying system and lead to > extended requirements. > > Larger releases as the cooking 4.2.0 is of course difference. Here we > need to have a closer look on the minimum requirements. > > Marcus > > > - > 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: [discussion] get rid of NOT_AN_OOO_ISSUE
On 12/29/18 3:42 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote: On 12/29/2018 12:49 PM, Jörg Schmidt wrote: From: Peter Kovacs [mailto:pe...@apache.org] Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2018 3:17 PM To: dev; users Subject: [discussion] get rid of NOT_AN_OOO_ISSUE Hi all, I would like to get rid of the Resolution "NOT_AN_OOO_ISSUE". This leaves people angry and it is annoying to Copy paste or just rewrite always the same stuff. So I wonder if we could add a component user support, and allocate the users list to it. With that we have a broader community looking at those help requests, and handle them like every other Issue. Also maybe the barrier between developers/testers and user support gets reduced a bit. If it is a bug someone can simply change the component and we can check for reproducibility. Instead of NOT_AN_ISSUE I would like to have FIXED by workaround or something similar. can you take some time and write your opinion? my opinion: Bugzilla is not a support ticket system. If we were to start inviting users (through an appropriate category in Bugzilla) to submit support requests here, we would be creating additional work for ourselves. I don't think there will be more satisfaction through more tolerance in the use of Bugzilla. See the following example: For years, we have tolerated misbehavior by users on the German users mailing list (users...@openoffice.apache.org), and what we achieve is not happy users, but confusion, inefficiency, and frustration among volunteers and users. Sorry, I understand your concern, but I don't think we can solve the problems of misuse of Bugzilla in that way. greetings, Jörg Peter; As Marcus stated earlier NOT_AN_OOO_ISSUE is a valid response to an issue that does not have it's roots in AOO and should be used as such. Bugzilla is a bug tracking system and not an support help desk. Keith I agree with Marcus and Keith on this. Maybe some instructions to the "closer" of the issue would be to direct the reporter to the forums as Dave suggests. -- -- MzK - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: How up-to-date are the specified system requirements?
Am 30.12.18 um 18:18 schrieb Jörg Schmidt: How up to date are the informations on: https://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/source/sys_reqs_aoo41.html Are there any additional hints? Reason for my questions: I want to update the german installation manual [1] in the next days. [1] http://prooo-box.org/live/dokumentation/office/installations_handbuch.pdf the 4.1.x release branch is a stable one. I don't know of larger changes that would influence the underlying system and lead to extended requirements. Larger releases as the cooking 4.2.0 is of course difference. Here we need to have a closer look on the minimum requirements. Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
How up-to-date are the specified system requirements?
Hello, How up to date are the informations on: https://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/source/sys_reqs_aoo41.html Are there any additional hints? Reason for my questions: I want to update the german installation manual [1] in the next days. [1] http://prooo-box.org/live/dokumentation/office/installations_handbuch.pdf greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: Änderungen in Math für "%alpha"?
So, hier die notwendige Schreibung der griechischen Kleinbuchstaben in Math in AOO 4.1.6(de) %Alpha %Beta %Gamma %Delta %Epsilon %Zeta %Eta %Theta %jota %kappa %Lambda %my %ny %xi %omikron %pi %rho %Sigma %Tau %ypsilon %Phi %Chi %Psi %Omega %varepsilon %varsigma %varphi %vartheta %varpi %varrho Gruß Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-de-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-de-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: [discussion] get rid of NOT_AN_OOO_ISSUE
> From: Peter Kovacs [mailto:pe...@apache.org] > Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2018 12:45 PM > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org > Subject: Re: [discussion] get rid of NOT_AN_OOO_ISSUE > > Thanks all for your feedback. I am not so sure the Idea > carries. However > I would go in depth because maybe there is something we can > think about > in the long run. > > Markus wrote: > > > > > I cannot belief that all (or the most) users are really angry / > > annoyed / disappointed. Can you proof that? > > In a subset of cases we closed we had arguments. We also have improved > the closing comment as a reaction, which controls the > outbreak much better. > > One example where we had a cry out has been here: > > https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127855 imho: in this thread you are giving the user a wrong answer. The user asks for the instructions on this dialog (and the corresponding dialog for sending the report): https://docplayer.org/docs-images/25/5692897/images/80-0.png However, you are answering about Bugzilla. Your answer is wrong because you misunderstood the user. That's the problem in the spezific case. Or in other words: the problem is not Bugzilla, but the message dialog of OpenOffice and the question is: Does this dialog still work properly at all? I don't know. > I do also mention this scottish sceptic guy, who ranted exactly on one > of these cases. While I do not want to look to closely on his method I > believe he or in his surrounding someone has been affected by such a > case and he did berserk in an issue and after that on his blog. Do you mean a special blog post? If yes, do you have the link? > The support request is there. It costs effort to move people into the > right channel i.e. Forums. And it is effort to move an issue > that needed > to be first clarified and ended up on Forums to move it to the Channel > of Bugzilla. > > I think we have to discuss ways to reduce this border. I'm with you on this. My experience, however, with regard to such discussions in the German community is unfortunately negative. > I think we need to lower this to improve the recruitment rate. We are > doing pretty bad on this topic in general. I do think that if > more users > are on Bugzilla, maybe they start looking into other stuff. Maybe the > Idea is stupid, and not right. But we need to open ways that > people can > naturally extend their work that they are doing. Maybe my > impression is > also not right, and we need to take care different steps to > activate people. > > For QA on 4.1.6 we had 7 Release Testers. That is thin. Maybe > if people > handle support request they can be more easily activated to handle new > bugs, and then activated for release testing. OK, that's a different perspective. I can't say anything about that at the moment. greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] get rid of NOT_AN_OOO_ISSUE
Thanks all for your feedback. I am not so sure the Idea carries. However I would go in depth because maybe there is something we can think about in the long run. Markus wrote: > > I cannot belief that all (or the most) users are really angry / > annoyed / disappointed. Can you proof that? In a subset of cases we closed we had arguments. We also have improved the closing comment as a reaction, which controls the outbreak much better. One example where we had a cry out has been here: https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127855 I do also mention this scottish sceptic guy, who ranted exactly on one of these cases. While I do not want to look to closely on his method I believe he or in his surrounding someone has been affected by such a case and he did berserk in an issue and after that on his blog. But maybe these cases are not as often as the normal cases. > The resolution was created to make it visible that the reported issue > has its source not in OpenOffice. It has nothing to do with user > support. Maybe it's often used for this but this was/is not intended. True. I think all the cases where a reset of the Profile does resolve the Issue may be wrong to close them as NOT_AN_OOO_ISSUE since the Issue is a corrupted profile. And we do not know the root cause for the corruption. And we should consider in finding out if we can not harden openoffice against this corruption. Most often we do not know if a Issue report has been fixed with profile reset. Jörg wrote: > Bugzilla is not a support ticket system. If we were to start inviting users > (through an appropriate category in Bugzilla) to submit support requests > here, we would be creating additional work for ourselves. The support request is there. It costs effort to move people into the right channel i.e. Forums. And it is effort to move an issue that needed to be first clarified and ended up on Forums to move it to the Channel of Bugzilla. I think we have to discuss ways to reduce this border. I think we need to lower this to improve the recruitment rate. We are doing pretty bad on this topic in general. I do think that if more users are on Bugzilla, maybe they start looking into other stuff. Maybe the Idea is stupid, and not right. But we need to open ways that people can naturally extend their work that they are doing. Maybe my impression is also not right, and we need to take care different steps to activate people. For QA on 4.1.6 we had 7 Release Testers. That is thin. Maybe if people handle support request they can be more easily activated to handle new bugs, and then activated for release testing. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
