Re: Reporting a problem with the OpenOffice website

[Dave Barton]

 Original Message  
From: Michał Mulawa 
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 10:53:32 +0200

> Hi
> so i wanted to upgrade my OpenOffice from 3.31 to 4.0. I landed on the
> following url: http://www.openoffice.org/download/ . There are 3 main
> things on that page: share via facebook/twitter/googlePlus, browse
> addons, browse templates. But I don't want any of theese, I just want to
> download the installer. there is no easy-to-find link to do so. I
> suppose it shows up after i share it on FB/etc, bot I dont't have any
> account on any of them. Even if I had an account, why would you force me
> to share such an information?
> 
> the "download page" without the actual download link makes no sense, I
> hope you fix this...
> 
> 
> regards,
> mike

Do you not see a large green button that says:
"Download Apache OpenOffice 4.0.0
 Click here for the most recent version for:
  and "

If  and/or  are not correct click
the "Get all platforms, languages, language packs." link and select the
appropriate option from the table there:
http://www.openoffice.org/download/other.html

You are not subscribed to this list. I have cc'd you as a courtesy,
please reply only to the list.

Regards
Dave



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [WWW]Outdated links on support page?

[Dave Barton]

Ricardo Berlasso wrote:
> On the EN support page(1) there are links to "Tutorials for OpenOffice",
> "OpenOfficeSchool" and "8daysaweek".
> 
> AFAIK, the first two resources are not being maintained since several years
> while 8daysaweek site have a big picture on the main page telling that the
> site is now closed(2).
> 
> (1) http://www.openoffice.org/support/index.html
> (2) http://www.8daysaweek.co.uk/
> 
> It seems a cleaning is needed. What do you think? Somebody knows about
> other sites with more updated content on English (I know a couple on
> Spanish)?
> 
> Regards
> Ricardo

Did you consider contacting them to find out the current situation?

Obviously there is no point contacting "8daysaweek", because their home
page makes it clear.

"Tutorials for OpenOffice" is now being worked on, but there is a lot of
material to be updated, so don't expect to see immediate changes. This
site also handles a number of support questions every day.

I am awaiting a reply from "OpenOfficeSchool".

It is a shame that the ecosystem that surrounded the original
OpenOffice.org project appears to be fading away. I have done some
fairly thorough checking and there does not seem to be any new English
sites coming on-line.

Regards
Dave



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Unnecesary filestructure on images

[Dave Fisher]

On Aug 13, 2013, at 5:57 PM, Alexandro Colorado wrote:

> On 8/13/13, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>> 
>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 4:07 PM, Alexandro Colorado wrote:
>> 
>>> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 5:04 PM, Dave Fisher 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Speaking of a confusing email exchange. This is difficult for busy
>>>> people
>>>> in the last 24 hours how many messages have been posted? A lot. By how
>>>> many
>>>> people? Not many and most by one person.
>>>> 
>>>> Did anyone create a CWiki page to outline an actual proposal and
>>>> possible
>>>> variations?
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> ​I created this page:
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/File+handling+proposal+for+logos+and+graphics
>> 
>> I edited the root files and made it into a table where the disposition of
>> each file and folder can be developed and approved.
> 
> ok but I do believe this proposal was for images and logo, and adding
> all the other directories put some overhead to what the proposal is
> about. I did include the files to identify possible conventions.

We can separate the two or we can expand this into an overall ooo-site cleanup. 
Agree to the plan and then individuals can divide and conquer.

I think that the tabular format is one qw should consider it will allow for a 
clear description of the plan. Redirection of old names to new could be helpful 
for name changes.

Also, decisions made could easily effect various NL sites. We really need to be 
very deliberate here. 

Regards,
Dave



> 
>> 
>> Please don't overwrite it. Allow others to contribute. I suggest a similar
>> format for other directories.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>> 
>>> ​
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I would like to know what the delta is from what we are doing now to any
>>>> new state in order to see if I agree or have another choice.
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Dave
>>>> 
>>>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 2:04 PM, Alexandro Colorado wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 8/13/13, Ricardo Berlasso  wrote:
>>>>>> 2013/8/13 Alexandro Colorado 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 8/13/13, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Alexandro Colorado 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 8:25 AM, Rob Weir 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 7:49 PM, Alexandro Colorado
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Rob Weir 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 1:35 AM, Alexandro Colorado
>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the image structure on the website is a bit messy,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>>>>> some cleanup done by kschenk but I think there is still a lot
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> clean up
>>>>>>>>>>>>> work to be done.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, the new logo, was simply draged and drop to the
>>>>>>>>> AOOLogos
>>>>>>>>>>>>> folder with a huge name. I understand the name was needed to
>>>>>>>>> identify
>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> between the rest of the competitive logos. But now that is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> selected,
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> current name is unecessary long.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_selected_2013-06_optim_300w.png<
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>

Re: Unnecesary filestructure on images

[Dave Fisher]

On Aug 13, 2013, at 4:07 PM, Alexandro Colorado wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 5:04 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
>> Speaking of a confusing email exchange. This is difficult for busy people
>> in the last 24 hours how many messages have been posted? A lot. By how many
>> people? Not many and most by one person.
>> 
>> Did anyone create a CWiki page to outline an actual proposal and possible
>> variations?
>> 
> 
> ​I created this page:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/File+handling+proposal+for+logos+and+graphics

I edited the root files and made it into a table where the disposition of each 
file and folder can be developed and approved.

Please don't overwrite it. Allow others to contribute. I suggest a similar 
format for other directories.

Regards,
Dave

> ​
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> I would like to know what the delta is from what we are doing now to any
>> new state in order to see if I agree or have another choice.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>> 
>> On Aug 13, 2013, at 2:04 PM, Alexandro Colorado wrote:
>> 
>>> On 8/13/13, Ricardo Berlasso  wrote:
>>>> 2013/8/13 Alexandro Colorado 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 8/13/13, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Alexandro Colorado 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 8:25 AM, Rob Weir 
>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 7:49 PM, Alexandro Colorado 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Rob Weir 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 1:35 AM, Alexandro Colorado
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> 
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I think the image structure on the website is a bit messy,
>>>>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>>> some cleanup done by kschenk but I think there is still a lot
>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> clean up
>>>>>>>>>>> work to be done.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> For example, the new logo, was simply draged and drop to the
>>>>>>> AOOLogos
>>>>>>>>>>> folder with a huge name. I understand the name was needed to
>>>>>>> identify
>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>> between the rest of the competitive logos. But now that is
>>>>>>>>>>> selected,
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> current name is unecessary long.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_selected_2013-06_optim_300w.png<
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/images/AOO_logos/Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_selected_2013-06_optim_300w.png?view=log
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Right.  That work is incomplete.  I checked it in originally,
>>>>>>>>>> after
>>>>>>>>>> the logo vote, so we could start working on the product
>>>>>>>>>> integration
>>>>>>>>>> immediately.  But note that the above logo is not the one we
>>>>>>>>>> actually
>>>>>>>>>> used in AOO 4.0 !!
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> The one we actually used is this one:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branding/Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_selected_2013-06_Inkscape_kg.svg
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> This was Chris R's contest logo with some minor technical
>>>>>>>>>> changes.
>>>

Re: Unnecesary filestructure on images

[Dave Fisher]

Speaking of a confusing email exchange. This is difficult for busy people in 
the last 24 hours how many messages have been posted? A lot. By how many 
people? Not many and most by one person.

Did anyone create a CWiki page to outline an actual proposal and possible 
variations?

I would like to know what the delta is from what we are doing now to any new 
state in order to see if I agree or have another choice.

Regards,
Dave

On Aug 13, 2013, at 2:04 PM, Alexandro Colorado wrote:

> On 8/13/13, Ricardo Berlasso  wrote:
>> 2013/8/13 Alexandro Colorado 
>> 
>>> On 8/13/13, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Alexandro Colorado 
>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 8:25 AM, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 7:49 PM, Alexandro Colorado 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Rob Weir 
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 1:35 AM, Alexandro Colorado
>>>>>>>> >>> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I think the image structure on the website is a bit messy,
>>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>> some cleanup done by kschenk but I think there is still a lot
>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>> clean up
>>>>>>>>> work to be done.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> For example, the new logo, was simply draged and drop to the
>>>>> AOOLogos
>>>>>>>>> folder with a huge name. I understand the name was needed to
>>>>> identify
>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>> between the rest of the competitive logos. But now that is
>>>>>>>>> selected,
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> current name is unecessary long.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_selected_2013-06_optim_300w.png<
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/images/AOO_logos/Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_selected_2013-06_optim_300w.png?view=log
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Right.  That work is incomplete.  I checked it in originally,
>>>>>>>> after
>>>>>>>> the logo vote, so we could start working on the product
>>>>>>>> integration
>>>>>>>> immediately.  But note that the above logo is not the one we
>>>>>>>> actually
>>>>>>>> used in AOO 4.0 !!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The one we actually used is this one:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branding/Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_selected_2013-06_Inkscape_kg.svg
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> This was Chris R's contest logo with some minor technical
>>>>>>>> changes.
>>>>>>>> Kevin G. used this and generated the PNG/JPG files for AOO 4.0,
>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>> I helped check in.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> My intent was to take that SVG and rename it to
>>> "master-logo-40.svg"
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Again I think we do need a convention for a "logo.svg" as opposed
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> ending with a logo-30.svg logo-40.svg logo-50.svg. An just
>>>>> incrementally
>>>>>>> replace with the future logos as we update the SVG.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Here's the complication:   The old logos are still relevant some
>>>>>> some
>>>>>> purposes.  For example, the PMC receives ongoing requests to approve
>>>>>> use of the old OpenOffice.org logo.  Why would that happen?  Often
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> is a request by publishers who are making an e-book version

Re: Unnecesary filestructure on images

[Dave Fisher]

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 11, 2013, at 3:52 PM, Alexandro Colorado  wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> On Aug 11, 2013, at 2:26 PM, Alexandro Colorado  wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> 
>>>> On Aug 11, 2013, at 1:35 AM, Alexandro Colorado  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I think the image structure on the website is a bit messy, there has
>> been
>>>>> some cleanup done by kschenk but I think there is still a lot of clean
>> up
>>>>> work to be done.
>>>>> 
>>>>> For example, the new logo, was simply draged and drop to the AOOLogos
>>>>> folder with a huge name. I understand the name was needed to identify
>> it
>>>>> between the rest of the competitive logos. But now that is selected,
>> the
>>>>> current name is unecessary long.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_selected_2013-06_optim_300w.png<
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/images/AOO_logos/Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_selected_2013-06_optim_300w.png?view=log
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> At the same time we have old logos which had been untouch. I think the
>>>>> webdevs have small understanding of a svn is builted so that the files
>>>> are
>>>>> updated without having different versions laying arround.
>>>> 
>>>> This is not so. I can assure you that I completely understand SVN and
>> VCS.
>>>> 
>>>> Choices were made to be non disruptive. Changing logos for the site is
>>>> handled in exactly one spot. This means different names for different
>>>> versions is entirely appropriate.
>>> 
>>> ​I can't imagine this 'non disruptive' happening in code as well and
>> having
>>> different librarries with different classes and different names attached
>> to
>>> the libraries. Like all of the sudden you have 5 ColumnControlWindow.cxx
>> it
>>> would now be ColumnControlWindow_joes_selected_20130218.cxx attached to
>>> previous 5 different alternatives of the .cxx file. ​
>> 
>> We are discussing the website and the work that Kay and I did during the
>> move to Apache. Remember you referred to webdevs not understanding svn.
> 
> ​Ok I understand how this came to be now, and I can see the point on legacy
> files. However this practice would eventually need some reorganization.
> Hopefully this reorganization is today.
> 
> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Over this
>>>>> example, ooo-logo.png and
>>>>> AOO4_website_logo.png<
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/images/AOO_logos/AOO4_website_logo.png?view=log
>>>>> exist.
>>>> 
>>>> The logos differ. The names differ.
>>> 
>>> ​The logos are outdated and obosolete, they should only exist in the
>>> revsion history, and maybe on a different archieved section with a more
>>> detailed metadata instead of cludgy filename. Something like:
>>> 
>>> svn log:
>>> logo.png  rev123222 AOO 4 for website selected from contest...
>>>rev123221 AOO logo 3.4.1 under apache brand
>>>rev123220 OOo Oracle branding for .. ​
>> 
>> Kay has proposed and created a canonical location for logos and original
>> art. You suggested that some standards for sizes and names be applied, we
>> await a concrete proposal.
> 
> There are two different locations for the logos at the moment afaik,
> $root/images/ and $root/marketing/art/galleries/logos/aoo-working/​
> 
> The second one is for art-related activities, and I can see how handling
> multiple work would make use of a large file name.
> 
> For the first one, which are webdev related, I don't see the benefit of
> holding such filenames or even multiple filenames. So yes, a cannonical
> location and standarized convention for  the different rasterize images as
> well as a clear distinction to the source file.
> 
> for unknown reasons, I am unable to access cwiki, getting a permission
> error to even see my own profile in confluence. I dont see a component for
> infra on bugzilla, should it go on Jira?
> 

There may be a Apache infra wiki upgrade in progress. I'm traveling and will 
check la

Re: Websites headers (forum, wiki, main site, ...)

[Dave Fisher]

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 11, 2013, at 3:54 PM, Alexandro Colorado  wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 3:16 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> On Aug 11, 2013, at 3:04 PM, Alexandro Colorado  wrote:
>> 
>>> There is also other sites like extensions, www and openoffice.apache.org
>> ,
>>> blog, templates. We have a new logo, which means the sites need to be
>>> updated.
>>> 
>>> Since AOO hasn't really mature to the old OOo days where there was a
>>> dedicated webdev project to handle all sites, is clear there needs to be
>>> some initiative from somewhere to perform this mantainance.
>>> 
>>> So the status is:
>>> blog, www, extensions and o...@apache.org have the new logo
>>> templates, forum, wiki, forum index still on the old logo or don't have
>> the
>>> previous logo at all.
>>> 
>>> I develop an incremental adaptation of the logo to perform a similar font
>>> to the new logo which uses Sans Pro. But kept the 3 gulls artwork. Andrea
>>> recomended to replace the 3 gulls with the orb.
>> 
>> Why would you change the font? And what did you change it too?
> 
> ​https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122998#c0
> ​

The bugzilla does not answer my question.

You used two fonts what are they and what is the license?

IIRC open sans is Apache licensed. Why change?


> 
> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> An issue has been put in place on bugzilla #122998 with all the samples
>> and
>>> sources.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Hagar Delest >> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> The question was raised in another thread but better have a dedicated
>> one.
>>>> 
>>>> What is the status with the headers exactly? A user will certainly
>> visit 3
>>>> areas first: the main site, then the wiki and the forum. Today they
>> have 3
>>>> different headers. As pointed out by Andrea, we need a consistent
>> branding
>>>> to give users a kind of security feeling.
>>>> 
>>>> I've made a dedicated topic in the forum showing the 3 current headers
>> and
>>>> a proposal I've made very quickly: http://forum.openoffice.org/**
>>>> en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=**63523<
>> http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=63523>
>>>> No need to register to see it so have a look.
>>>> The point is: we should have the same branding (icon + text) at least
>> for
>>>> every areas, at the same location.
>>>> 
>>>> Hagar
>> --**--**-
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
>> dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Alexandro Colorado
>>> Apache OpenOffice Contributor
>>> http://www.openoffice.org
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> 
> 
> -- 
> Alexandro Colorado
> Apache OpenOffice Contributor
> http://www.openoffice.org

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Websites headers (forum, wiki, main site, ...)

[Dave Fisher]

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 11, 2013, at 3:04 PM, Alexandro Colorado  wrote:

> There is also other sites like extensions, www and openoffice.apache.org,
> blog, templates. We have a new logo, which means the sites need to be
> updated.
> 
> Since AOO hasn't really mature to the old OOo days where there was a
> dedicated webdev project to handle all sites, is clear there needs to be
> some initiative from somewhere to perform this mantainance.
> 
> So the status is:
> blog, www, extensions and o...@apache.org have the new logo
> templates, forum, wiki, forum index still on the old logo or don't have the
> previous logo at all.
> 
> I develop an incremental adaptation of the logo to perform a similar font
> to the new logo which uses Sans Pro. But kept the 3 gulls artwork. Andrea
> recomended to replace the 3 gulls with the orb.

Why would you change the font? And what did you change it too?

> 
> An issue has been put in place on bugzilla #122998 with all the samples and
> sources.
> 
> 
> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Hagar Delest wrote:
> 
>> The question was raised in another thread but better have a dedicated one.
>> 
>> What is the status with the headers exactly? A user will certainly visit 3
>> areas first: the main site, then the wiki and the forum. Today they have 3
>> different headers. As pointed out by Andrea, we need a consistent branding
>> to give users a kind of security feeling.
>> 
>> I've made a dedicated topic in the forum showing the 3 current headers and
>> a proposal I've made very quickly: http://forum.openoffice.org/**
>> en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=**63523
>> No need to register to see it so have a look.
>> The point is: we should have the same branding (icon + text) at least for
>> every areas, at the same location.
>> 
>> Hagar
>> 
>> --**--**-
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> 
> 
> -- 
> Alexandro Colorado
> Apache OpenOffice Contributor
> http://www.openoffice.org

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Unnecesary filestructure on images

[Dave Fisher]

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 11, 2013, at 2:26 PM, Alexandro Colorado  wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> On Aug 11, 2013, at 1:35 AM, Alexandro Colorado  wrote:
>> 
>>> I think the image structure on the website is a bit messy, there has been
>>> some cleanup done by kschenk but I think there is still a lot of clean up
>>> work to be done.
>>> 
>>> For example, the new logo, was simply draged and drop to the AOOLogos
>>> folder with a huge name. I understand the name was needed to identify it
>>> between the rest of the competitive logos. But now that is selected, the
>>> current name is unecessary long.
>>> 
>>> Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_selected_2013-06_optim_300w.png<
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/images/AOO_logos/Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_selected_2013-06_optim_300w.png?view=log
>>> 
>>> 
>>> At the same time we have old logos which had been untouch. I think the
>>> webdevs have small understanding of a svn is builted so that the files
>> are
>>> updated without having different versions laying arround.
>> 
>> This is not so. I can assure you that I completely understand SVN and VCS.
>> 
>> Choices were made to be non disruptive. Changing logos for the site is
>> handled in exactly one spot. This means different names for different
>> versions is entirely appropriate.
> 
> ​I can't imagine this 'non disruptive' happening in code as well and having
> different librarries with different classes and different names attached to
> the libraries. Like all of the sudden you have 5 ColumnControlWindow.cxx it
> would now be ColumnControlWindow_joes_selected_20130218.cxx attached to
> previous 5 different alternatives of the .cxx file. ​

We are discussing the website and the work that Kay and I did during the move 
to Apache. Remember you referred to webdevs not understanding svn.

> 
> 
>> 
>>> Over this
>>> example, ooo-logo.png and
>>> AOO4_website_logo.png<
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/images/AOO_logos/AOO4_website_logo.png?view=log
>>> exist.
>> 
>> The logos differ. The names differ.
> 
> ​The logos are outdated and obosolete, they should only exist in the
> revsion history, and maybe on a different archieved section with a more
> detailed metadata instead of cludgy filename. Something like:
> 
> svn log:
> logo.png  rev123222 AOO 4 for website selected from contest...
> rev123221 AOO logo 3.4.1 under apache brand
> rev123220 OOo Oracle branding for .. ​
> 

Kay has proposed and created a canonical location for logos and original art. 
You suggested that some standards for sizes and names be applied, we await a 
concrete proposal.


> 
> 
>> 
>> If we are looking to provide a canonical path to a single current logo for
>> third party use then that is a different question
>> 
>>> All these proliferation of logos, usually will built up to become
>>> incredibly messy to work. I suggest to put the information such as
>> author,
>>> version, status, etc. on the comments of the commit and not on the
>>> filename.
>> 
>> I agree that the name is long, changing it would be simple, but to what?
> 
> ​Is unnecesary long.​ K.I.S.S. PNG and SVG have metadata exactly for issues
> like this. Imagemagic can just do something like
> 
> convert logo.png -set Title "Apache OpenOffice 4" -set Author "ChrisR" 
> logo.png
> 
> identify -verbose logo.png |grep Title
> 
>   Title: Apache OpenOffice 4
> 
> ​​
> 
> ​http://blog.client9.com/2007/08/editing-png-metadata-from-command-line.html

Add it to a list of proposed actions to be discussed.

The cwiki is provided for this purpose.

I don't disagree, but it is absolutely necessary to proceed in an open manner.

Regards,
Dave


> ​
> 
>> 
>> Author is the committer and if they are representing others contribution
>> then they can easily indicate that is so.
>> 
>> If creating a PNG based on an SVG then include the SVG path in the comment.
>> 
>>> Likewise to take the time to look for the source of the image,
>>> since there is an SVG/ folder to link the source of them, and finally if
>>> there are different images (sizes) to have a common convention.
>> 
>> If you would like to discuss common conventions and sizes then please
>> create a cwiki p

Re: Unnecesary filestructure on images

[Dave Fisher]

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 11, 2013, at 1:35 AM, Alexandro Colorado  wrote:

> I think the image structure on the website is a bit messy, there has been
> some cleanup done by kschenk but I think there is still a lot of clean up
> work to be done.
> 
> For example, the new logo, was simply draged and drop to the AOOLogos
> folder with a huge name. I understand the name was needed to identify it
> between the rest of the competitive logos. But now that is selected, the
> current name is unecessary long.
> 
> Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_selected_2013-06_optim_300w.png<http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/images/AOO_logos/Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_selected_2013-06_optim_300w.png?view=log>
> 
> At the same time we have old logos which had been untouch. I think the
> webdevs have small understanding of a svn is builted so that the files are
> updated without having different versions laying arround.

This is not so. I can assure you that I completely understand SVN and VCS.

Choices were made to be non disruptive. Changing logos for the site is handled 
in exactly one spot. This means different names for different versions is 
entirely appropriate.

> Over this
> example, ooo-logo.png and
> AOO4_website_logo.png<http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/images/AOO_logos/AOO4_website_logo.png?view=log>exist.
> 

The logos differ. The names differ. 

If we are looking to provide a canonical path to a single current logo for 
third party use then that is a different question

> All these proliferation of logos, usually will built up to become
> incredibly messy to work. I suggest to put the information such as author,
> version, status, etc. on the comments of the commit and not on the
> filename.

I agree that the name is long, changing it would be simple, but to what?

Author is the committer and if they are representing others contribution then 
they can easily indicate that is so.

If creating a PNG based on an SVG then include the SVG path in the comment.

>  Likewise to take the time to look for the source of the image,
> since there is an SVG/ folder to link the source of them, and finally if
> there are different images (sizes) to have a common convention.

If you would like to discuss common conventions and sizes then please create a 
cwiki page and start a new thread.

> 
> If you want to review the images please go here:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/images/AOO_logos/

Regards,
Dave
> 
> -- 
> Alexandro Colorado
> Apache OpenOffice Contributor
> http://www.openoffice.org

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: OpenOffice Multi-User Settings

[Dave Barton]

Sorry Oliver. Clicked send before correcting the recipient list.

Copy to Lira Diocese - Non-Subscribed Poster

 Original Message  
From: Oliver Brinzing 
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2013 15:10:56 +0200

> Hi Lira,
> 
>> default. Is there a way that I can enter the settings from the server and
>> it reflects on all the user accounts? or it has to be done for every user
>> account allover again?
> 
> you can edit the files "calc.xcd", "writer.xcd" and "impress.xcd" in
> "C:\Program Files (x86)\OpenOffice 4\share\registry" for example:
> 
> from: writer8
> to:MS Word 97
> 
> from  calc8
> to:MS Excel 97
> 
> from: impress8
> to:MS PowerPoint 
> 97
> 
> but be carefull - make a copy first and use a  xml editor ;-)
> 
> Regards
> 
> Oliver


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: OpenOffice Multi-User Settings

[Dave Barton]

Copy to Lira Diocese - Non-Subscribed Poster

 Original Message  
From: Oliver Brinzing 
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2013 15:10:56 +0200

> Hi Lira,
> 
>> default. Is there a way that I can enter the settings from the server and
>> it reflects on all the user accounts? or it has to be done for every user
>> account allover again?
> 
> you can edit the files "calc.xcd", "writer.xcd" and "impress.xcd" in
> "C:\Program Files (x86)\OpenOffice 4\share\registry" for example:
> 
> from: writer8
> to:MS Word 97
> 
> from  calc8
> to:MS Excel 97
> 
> from: impress8
> to:MS PowerPoint 
> 97
> 
> but be carefull - make a copy first and use a  xml editor ;-)
> 
> Regards
> 
> Oliver


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: removal problem

[Dave Barton]

Copy to Peter Lindqvist - Non-Subscribed Poster

Rory O'Farrell wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 10:51:10 +0200
> Peter Lindqvist  wrote:
>
>> Dear Sir/Madam!
>>
>> I installed an update for Open Office one week ago and there came som 
>> unwanted programs with it.
>>
>> On of theese is really annoying and i need guiding help to uninstall it.
>>
>> It is QV6, som kind of add on that infected IE 10 and Firefox. Firefox I 
>> reinstalled and the problem were fixed there, but with IE10 I just don't 
>> se any solution. Do You?
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Peter Lindqvist, Svaengsta, Sweden
>>
>> peter.lindqv...@gmail.com
>>
> You must not have downloaded from www.openoffice.org/download. From that site 
> there are no add-ons integrated wth the OpenOffice dowenload. I recomeend 
> that you remove the program entirely, run a virus and malware scan, then 
> redownload from the above site only (or as redirected by it to Sourceforge) 
> and reinstall again.
>
> To remove the faulty program entirely you may need to use something like 
> RevoUninstaller at its most aggressive settings.
>


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [discuss] drop support for Java 5 and Java 6 for Windows

[Dave Fisher]

> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> Thank you for this great explanation! So basically, review the AOO java API.
>> 
> 
> It is a bit more complicated than that.   The Java language itself has
> evolved, not just the libraries. There are bytecode changes as well.
> The difference between Java 1.7/1.6 is not very big, but there are
> more significant differences if you need to maintain compatibility
> with Java 1.5.  Not impossible, but it would be extra effort.
> 
> And remember, the "cost" of supporting old platforms is not just the
> dev work.  It also involves QA and support..  If we say we "support"
> something then we really ought to be testing in, not just saying that
> we not aware of any problems.  The OpenOffice brand should mean that
> users can run on any supported platform and have a good experience.
> IMHO we should not say we "support" a platform unless we're willing
> and able to meet that kind of expectation.
> 
> As a practical matter we cannot be testing every platform on 3
> different JVM versions.  That's not going to happen.  The test matrix
> is too large.  Even on Windows that is XP/Vista/Win7/Win8 or 4
> platforms * 3 JVM's, or 12 combinations.  And that is just Windows.

Good points.

I think that we should evaluate our Java dependencies, the projects and where 
they are their minimum java version.

I know that there has been a drive to remove Java, but I can see some quick 
potential wins by using Java based Apache projects like POI to drive MS Office 
two way compatibility. (OK another thread ;-)

Regards,
Dave

> 
> -Rob
> 
>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>>  Andrea.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --**--**-
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
>>> 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
> 
> -
> 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: [proposal] Establish new svn area for "branding" objects

[Dave Fisher]

On Aug 2, 2013, at 11:25 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:

> Am 08/02/2013 06:46 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>> Re the discussion started Jul 24, 2013
>> 
>> http://markmail.org/message/6aoohsq4jbx5z7us
>> 
>> This proposal is to establish an svn area for branding elements (svg files
>> of logos, and other similar branding sources) in a new  area
>> /openoffice/branding
>> 
>> This will be outside the web access area.
>> 
>> Lazy Consensus will be used for this proposal. If no objections are raised,
>> work on establishing this area  can begin on Monday, noon PDT.
> 
> I've looked into the root of the website and found that there is already an 
> area for the website:
> .../ooo-site/branding/

Do you mean ooo-site/trunk/content/branding?

That is the old branding folder that has commonly used graphical elements like 
a tiny q.

It is totally legacy. Please do not use it for this purpose at all.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> so, this proposal is not for the website? How do we want to handle the other 
> one?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 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: Downloading latest version of Open office

[Dave Fisher]

Hi Ed,

You should never need a phone number or make a call to download or otherwise 
activate Apache OpenOffice.

Please download from http://www.openoffice.org/download

Regards,
Dave

On Jul 31, 2013, at 5:12 PM, Edward Reyes wrote:

> i think you guys blew it this time. T-Mobile will not complete a call without 
> the prefix ONE, which means the number cannot be verified unless you spell 
> out the complete number. e.g. 1-626-422-4343.
> 
> Thank you,
> Ed


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] New "other.html" for all possible download links

[Dave Fisher]

;> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, looks great.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thanks. :-)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Even when I've missed to state it from the beginning but I expect to
>>>>>>>>> use
>>>>>>>>> lazy consensus here. If there are no objections I plan to make it
>>> Live
>>>>>>>>> at ~Sunday evening Hamburg time.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> As I haven't seen any objections I'll create the new "other.html" in
>>> a
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> next time.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Sorry, but I find the page hard to use.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Most people will not need any language packs, so why clutter the table
>>>>>>> with them?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Also if a user does want to add multiple language packs, it's hard
>>>>>>> work finding them amongst all the full installations.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I think it would be a lot clearer for the page to be laid out
>>>>>>> something like the following:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> This was the old system and the goal was to integrate all files that
>>>>>> belong
>>>>>> to a specific language and platform.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm not sure that goal is particularly useful to the end-user.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  If it's hard to read due to a small font size, this could be changed.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> It's not the font size.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  Otherwise I don't thing that it's too confusing.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Well, you are a developer working on OOo.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Only for the website, not for the source code. But maybe this is no
>>> longer
>>>> relevant as I do this already for years.
>>>> 
>>>>  I am trying to look at it as a non-developer who wants to download the
>>>>> software.
>>>>> 
>>>>>   [ cut here ] ---
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>  [ cut here ] ---
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> If it is possible to provide a dynamic page, then it might be nice to
>>>>>>> determine the platform first (user selected; perhaps with
>>>>>>> auto-detected default), and then use the platform to display only the
>>>>>>> installation sets and language packs for that platform.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The dynamic thing is not to continue the data guessing from the main
>>>>>> download webpage but to simplify the modification for new releases.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The "other.html" is a kind of fallback when:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> a) the user is not able to use the green box on the previous main
>>>>>> download
>>>>>> webpage.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> b) or when he is searching for a build different from the browser's
>>>>>> language
>>>>>> / platform.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> AFAICT it's also used when the user wants to add a new language, in
>>>>> which case they already have the base installation.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Yes, and there are maybe some more possibilities.
>>>> 
>>>>  As we don't know the reason(s) for a) there shouldn't be any limitations
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> give the user the full control to find what he needs.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Yes, but that's not relevant to the issue of the page design.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  And if b) it will help him as well.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Which is where the page design is very important.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  The difference of full installations and language packs is described
>>>>>> directly above the table by your suggestion.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Yes, but I'm afraid I don't find it easy to read.
>>>>> There's quite a lot of information there which is not particularly
>>>>> relevant to the end user.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Also the most common use case - downloading a single base installation
>>>>> and no languag packs - is not actually described.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> If you think that the text can be better, then please tell me. Based on
>>>> Apache's famous slogan: Patches are welcome. :-)
>>>> 
>>>>  That would avoid problems with people downloading the language pack
>>>>>>> for the wrong platform.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Sorry, but this can also happen in the current "other.html".
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> Of course; I was just making a suggestion to improve the page further.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Yes, that's great. However, I'm missing arguments that the new layout is
>>>> more confusing than the current one. Maybe you can help here to give us
>>>> some use cases?
>>>> 
>>>>  I think it would make for a better end-user experience.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I would say: Let the users decide. :-) If we get a reasonable amount of
>>>>>> complains then we can go back to different tables.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> Anything against this? We can change back to the old one at any time.
>>>> 
>>> @marcus; I for one like the way its done, not need to change back. But I
>>> assume the old version is kept in svn ?
>>> 
>>> So lets see if there are compains (which you seem to solve quickly and
>>> quietly something I really favour).
>>> 
>>> rgds
>>> jan I.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> I think we should just go live with these new changes. There is more to
>> this one but I don't think it's more confusing.
>> 
>> And...we can always go back.
> 
> Thanks to all for your opinions. I've done the commits and the new webpage is 
> live:
> 
> http://www.openoffice.org/download/other.html

I think that while sebb has some good points let's not forget that these are 
the pages we send users to when the javascript detection of their environment 
does not give them what they want.

If we want to improve the experience then we would do something really dynamic 
and ask some questions which would narrow the selection.

Regards,
Dave


> 
> 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: [REVIEW] draft blog.

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 30, 2013, at 3:32 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Donald Whytock  wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 5:59 PM, janI  wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi
>>> 
>>> A while ago we discussed to get more bloggers.
>>> 
>>> Since I have 1 years birthday in a couple of days, I have made a blog.
>>> 
>>> I am not a native speaker, so I assume there are some mistakes in there,
>>> feel free to correct them.
>>> 
>>> But more importantly, is this a post we as community would like to make
>>> public ?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=developer_in_aoo_1year_celebration
>>> 
>>> Please be gentle this is my first blog.
>>> 
>>> rgds
>>> jan I.
>>> 
>> 
>> Sometimes, when I'm proofing material from an EFL speaker, I find myself
>> inclined to not try to fix certain things because they look naturally
>> authentic and sincere.  Excessive proofing runs the risk of editing out
>> some of the raw passion and enthusiasm being expressed.  Especially in
>> cases like this, where passion and enthusiasm are sort of the point of the
>> blog post.
>> 
> 
> +1.  A personal-perspective post should not read like a marketing brochure.
> 
> I thought the post was great.  I'd recommend only simple corrections,
> e.g., standardize capitalization.
> 
> I think personal posts are enhanced with a photograph, if Jan has a
> suitable one.  But it is fine either way.

+1000 - this sure gives me a big smile!

Best Regards,
Dave

> 
> Regards,
> 
> -Rob
> 
>> But I can give it a shot, if you like...?
>> 
>> Don
> 
> -
> 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] Should source changes require [discussion] and/or issue submission?

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 30, 2013, at 9:52 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:00 PM, janI  wrote:
> 
>> On 29 July 2013 23:05, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
>> 
>>> Kay Schenk wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>> http://www.openoffice.org/**marketing/art/galleries/logos/**aoo-working/<
>> http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/art/galleries/logos/aoo-working/>
>>>> Last week, two of the original svg files -- files prefixed with:
>>>> Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_**selected_2013-06
>>>> were changed. These changes were  not discussed in advance, nor an issue
>>>> submitted for them. Given the events of the day, it was the PMC's
>> decision
>>>> to not  veto these changes, but to copy these changed originals
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thank you Kay for the reminder. I added a WARNING.txt file to the
>>> "aoo-working" directory to help avoiding changes that have not been
>>> discussed here first.
>>> 
>> 
>> I like the WARNING.txt file, could we agree to use the same file for other
>> "sensible" (not sure if that is the right word) areas ? I think of e.g.
>> release notes.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> So, back the original topic. Given recent events, do we want to have a
>>>> changed policy to require issue submission and/or list discussion before
>>>> new commits?
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I'd say we don't need it in general; it will be helpful for all
>>> significant code changes, but surely we don't need it for the website.
>>> Let's rely on common sense and peer scrutiny.
>>> 
>> 
>> +1, lets not make it too complicated to work, that said with a smile !! For
>> significant code changes, a discussion is a must, but I thought it was
>> already policy ?

I'm ok with adding WARNING.txt as appropriate. I can see that there may be 
either of two types of warnings.

Full RTC - where any change including additions should be discussed.

Adds CTR and updates RTC - where changes to existing artifacts require 
discussion.

The branding tree and release notes are examples of where this is in affect.

It may be that changes are being made and reviewed during the discussion. We 
wouldn't be so strict. For example before the 4.1 release. Rob may start to 
create release notes by adding and then making a series of modifications. There 
would be a [DISCUSS] Starting release notes. We wouldn't need a discussion for 
every little change. It is more we want to be aware these are happening. The 
community can then help in very way from criticism to translation to whatever.

Regards,
Dave


>> 
>> rgds
>> jan I.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>>  Andrea.
>>> 
>>> --**--**-
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
>> dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> Here is some information on decision making/discussions:
> 
> http://openoffice.apache.org/orientation/decision-making.html
> http://community.apache.org/committers/
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles
> 
> I could not find any specific "rules" on when decision making should be
> used. In OpenOffice, it is used on a regular basis for many different
> changes, but WHEN to use it doesn't seem to be set in stone. And it looks
> like, some projects have defined their own criteria.
> 
> 
> -- 
> -
> 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

Re: Portable version (X-ApacheOpenOffice by winPenPack) updated

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 28, 2013, at 11:21 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:

> Am 07/28/2013 06:28 PM, schrieb Dave Fisher:
>> 
>> On Jul 28, 2013, at 5:46 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>> 
>>> Am 07/28/2013 02:18 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>> On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Marcus (OOo)   
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Am 07/28/2013 01:56 PM, schrieb janI:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 28 July 2013 13:47, Marcus (OOo)wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Am 07/28/2013 12:37 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 24/07/2013 Hagar Delest wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Huge thanks for such reactivity indeed.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> But a lot of people are missing it due to the "portable" version being
>>>>>>>> too hidden in our download infrastructure.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> What's the best solution to ensure that:
>>>>>>>> 1) Users can actually find the "portable" version and
>>>>>>>> 2) Users are correctly informed that this is a third-party port?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> My proposal (subject to lazy consensus or discussion here) would be to
>>>>>>>> modify
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**download/<http://www.openoffice.org/download/>
>>>>>>>> as follows: add it to the line that says
>>>>>>>> Get all platforms, languages, language packs | Source Code tarballs and
>>>>>>>> SDK |
>>>>>>>> so that it becomes
>>>>>>>> Get all platforms, languages, language packs | Source Code tarballs and
>>>>>>>> SDK | Third-party and portable versions
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> and to link the additional text to
>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**porting/<http://www.openoffice.org/porting/>
>>>>>>>> so that people are correctly informed. This also ensures that when/if 
>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>> have other portable versions available nothing needs to be changed.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> To have a visible impression see here:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> http://ooo-site.staging.**apache.org/download/test/**index.html<http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/download/test/index.html>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> +1, is "portings" the right word ? my dictionary suggest "ports",  but I
>>>>>> am
>>>>>> no native speaker.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hm, my favorite online dictionary says "portings". ;-) Let's see what our
>>>>> native speakers will say.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> "ports" is more usual in a software context.
>>>> 
>>>> But "portable" is ambiguous, since it means two things:  1) capable of
>>>> being ported to multiple platforms.  2) something you can carry.
>>>> 
>>>> Since we offer portable code, ports of the binaries and a portable
>>>> version, it is hard to avoid confusion here ;-)
>>> 
>>> The link says:
>>> Portable USB version and other third-party portings
>> 
>> I think "Third-party ports including a portable USB version" is better US 
>> English.
>>> 
>>> and the title:
>>> Get Apache OpenOffice as portable USB version or choose from other 
>>> third-party portings
>> 
>> "Get third-party ports of Apache OpenOffice including a portable USB 
>> version."
> 
> I want to put the portable thing first as it seems to be the more important 
> info. So, how to do it in better English?

Link: "Portable USB versions and third-party ports."

Title: "Get Apache OpenOffice software packaged as portable USB versions and 
third-party ports."

Regards,
Dave

> 
>>> Shouldn't this be enough to make it clear? Or is it better when I replace 
>>> "Portable USB version" with "Portable USB App"?
>> 
>> If we say App then users will be thinking "App Store".
> 
> OK
> 
> 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: [WWW]Forum landing page

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 28, 2013, at 8:43 AM, janI wrote:

> On 28 July 2013 14:31, Rob Weir  wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 5:26 AM, janI  wrote:
>>> On 28 July 2013 09:01, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Rob Weir wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Note that we do have this page already:
>>>>> http://openoffice.apache.org/**pmc-faqs.html#moderator<
>> http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html#moderator>
>>>>> Maybe that can be updated?  Or if you have something more ambitious in
>>>>> mind, the existing page can be retired.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> It will be just fine to update that page.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> that page is very outdated, and it is a mixture of all kinds of
>>> information. I think it would be better to have a special page,
>>> 
>>> I think pmc-faq, should have exact that content.
>>> 
>>> objections ?
>>> 
>> 
>> An outdated page versus a page that doesn't exist yet?   I guess I
>> don't care, so long as in the end there is a single place to go for
>> this info.
>> 
> 
> Well I could say the same, a page only a few knows that contains quite a
> lot of diifferent information, and where the maintenance part is outdated
> (doesnt even contain the services we offer), or a new page with the sole
> purpose of information who is doing the job.

If this is a new page then it should be called "Infrastructure" and be linked 
to from the left nav in the Community section of the project site.

Once the page is created and we are happy with it we can update the PMC facts 
by replacing the duplicate content with a link.

Regards,
Dave 


> 
> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Additional contact information, if desired, can be stored in the private
>>>> (PMC members only) SVN repository for this PMC:
>>>> svn checkout https://svn.apache.org/repos/**private/pmc/openoffice<
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/pmc/openoffice>
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> That is a possibility, do you think of telephone numbers etc, for
>> emergency
>>> situations ?
>>> 
>>> I will make a proposal on ~jani and ask for lazy consensus.
>>> 
>>> Does any maintainer (sysadm, sysop, root etc) have a problem that the
>> page
>>> contain our apache emails ?
>>> If so please object now, before I show my proposal.
>>> 
>> 
>> We should be using existing tools like the mailing list and BZ and IRC
>> for admin requests and reporting outages.  I don't think we want to
>> encourage direct emails.
>> 
> 
> hmm, if thats the case then there are no purpose of telling who is doing
> the job...then we all just scream help on whatever list and hope the right
> person reads its. On the other hand, if we want to identify the people
> doing the job I have only found the mailId as a common dominator, if you
> have another id then please tell me.
> 
> Using BZ for outages, would be at least interesting, on a good day it would
> take 2-3 weeks before I became aware of the problem. I think for outages BZ
> is not really the suited. IRC might be suited, but I seldom see people who
> can do something in there. Maybe I am just negative, but at least I have
> nearly a full year experience with AOO (and 25+ with other systems) and all
> ourages an until today I have not received a single outage request from BZ
> or IRC.
> 
> 
>> The real goal, IMHO, should be making sure that the responsible party
>> can easily find out what issues/requests are related to their area.
>> This could be done by using the dev list for all such requests.  It
>> could also be done by having BZ areas for such requests, something we
>> do have today in most cases.
>> 
> 
> I honestly think that the responsible party know what their area are, I
> think it is more important the informing part knows where to inform.
> 
> I take your word for using BZ and dev@, since it saves me the work of
> making a list. But bear in mind that I (as an example) from time to time
> only read dev mail with 72 hours interval, do you really want to wait that
> long to get a server restarted ?
> 
> 
>> 
>> So I would recommend just listing names or Apache ID's (robweir, etc.)
>> without mailto: hyperlinks, for reference.
>> 
> 
> now you confuse me, you have just argued to use BZ and dev list, so no need
> for specific names ?
> 
> 
>> 
>> Of course, every rule has exceptions.
>> 
>> Maybe a variation on this approach would work for us as w

Re: Portable version (X-ApacheOpenOffice by winPenPack) updated

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 28, 2013, at 5:46 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:

> Am 07/28/2013 02:18 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>> On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Marcus (OOo)  wrote:
>>> Am 07/28/2013 01:56 PM, schrieb janI:
>>> 
>>>> On 28 July 2013 13:47, Marcus (OOo)   wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Am 07/28/2013 12:37 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 24/07/2013 Hagar Delest wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Huge thanks for such reactivity indeed.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> But a lot of people are missing it due to the "portable" version being
>>>>>> too hidden in our download infrastructure.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> What's the best solution to ensure that:
>>>>>> 1) Users can actually find the "portable" version and
>>>>>> 2) Users are correctly informed that this is a third-party port?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> My proposal (subject to lazy consensus or discussion here) would be to
>>>>>> modify
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**download/<http://www.openoffice.org/download/>
>>>>>> as follows: add it to the line that says
>>>>>> Get all platforms, languages, language packs | Source Code tarballs and
>>>>>> SDK |
>>>>>> so that it becomes
>>>>>> Get all platforms, languages, language packs | Source Code tarballs and
>>>>>> SDK | Third-party and portable versions
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> and to link the additional text to
>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**porting/<http://www.openoffice.org/porting/>
>>>>>> so that people are correctly informed. This also ensures that when/if we
>>>>>> have other portable versions available nothing needs to be changed.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> To have a visible impression see here:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://ooo-site.staging.**apache.org/download/test/**index.html<http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/download/test/index.html>
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> +1, is "portings" the right word ? my dictionary suggest "ports",  but I
>>>> am
>>>> no native speaker.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hm, my favorite online dictionary says "portings". ;-) Let's see what our
>>> native speakers will say.
>>> 
>> 
>> "ports" is more usual in a software context.
>> 
>> But "portable" is ambiguous, since it means two things:  1) capable of
>> being ported to multiple platforms.  2) something you can carry.
>> 
>> Since we offer portable code, ports of the binaries and a portable
>> version, it is hard to avoid confusion here ;-)
> 
> The link says:
> Portable USB version and other third-party portings

I think "Third-party ports including a portable USB version" is better US 
English.

> 
> and the title:
> Get Apache OpenOffice as portable USB version or choose from other 
> third-party portings

"Get third-party ports of Apache OpenOffice including a portable USB version."

> 
> Shouldn't this be enough to make it clear? Or is it better when I replace 
> "Portable USB version" with "Portable USB App"?

If we say App then users will be thinking "App Store".

Regards,
Dave

> 
> 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: AOO 4.0 Release Feedback

[Dave Fisher]

+1000 - Super Work Jürgen!

And great work was done by so many! Absolutely wonderful!

On Jul 26, 2013, at 1:29 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 3:51 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I wanted to say some words to our release because of some private stuff
>> I wasn't able to participate "live" in the end phase. But I tried at
>> least to catch up some press coverages ;-)
>> 
>> First of all I think we did all together a good job and we can be proud
>> of what we have achieved. And that is the key message we should be proud
>> and should enjoy the moment a little bit.
>> 
>> A new 1 day download record, yeah! And that on the first full 24 hour
>> day after the release. That is impressive and I like it!
>> 
>> I am really proud to be part of this community and I hope we will
>> release many more version and will provide together the best free office
>> productivity suite.
>> 
>> Congratulation to our complete community. It's only possible together
>> and by working hand in hand. It was a pleasure to see the translation
>> process, the growing sidebar feature over several weeks, the logo work,
>> the other improvements in areas that will often not be noticed by our
>> users. I means the infra work, the wiki maintenance, the forum etc.
>> We have some further good stuff in the pipeline, iAccessibilty2, the
>> improved translation process, the 64bit port of MacOS ...
>> We have patches from the OSBA for better OOXML support that is from my
>> point f view important and we should work on the integration. Any I am
>> sure many other things will come up over time ...
>> 
>> Well we can always make things better and I am sure we will improve over
>> time but that is normal and make the whole thing so interesting. I
>> noticed an increasing interest of new volunteers in different areas. And
>> I believe we can do better to support newcomers and help where necessary
>> and guide them ... I know this is time consuming but it's necessary to
>> grow our community. And here we should try to grow especially the
>> developer community and we should think together what we can change or
>> improve to make this possible.
>> 
>> Anyway I am proud to be part of this project and I am looking forward to
>> more positive feedback for AOO 4.0 that will motivate us for the next
>> version ...
>> 
>> Thank you to all of you and wish all a nice weekend
>> 
>> Juergen
>> 
> 
> Your words speak volumes and thank you for them.
> 
> And, thank YOU for being a super Release Manager.
> 
> 
>> 
>> -
>> 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


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Some NL homepages that need updating for 4.0

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 24, 2013, at 5:08 PM, Ricardo Berlasso wrote:

> 2013/7/25 Xuacu 
> 
>> Hi Marcus, all
>> 
>> I've trying to find how I can translate that pages (and, perhaps,
>> create new ones) with no luck so far. I guess I need an account
>> "somewhere" and an access point to the CMS, but I've been unable to
>> find it.
>> 
> 
> Try this page: http://openoffice.apache.org/website-local.html
> 
> specially the part for the "bookmarklet".

http://openoffice.apache.org/website-local.html#using-the-apache-cms-bookmarklet-simpler-method

Regards,
Dave


> 
> Regards
> Ricardo
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> I suppose it must have been explained 100 times, but I missed it
>> all... could someone explain it one more time?
>> 
>> Thanks in advance, and my apologies for the inconveniences.
>> 
>> Regards
>> --
>> Xuacu
>> 
>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:41 PM, Marcus (OOo) 
>> wrote:
>>> Am 07/23/2013 01:20 PM, schrieb Xuacu:
>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> [...]
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The problem is that these pages use
>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/globalvars_improved.js
>>>>>> which still has 3.4.1, but since it's global configuration I didn't
>>>>>> change
>>>>>> it. The current download page uses
>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/globalvars.js
>>>>>> that has the correct numbers but does not work as a
>>>>>> globalvars_improved.js
>>>>>> replacement in the IT site.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Maybe Marcus can help describe what needs to be done here.  I bet
>>>>> their are HTML changes needed as well as pointing to the new
>>>>> javascript.
>>>>> [...]
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Download page for Asturian is really outdated, and mostly points to
>>>> our NL team page which is outdated too. I will now fix our NL pages,
>>>> but it would be great if, as you say, someone describes what (and
>>>> where) is needed to fix AOO download page to keep as much as possible
>>>> within AOO site.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I've created a ".../ast/download/index.html" directory + webpage.
>>> 
>>> BTW:
>>> In the "index.html" I've set the variable NL_LANGUAGE to "ast". That
>> means
>>> that only Asturian files can be downloaded.
>>> 
>>> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/ast/download/index.html
>>> 
>>> Happy testing and translating. :-)
>>> 
>>> And don't forget to change the link for download on
>>> "http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/ast/index.html";
>>> 
>>> 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: [PROPOSAL] New "other.html" for all possible download links

[Dave Fisher]

+100.

Your great work continues!

Regards,
Dave
 
On Jul 24, 2013, at 4:24 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:

> Am 07/25/2013 12:48 AM, schrieb Balaji Arun:
>> Hi Marcus
>> 
>> For the title of the page "Apache OpenOffice - Download all builds", I think
>> there can be better way to put it. It is like asking user to download every
>> build. Please consider "Apache OpenOffice Downloads - All Builds" or any
>> other apt title.
> 
> Good idea. To align it with the "index.html" I've adjusted the text for 
> webpage title and H1 tag.
> 
>> The UI looks simple and neat.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Marcus
> 
> 
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Marcus (OOo) [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 6:19 PM
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: [PROPOSAL] New "other.html" for all possible download links
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> I've created a new webpage to offer all possible download links for a
>> release version:
>> 
>> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/download/test/other_tables.html
>> 
>> Advantages:
>> - created automatically, depending on the respective available
>>languages for the release version, controlled via the "globalvars.js"
>>file
>> -->  no manual changes in the "other.html" for every new release
>> 
>> - contains links to all checksum files
>> -->  no separate webpage just for checksum files necessary
>> 
>> - all possible downloads for a respective language and OS in a single
>>place
>> 
>> Please test and tell me your feedback.
>> 
>> @Andrea:
>> I've already considered your smaller font size wish for the checksum links.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> 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
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Ciao
> 
> 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: [PROPOSAL] New "other.html" for all possible download links

[Dave Fisher]

Hi Marcus,

Very cool! I have some minor points

> Important Notes:
> 
>   • A language pack is not a release for its own and has to be installed 
> over a stable release with the same version number and platform. It contains 
> resource files for a specific language and platform to show, e.g., menus, 
> dialogs, error messages in your language. It may contain translated Help 
> content. Language packs are created if at least 80% of the user interface 
> (UI) is translated. In case it is not fully localized, some elements of the 
> UI or help topics will display in English as default language.

(1) The first bullet needs editing as 80% is not the policy, the policy is 100%.

(2) Add a bullet:

* If your language is not listed here, please http://openoffice.apache.org/native-lang.html >

> 
>   • If your operating system is not listed here, or you need a special 
> version of Apache OpenOffice, please see our list of third-party ports and 
> distributions.

(3) Similarly the further notes needs both an Apache OpenOffice and 4.0 update.

>   • Please read here further important notes

(4) Shouldn't we order the columns by popularity? Windows, MacOSX, Linux (don't 
know the popular order..)

Regards,
Dave

On Jul 24, 2013, at 3:18 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I've created a new webpage to offer all possible download links for a release 
> version:
> 
> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/download/test/other_tables.html
> 
> Advantages:
> - created automatically, depending on the respective available
>  languages for the release version, controlled via the "globalvars.js"
>  file
> --> no manual changes in the "other.html" for every new release
> 
> - contains links to all checksum files
> --> no separate webpage just for checksum files necessary
> 
> - all possible downloads for a respective language and OS in a single
>  place
> 
> Please test and tell me your feedback.
> 
> @Andrea:
> I've already considered your smaller font size wish for the checksum links.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 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: AOO in the Linux distros

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 24, 2013, at 1:55 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:

> Am Mittwoch, 24. Juli 2013 um 17:25 schrieb Kay Schenk:
>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:29 AM, Alexandro Colorado  wrote:
>> 
>>> I would like to see a blog entry tutorial demonstrating the
>>> installation of OpenOffice on the 4 major distros and also Win and
>>> OSX.
>>> 
>>> This would be helpful to the community I think.
>> 
>> The Install Guide covers installation on Linux -- but not from a distro
>> specific perspective. These instructions work very well for some distros
>> and not well for others. I can't elaborate much more on that statement.
>> 
>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/common/instructions.html
>> 
>> When we released 3.4., we found some additional installation instructions
>> which are included in the wiki version of the Linux install page (which now
>> also needs some slight updating):
>> 
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ/Installation/How_do_I_install_OpenOffice.org_on_Linux%3F#Where_can_I_find_more_information_on_installing_OpenOffice_on_Linux.3F
>> 
>> I would suggest if you find tutorials, or create tutorials yourself, for
>> any Linux distros, that you put links to them on the above wiki page.
>> 
>> 
> 
> if a distro installs LibreOffice when the user select OpenOffice it's a 
> trademark violation and it is time to stop this...
> 
> Just my opinion, they can do whatever they want but we should stop them to 
> use our brand.

If the PMC wants to do this then we should discuss this with Shane on the 
trademarks@ list.

We probably want to see if the distributors are willing to cooperate first.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> Juergen  
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> On 7/24/13, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn  wrote:
>>>> Rory O'Farrell schrieb:
>>>>> Now that AOO 4.0 is successfully launched, perhaps the time has come to
>>>>> try to get it into the Linux distros.At present if one selects
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> OpenOffice
>>>>> in the distros I know, one gets LibreOffice. One should get a clear
>>>>> choice, not a default substitution.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The problem is mostly the lack of volunteers which are willing to
>>>> package and maintain AOO among these distros' developers.
>>>> 
>>>> Gentoo has a precompiled version of AOO packaged:
>>>> http://packages.gentoo.org/package/app-office/openoffice-bin
>>>> 
>>>> Besides that, there exist some user maintained packages for Ubuntu,
>>>> Arch, Slackware and other distros.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Alexandro Colorado
>>> Apache OpenOffice Contributor
>>> http://www.openoffice.org
>>> 
>>> -
>>> 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
>> 
>> 
> 
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] added security to avoid changes in artifacts.

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 24, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:

> Am 07/24/2013 07:07 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 1:00 PM, janI  wrote:
>>> On 24 July 2013 18:34, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:03 PM, janI  wrote:
>>>>> Hi.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I have followed the discussions in here, and have seen a number of not
>>>>> wanted changed in our important artifacts happen.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I think it is important, that items like our logos, release notes etc.
>>>>> cannot be changed by accident. I believe it happens by accident and that
>>>>> could avoided with a simple measure.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> It might be useful to think of this in terms of Review-Then-Commit
>>>> (RTC) versus Commit-Then-Review (CTR) rules.  Once we clarify these
>>>> and when they apply, then we can discuss whether additional
>>>> technological means are needed to enforce this.
>>>> 
>>>> For the wiki the general rules is CTR for all users with an account.
>>>> No additional karma is needed.
>>>> 
>>>> The for resources in Subversion the general rule is CTR for all
>>>> commiters.  Additionally, the public can submit patches, to the list,
>>>> attached to BZ issues, or using the CMS anonymous submission tool.
>>>> This then is effectively RTC since a committer must first reviews the
>>>> patch.
>>>> 
>>>> Those are the default postures, but there are exceptions.  For
>>>> example, as we approach a Release Candidate we switch into RTC for the
>>>> trunk code.  We only make changes after a bug has been proposed and
>>>> approved as a "release blocker" on the dev list.
>>>> 
>>>> So we could simply adopt a RTC for certain resources at certain times.
>>>>  For example, Release Notes once a release occurs, are RTC.  The
>>>> project logos, once approved and published, are RTC.   If we agree to
>>>> such things there are lightweight ways of reminding ourselves.  For
>>>> example, we could have a README file in directories that are RTC that
>>>> explain this.  That should be enough for conscientious,
>>>> well-intentioned volunteers,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> I am normally strong against limitations, but I would like to suggest
>>>> that
>>>>> these items are moved to one (or more) subdirs, where the commit right is
>>>>> restricted e.x. to PMC members or even less. Doing so will not prohibit
>>>>> anybody from making their changes but simply avoid that the changes are
>>>>> product wide.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Personally I think this is a RTC versus CTR question.  This
>>>> distinction is a tool that we don't invoke as often as we could.
>>>> Maybe that would be sufficient, at least in SVN.
>>>> 
>>>> Also, I think even a PMC member should be following CTR rules when it
>>>> is in effect.  I don't think of a PMC member as a higher class of
>>>> committer in terms of what they have access to.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I think you misunderstood me.  I agree with the RTC/CTR discussion, but
>>> that does not prevent the accidential commit, I think it has happened to
>>> most of us, that we commit our changes, and we overlook that another file
>>> is also committed.
>>> 
>> 
>> I disagree that we have a a problem with accidental overwrites in SVN
>> in cases where it is clear that RTC is in effect.  I think the problem
>> is that it is not clear when CTR is in effect.
> 
> I don't think that it will help to prevent every error of this kind.
> 
>> Also, I don't see how your solution helps with truly accidental
>> commits.  Surely PMC members make errors as well?
> 
> Of course, as they are humans, too. ;-)
> 
> But you don't become a PMC member by default. You need to show some things 
> that you have understand how the page is turning. And then I doubt that such 
> error would happen.
> 
> So, I also think that we should do more than just turn the CTR into RTC and 
> expect that no mistakes will happen after that.
> 
> My 2 ct.

I think that there are a few things to think about.

We can all understand when RTC and CTR are in effect. These are different in 
different systems.

We are talking about a situation where a commit was made that was not 
acceptable. Since it was in svn we can always revert. In other systems we have 
other means of restoration.

I don't think we need extra security. We may need a review of our systems to 
know what is in effect. WIth that in hand we can discuss what policy changes to 
make.

Whatever changes might be made they should be the smallest possible and kept 
simple.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> 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: Logo on CWiki page?

[Dave Fisher]

Hi -

It is done in the CWiki admin. I'll take a look but it will be this evening US 
west coast time. If you cannot wait then it is Gavin of infra and he is 
Australian (IIRC).

Regards,
DAve

On Jul 23, 2013, at 8:54 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> All of our CWiki pages, including the Release Notes, has a small Logo
> in the upper left.  It points this file:
> 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27361429/OOOUSERS?version=3&modificationDate=1352114158000
> 
> Is there some "special" page that contains that logo?  Is it
> accessible to anyone here?  Or do we need to go through Infra to
> update?
> 
> Because of the small space, I wonder if a globe-only logo would work
> better there, perhaps a little larger even?
> 
> -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: final look at website test page...and slightly smaller logo

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 21, 2013, at 4:35 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Marcus (OOo)  wrote:
> 
>> Am 07/21/2013 10:01 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>> 
>> Well I thought the VERY BIG logo didn't look so good after all -- here's a
>>> slightly smaller version
>>> 
>>> http://ooo-site.staging.**apache.org/test/<http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/test/>
>>> 
>> 
>> Looks also good. However, it's the main entry page for users. IMHO it is
>> OK to use the bigger one.
> 
> 
> Thanks. maybe for now, we use the same logo on both websites -- this new
> one.

I like your slightly smaller version. It looks great!

Regards,
Dave

> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Committed, but not published since LOTS of DL stuff pending.
>>> 
>>> So, we will go with this one I think.
>>> 
>>> Another odd thing -- the LARGE earlier logo I rendered:
>>> 
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**images/AOO_logos/AOO4_logo_**cropped.png<http://www.openoffice.org/images/AOO_logos/AOO4_logo_cropped.png>
>>> 
>>> I was able to render with transparent background -- this was from Chris
>>> R's
>>> original svg. The new ones in:
>>> 
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**marketing/art/galleries/logos/**aoo-working/<http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/art/galleries/logos/aoo-working/>
>>> 
>> 
>> After the release we should definitely clean-up the logos in the different
>> locations.
>> 
> 
> That and more... ;}
> 
> 
>> 
>> Marcus
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I don't seem to be able to render new svgs as transparent. So???
>>> Either svg has changed or Gimp (new version) is broken.
>>> 
>>> So, for right now -- logo has white background.
>>> 
>> 
>> --**--**-
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>> dev-unsubscribe@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


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: MWiki is Missing Key Navigation and Apache Trademark information.

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 21, 2013, at 7:28 AM, janI wrote:

> On 21 July 2013 16:25, janI  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 21 July 2013 16:03, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> On Jul 21, 2013, at 12:07 AM, janI wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 21 July 2013 03:34, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Jul 20, 2013, at 5:50 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Dave Fisher 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi MWiki,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The MWiki is missing a few key items:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> See: http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs#navigation
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> That is guidance for  the "project website".  That website is
>>>>>> http://openoffice.apache.org, yes?
>>>>> 
>>>>> This is policy for project sites. The Mwiki is a project site and the
>>>>> target for a feather link is mandated to be www.apache.org and not an
>>>>> internal wiki page that says nothing much about Apache.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> @dave, I do agree with you that this is guideline that should be
>>> followed,
>>>> however I have NOT removed the feather, and when I look at the css
>>> before I
>>>> started doing maintenance I cannot see.
>>>> 
>>>> Can anyone remember if it has ever been there, and advice where it was ?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Of course, the project also works with several other websites, from
>>>>>> www.openoffice.org to Bugzilla to CWiki to Forums to Blogs to MWiki
>>> to
>>>>>> Extensions and Templates.  If we think these rules apply to all
>>>>>> project-related websites, then we have a much bigger set of items to
>>>>>> work on, not just MWiki.
>>>>> 
>>>>> One thing at a time. The Forums were just adjusted. Extensions site is
>>>>> much closer to correct than the MWiki.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I see that I need to change the footer on www.openoffice.org. Done,
>>> but
>>>>> staged only. I don't want to publish if other AOO4 changes are pending.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Left Navigation:
>>>>>>> (1) A link back to the main openoffice.apache.org.
>>>>>>> (2) A link back to the main www.openoffice.org.
>>>>>>> (3) "Main Page" is misleading and should be something like "Wiki Home
>>>>> Page".
>>>>> 
>>>>> I think that additions here would help, but I am not a strong advocate.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Yeah, it would help to update the whole wiki, something we have been
>>>> discussing from time to time here on the list. But until now nobody have
>>>> volunteered to help make a new design.
>>> 
>>> I volunteered to help when we did www.openoffice.org, but that was
>>> before your time when there was no MWiki sysadmin. Are the MWiki templates
>>> in the Apache Infrastructure SVN? If so, with a few pointers I can see what
>>> it would take to make changes.
>>> 
>> 
>> Only the Aoo template is in svn, because all others are standard installed
>> from the release.
>> 
>> All changes made on top of ver 1.25 are stored in
>> 
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/infrastructure/trunk/machines/vms/ooo-wiki2-vm.apache.org/x1/wiki
>> 
>> This is the structure that infra uses for vm specific changes.
>> 
>> Be aware that in order to "stage" changes, /x1/wiki exist on the vm, but
>> the files need to copied to /x1/mwiki (live directory) before being active
>> (documented in the runbook).
>> 
>> I have also installed "wikitest.o.o", in order to be able to test upgrades
>> safely. I used that for layout changes, in order not to interrupt the live
>> system, before my changes actually worked.
>> 
>> I am not working on ooo-wiki2-vm.a.o, so any changes you do will not
>> conflict with other work.
>> 
> 
> Sorry for double posting, but I forgot an important issue.
> 
> Mwiki present itself in different languages automatically, so if you add
> text, the easiest is to reuse texts that are already translated. Adding new
> text with automatic transla

Re: MWiki is Missing Key Navigation and Apache Trademark information.

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 21, 2013, at 12:07 AM, janI wrote:

> On 21 July 2013 03:34, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Jul 20, 2013, at 5:50 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Dave Fisher 
>> wrote:
>>>> Hi MWiki,
>>>> 
>>>> The MWiki is missing a few key items:
>>>> 
>>>> See: http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs#navigation
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> That is guidance for  the "project website".  That website is
>>> http://openoffice.apache.org, yes?
>> 
>> This is policy for project sites. The Mwiki is a project site and the
>> target for a feather link is mandated to be www.apache.org and not an
>> internal wiki page that says nothing much about Apache.
>> 
> 
> @dave, I do agree with you that this is guideline that should be followed,
> however I have NOT removed the feather, and when I look at the css before I
> started doing maintenance I cannot see.
> 
> Can anyone remember if it has ever been there, and advice where it was ?
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>>> Of course, the project also works with several other websites, from
>>> www.openoffice.org to Bugzilla to CWiki to Forums to Blogs to MWiki to
>>> Extensions and Templates.  If we think these rules apply to all
>>> project-related websites, then we have a much bigger set of items to
>>> work on, not just MWiki.
>> 
>> One thing at a time. The Forums were just adjusted. Extensions site is
>> much closer to correct than the MWiki.
>> 
>> I see that I need to change the footer on www.openoffice.org. Done, but
>> staged only. I don't want to publish if other AOO4 changes are pending.
>> 
>>> 
>>>> Left Navigation:
>>>> (1) A link back to the main openoffice.apache.org.
>>>> (2) A link back to the main www.openoffice.org.
>>>> (3) "Main Page" is misleading and should be something like "Wiki Home
>> Page".
>> 
>> I think that additions here would help, but I am not a strong advocate.
>> 
> 
> Yeah, it would help to update the whole wiki, something we have been
> discussing from time to time here on the list. But until now nobody have
> volunteered to help make a new design.

I volunteered to help when we did www.openoffice.org, but that was before your 
time when there was no MWiki sysadmin. Are the MWiki templates in the Apache 
Infrastructure SVN? If so, with a few pointers I can see what it would take to 
make changes.

Regards,
Dave


> 
> rgds
> jan I
> 
> 
>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Footer:
>>>> (1) NO trademark attribution.
>>>> (2) The Apache Feather on the lower left is broken and goes to a bad
>> place. - it must link to http://www.apache.org/
>>>> (3) Linked to About page needs an update -
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AOOW:About
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Footer also says "Content is available under", which is incomplete.  I
>>> assume something completed that sentence at one point.
>> 
>> I think there was something about a license.
>> 
>>> 
>>> I wonder whether it makes sense to just copy what we have from
>>> www.openoffice.org and use the same footer on MWiki as well, with
>>> links for:
>>> 
>>> Copyright & License | Privacy | Contact Us | Donate | Thanks
>>> 
>>> Or, if we need to add additional items, do so in a way that keeps the
>>> wiki and www.openoffice.org footers the same.
>> 
>> I can agree with that. The admins may need to pull some css over as well.
>> 
>> Here is openoffice.org footer.html with the above change plus the
>> relevant css
>> 
>> 
>>http://www.apache.org/";>> src="/images/feather-small.gif" alt="Apache Software
>> Foundation"/>
>>
>>  
>>Copyright & License | > href="/privacy.html">Privacy | Contact
>> Us | http://www.apache.org/foundation/contributing.html#Paypal";>Donate |
>> http://www.apache.org/foundation/thanks.html";>Thanks
>>  
>>  
>>Apache, the Apache feather logo, and OpenOffice are trademarks of
>> The Apache Software Foundation.
>>OpenOffice.org and the seagull logo are registered trademarks of
>> The Apache Software Foundation.
>>Other names appearing on the site may be trademarks of their
>> respective owners.
>>  
>>
>>  
>> 
>> Here is the related css
>> 
>> #footera {
>

Re: [RELEASE]: availability of uploads and synchronize SF mirrors

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 20, 2013, at 5:10 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:

> Am 07/20/2013 12:45 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>> Here a little update what I can see:
>> 
>> 1.
>> https://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/4.0.0/binaries/
>> 
>> The builds seem to be completely received on SourceForge. So, for me
>> it's done.
>> 
>> 2.
>> http://www.apache.org/dist/
>> 
>> No "openoffice" directory and therefore no binary and source builds.
>> Maybe Juergen and Infra are still working on this. I'll look again today
>> evening/tomorrow morning (European timezone).
> 
> This is unchanged.

There is a thread on the infrastructure ML that includes Juergen about this. 
Apparently it is there, but not there. This may have something to do with 
apache mirroring between US and Europe. I would suggest that you go on IRC 
#asfinfra and ask about this situation and not assume one way or another.

Thanks,
Dave


> 
> At the end it seems that we won't have source files available when we annouce 
> the release. Is this any kind of stopper? The source is available as usual 
> via SVN access. So, I don't know.
> 
> If not then I would unstage the dirs/files on SourceForge and therefore make 
> the AOO 4.0 release visible for the world. And update the download webpages.
> 
> As the announcement is planned for Monday I will do this on Sunday evening 
> (European time).
> 
> Any objections?
> 
> Marcus
> 
> 
> 
>> Am 07/19/2013 05:16 PM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
>>> The vote closed successful and I have once again uploaded the files in
>>> the dist are on the people server.
>>> 
>>> /www/www.apache.org/dist/openoffice/4.0.0
>>> 
>>> The relevant files for SF are under
>>> /www/www.apache.org/dist/extgernaldist/openoffice/4.0.0
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I hope the rsync url works now, if not please contact the infra people
>>> directly.
>>> 
>>> rsync Url: rsync.apache.org::apache-dist-external
>>> 
>>> 
>>> A complete file list can you find here
>>> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/aoo4.0_files_dist-openoffice-4.0.0.txt
>>> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/aoo4.0_files_dist-externaldist-openoffice-4.0.0.txt
>>> 
>>> 
>>> As I mentioned earlier I will be not available until next week Thursday.
>>> But I hope I can follow the release a little bit to have some fun with
>>> you all together ;-)
>>> 
>>> Juergen
> 
> -
> 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: MWiki is Missing Key Navigation and Apache Trademark information.

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 20, 2013, at 5:50 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>> Hi MWiki,
>> 
>> The MWiki is missing a few key items:
>> 
>> See: http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs#navigation
>> 
> 
> That is guidance for  the "project website".  That website is
> http://openoffice.apache.org, yes?

This is policy for project sites. The Mwiki is a project site and the target 
for a feather link is mandated to be www.apache.org and not an internal wiki 
page that says nothing much about Apache.

> Of course, the project also works with several other websites, from
> www.openoffice.org to Bugzilla to CWiki to Forums to Blogs to MWiki to
> Extensions and Templates.  If we think these rules apply to all
> project-related websites, then we have a much bigger set of items to
> work on, not just MWiki.

One thing at a time. The Forums were just adjusted. Extensions site is much 
closer to correct than the MWiki.

I see that I need to change the footer on www.openoffice.org. Done, but staged 
only. I don't want to publish if other AOO4 changes are pending.

> 
>> Left Navigation:
>> (1) A link back to the main openoffice.apache.org.
>> (2) A link back to the main www.openoffice.org.
>> (3) "Main Page" is misleading and should be something like "Wiki Home Page".

I think that additions here would help, but I am not a strong advocate.

>> 
>> Footer:
>> (1) NO trademark attribution.
>> (2) The Apache Feather on the lower left is broken and goes to a bad place. 
>> - it must link to http://www.apache.org/
>> (3) Linked to About page needs an update - 
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AOOW:About
>> 
> 
> Footer also says "Content is available under", which is incomplete.  I
> assume something completed that sentence at one point.

I think there was something about a license.

> 
> I wonder whether it makes sense to just copy what we have from
> www.openoffice.org and use the same footer on MWiki as well, with
> links for:
> 
> Copyright & License | Privacy | Contact Us | Donate | Thanks
> 
> Or, if we need to add additional items, do so in a way that keeps the
> wiki and www.openoffice.org footers the same.

I can agree with that. The admins may need to pull some css over as well.  

Here is openoffice.org footer.html with the above change plus the relevant css


http://www.apache.org/";>

  
Copyright & License | Privacy | Contact Us | 
http://www.apache.org/foundation/contributing.html#Paypal";>Donate 
| http://www.apache.org/foundation/thanks.html";>Thanks
  
  
Apache, the Apache feather logo, and OpenOffice are trademarks of The 
Apache Software Foundation.
OpenOffice.org and the seagull logo are registered trademarks of The 
Apache Software Foundation.
Other names appearing on the site may be trademarks of their respective 
owners.
  

  

Here is the related css

#footera {
  margin: 20px 0px 0px 0px;
  padding: 8px 0px 12px 0px;
  border-top: 2px solid #ccc;
  color:#666;
  font-size: 8pt;
  padding: 0 8px;
  text-align: left;
  overflow: auto;
  clear: both;
  line-height: 10pt;
}

#copyrighta {
}

#copyrighta p {
  padding-left: 20px;
  line-height: 10pt;
  padding-bottom: 5px;
}

#copyrighta a {
 color: #107EC0;
 text-decoration:underline;
}

#copyrighta a:hover {
 background-color: #e6ebed;
}

#poweredby {
  float: right;
  text-align: right;
  width: 210px;
  height: 100px;
}

#asf-logo {
  width: 180px;
  padding-top: 20px;
}

Regards,
Dave

> 
> Regards,
> 
> -Rob
> 
>> Thanks,
>> Dave
>> -
>> 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: mwiki contact page.

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 20, 2013, at 5:38 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 6:52 PM, janI  wrote:
>> Hi
>> 
>> the mwiki contact page has been removed after a offlist question from rob
>> weir, so we are back where we started a couple of weeks ago I have not
>> reopened the BZ issue with the request for a contact page.
>> 
>> all footers on wiki contain the text:
>> 
>> Contact: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> 
>> That message is NOT translated as with the rest of mwiki.
>> 
> 
> Jan,
> 
> I asked for the removal of that page because it was mainly generating
> spam.  Moderators had to deal with 15 examples of this from the wiki
> admin form in one day.
> 
> But now you've added the string "Contact: dev@openoffice.apache.org"
> *twice* to the footer of every wiki page, with no mention that there
> are other more appropriate avenues to go for support.
> 
> I'm not certain now that you understand or appreciate what the issue
> is.  Putting *any* prominent note to contact d...@openoffice.org is a
> very bad idea and will merely lead to misdirected support requests,
> causing a bad experience for users as well as volunteers.
> 
> So a -1 from me to your additions to the page footer.  Please remove
> it.  And please review any further changes of this nature here on the
> dev list before making it.

Add my -1 as well the footer is broken in several ways.

+1000 to a review on the list. These kinds of changes need discussion as we all 
miss aspects.

> 
> Remember, the number of people who have admin-related questions about
> the wiki are very, very, very few in number.  They will be best served
> by directing them to some variation of a page like the one we have on
> the main website:
> 
> http://www.openoffice.org/contact_us.html

+1 to a contact us.

Sorry I saw trouble separately and started another thread. My list is not dev@ 
but 6 other important matters.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> Thanks!
> 
> -Rob
> 
> 
> 
>> rgds.
>> Jan I.
> 
> -
> 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

MWiki is Missing Key Navigation and Apache Trademark information.

[Dave Fisher]

Hi MWiki,

The MWiki is missing a few key items:

See: http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs#navigation

Left Navigation:
(1) A link back to the main openoffice.apache.org.
(2) A link back to the main www.openoffice.org.
(3) "Main Page" is misleading and should be something like "Wiki Home Page".

Footer: 
(1) NO trademark attribution.
(2) The Apache Feather on the lower left is broken and goes to a bad place. - 
it must link to http://www.apache.org/
(3) Linked to About page needs an update - 
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AOOW:About

Thanks,
Dave
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [WWW]Forum landing page

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 20, 2013, at 12:39 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

> On 16/07/2013 Ricardo Berlasso wrote:
>> 2013/1/13 RGB ES
>>> The forum landing page still have the incubator logo:
>>> http://forum.openoffice.org/
>>> I think it needs to be replaced by the Apache logo.
>> Anyone working on this? It will be perfect if the page is fixed before 4.0
>> release.
> 
> I have access to that machine and I prepared the files there, but I don't 
> have enough privileges to actually put them online.
> 
> It is enough that someone with sudo access to ooo-forums.apache.org runs:
> $ sudo cp /home/pescetti/www/apache-logo.png /var/www/
> $ sudo cp /home/pescetti/www/index.php /var/www/
> to fix it (then the files owner can be set as it is now, www-data:www-data 
> for the PNG file and www-data:phpbb for the PHP file).
> 
> If someone wants to provide a 300x100 pixels replacement for
> http://forum.openoffice.org/forum-logo.png
> I can make it available on that machine too if this helps as an intermediate 
> step.

IRC with asfinfra.

Don't forget to remove the disclaimer too.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> 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: release media files

[Dave Fisher]

Hi Drew,

This looks really great, but as a note I had to run the mp4 through a convertor 
program to play it on my MacOSX 10.6.8.

Regards,
Dave

On Jul 20, 2013, at 11:26 AM, Drew Jensen wrote:

> Thanks for links - I grabbed all the files.
> 
> So - I'll give another throw and post what happens tomorrow..
> 
> 
> On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> 
>> Drew Jensen wrote:
>> 
>>> I took the liberty of spinning up a very brief such item, which you can
>>> find here:
>>> https://docs.google.com/file/**d/**0Bx7ZNEXlmR0IUTY1YzFhR1VLQU0/**
>>> edit?usp=sharing<https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bx7ZNEXlmR0IUTY1YzFhR1VLQU0/edit?usp=sharing>
>>> [unzip the a4.mp4 video file from the uploaded zip container]
>>> 
>> 
>> Nice! (and welcome back Drew, by the way). The new logo colors appear a
>> bit too bright at the end, but see below for vector sources, that may help
>> with this.
>> 
>> 
>> was not able to quickly find a vector graphic of what I take if the new
>>> logo, only - I did what I could using the PNG image I found on the wiki,
>>> but I'm sure there is a better image available.
>>> 
>> 
>> You can find all versions, including PDF and SVG, at
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/**asf/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/**
>> content/marketing/art/**galleries/logos/aoo-working/<https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/marketing/art/galleries/logos/aoo-working/>
>> (warning: this is meant to be a temporary location)
>> 
>> 
>> I would also like to offer, and have started, a second video. Longer, 45 -
>>> 90 sec. range, with a quick summary of new features. A little different
>>> audiance from the shorty here, I suppose. To start that I've downloaded
>>> all
>>> the information from the release notes page on the wiki, have used this to
>>> generate some raw screen video catpure for the GUI changes and will use,
>>> with your permission If I may, the graphics from the wiki for some of the
>>> file fidelity enhancements.
>>> 
>> 
>> This would be very good to have. I don't know of anyone else working on
>> this, and obviously you can feel free to use images from the Release Notes
>> page.
>> 
>> Regards,
>>  Andrea.
>> 
>> 
>> --**--**-
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>> dev-unsubscribe@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: [RESULT][VOTE]: Release OpenOffice 4.0 (RC2)

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 19, 2013, at 9:09 AM, janI wrote:

> On 19 July 2013 17:11, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:
> 
>> On 7/19/13 5:07 PM, Donald Whytock wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Jürgen Schmidt >> wrote:
>>> 
 The vote period to release the RC2 (based on release branch AOO40,
 revision 1503704) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0 has ended.
 
 The ballot result in 24 votes, 24 +1 votes including 14 binding PMC
 member votes.
 
 3 binding +1 votes are necessary for the release. That means the ballot
 closed successful to release the RC2 as AOO 4.0
 
 Vote tally
 
 +1 Jan Iversen (binding)
 +1 Keith McKenna
 +1 Olaf Felka
 +1 Sylvain Denis
 +1 Marco A.G. Pinto
 +1 V Stuart Foote
 +1 Samer Mansour
 +1 Ricardo Berlasso (binding)
 +1 Rory O'Farrell
 +1 Rob Weir (binding)
 +1 Shengfeng Liu
 +1 Kay Schenk (binding)
 +1 Marcus Lange (binding)
 +1 Regina Henschel (binding)
 +1 Andrew Rist (binding)
 +1 Donald Harbison (binding)
 +1 Xuacu
 +1 Juergen Schmidt (binding)
 +1 Yuzhen Fan
 +1 Andrea Pescetti (binding)
 +1 Armin Le Grand (binding)
 +1 Herbert Duerr (binding)
 +1 Kazunari Hirano (binding)
 +1 Andre Fischer (binding)
 
 Thanks
 
 Juergen
 
 
>>> Imacat voted -1.  Is he non-binding?
>>> 
>> 
>> the vote was not valid from my perspective because she voted on
>> something that was part of the vote. I haven't count it but of course it
>> would not change the result. And I believe imacat made it clear in a
>> later response.
>> 
> 
> Hi
> 
> I know it does not change anything, but imacat did not withdraw her -1, so
> it should be in the tally for the record. The vote is binding and should be
> counted.
> 
> It is in principle no good, that a single person decides if a vote is valid
> or not, it sort of invalidates the idea of voting.

imacat's VOTE was not a Veto as you cannot veto a release. Since it was not a 
VETO situation there is no invalidation.

Please count her VOTE as (binding)

In a sense this is different from Rapheal's -1 which was agreed by acclamation 
once the flaw was obvious.

Thank you.

> 
> rgds
> jan I.
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> Juergen
>> 
>> -
>> 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: [PROPOSAL] End-of-Life for OpenOffice.org 3.3.0

[Dave Fisher]

+1

On Jul 19, 2013, at 5:20 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> We currently have this link from the download page,from 2009,
> announcing end-of-life for OpenOffice.org 2.x:
> 
> http://www.openoffice.org/development/releases/eol.html
> 
> I'd like to update that page to also state that 3.x version prior to
> 3.4.x are also end-of-life.  Why?  We're unlikely to issue any more
> security patches for 3.3.0 or earlier.
> 
> So the concrete proposal is:
> 
> 1) Update the eol.html page to state that OOo 3.3.0 and earlier are no
> longer supported.
> 
> 2) Create a new landing page for users of OOo 3.3.0 and before who are
> using a language version that we do not yet have a translation.
> Explain in this page that the earlier versions are no longer
> supported.  List what translations are currently available and where
> they can be downloaded from.  Give information on how they can
> volunteer to help translate AOO into their native language.
> 
> 3) Configure the update notification server to OOo 3.3.0 users to this
> new landing page, if their language is not already translated.  (Where
> there is a translation we already point them to the download page)
> 
> 4) Blog post/announcement on end-of-life for OOo 3.3.0 and earlier.
> 
> The end result is that:  1) We made it clear what versions are
> supported.  2) We did our due diligence to reach out to users of older
> versions.  3) We encourage new translation volunteers.
> 
> No rush on this.  It does not need to be done at the same time as the
> 4.0 announcement.  It can follow a week or so later.
> 
> -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: Structure of the CWiki?

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 18, 2013, at 9:43 AM, janI wrote:

> On 18 July 2013 16:50, Rob Weir  wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 10:33 AM, janI  wrote:
>>> On 18 July 2013 15:29, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> We have the opportunity to restructure the pages on our CWiki.When
>>>> looking over the current structure it looks like we've been taking two
>>>> entirely different approaches to organizing the information:
>>>> 
>>>> 1) A team-oriented approach, where at the top organizational level
>>>> there are parent pages for each team, dev, qa, doc, l10n., etc.
>>>> 
>>>> 2) A release-oriented approach, where the top level is a specific
>>>> release, like AOO 3.4.1 or 4.0, and subpages are used for status and
>>>> plans for functional groups.
>>>> 
>>>> These two approaches look like they are both being used, but not
>>>> consistently.
>>>> 
>>>> I wonder if would be worth being more consistent, and doing something
>> like:
>>>> 
>>>> 1) Have a top-level page for each functional group, for tracking
>>>> release-independent information, e.g., links to useful other pages,
>>>> lists of volunteers, "how to" information.  The stuff that does not
>>>> change from release to release.  It is information about the team and
>>>> what they do, not information about tasks for a specific release.
>>>> 
>>>> 2) Then have top-level release-specific pages, where we store plans
>>>> and status reports, dashboards, etc., associated with a release.
>>>> 
>>>> I think this is not so far from what the CWiki was evolving toward.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> If we anyhow think about restructuring, why not also think of a merge
>> with
>>> mwiki...it does not seem correct that we need all these flavours of wiki,
>>> and it do cost maintenance.
>>> 
>> 
>> Restructuring is just drag and drop in CWiki.  Migration would be more
>> effort, but we could restructure while migrating.  But a non-trivial
>> effort unless there is a tool that automates page conversion, moving
>> images, etc.

Exactly. 

>> 
> 
> So because its complicated we keep maintaining at 2 different
> productsWe should have been a goverment agency.

Don't cast this kind of note about why we have two wikis. We got the CWiki on 
day one of the project at Apache. The Mwiki remained at Oracle for many months. 
(1) It took some time to get a volunteer named Terry E to do the migration 
which you have taken over. Thank you. (2) Ask on #asfinfra if you want to find 
out about the "difficulties" that occurred.

The CWiki serves its purpose very well.

> But I get your point, and wont press further for a simpler maintenance.

If the project wants to move to one wiki - sure go ahead. I'll help however I 
can when I have time. I would perfectly happy to longer have to Admin it which 
quite frankly has not been much of an effort. How much effort has it taken to 
manage MWiki?

The balance is that the ASF manages Confluence, but the project must manage our 
own MediaWiki.

Since the ASF is considering WordPress as a replacement for Roller. Maybe some 
of the CWiki content belongs there?

Anyone object to the deletion of the unused OOODEV cwiki?

Regards,
Dave

> 
> rgds
> jan I.
> 
> 
>> 
>> -Rob
>> 
>>> rgds
>>> jan I.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -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
>> 
>> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Broken download link

[Dave Fisher]

Hi,

Do you mean the download link in English at the top? This will work.

Or, is there one in Hebrew in the middle to a version 3.2? If so, then we need 
some help from the Hebrew speaking community as the content on this page is 
still legacy from 3 to 4 years ago and this project does not maintain those 
mirrors.


http://mirror.isoc.org.il/pub/openoffice/3.0.0/win32/OOo_3.0.0_he_install_win32_20090327.exe";>
קובץ התקנה של אופן אופיס


Note 3.0.0 is a very old version probably from the time that OpenOffice.org was 
part of Sun Microsystems.

Here at the Apache Software Foundation we are all volunteers. We about to 
release 4.0.

It would be good to get cooperation from the folks who are running 
www.openoffice.org.il - this group is not part of the project and we would like 
to bring them in.

Regards,
Dave


On Jul 17, 2013, at 3:05 AM, Ron Oz wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> The download link on the following page is broken:
> http://www.openoffice.org/he/
> 
> Thanks,
> Ron


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Possible show stopper on Windows 8, please verify

[Dave Fisher]

Putting on my Apache Member Hat. I do have an issue with skipping a re-vote.

PMC members are checking signatures and checksums? And we are verifying that 
the source tag matches the RC for source? These are guaranteed to change with 
the re-spin.

Let's not make a big deal out of our quality process and then skip a REQUIRED 
part of the Foundation's process.

Thanks,
Dave

On Jul 16, 2013, at 9:24 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 4:39 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> 
>> On 7/16/13 1:06 PM, Peter Junge wrote:
>>> On 7/16/2013 6:55 PM, Max Merbald wrote:
>>>> Hi Jürgen,
>>>> 
>>>> I just tried the same action with both AOO 4 without your dll file and
>>>> with it, using even the very same file where I had that crash on June
>>>> 22, but in neither case did I have a crash this time. I think I'll work
>>>> a bit more with Openoffice 4 now and if anything of the kind happens
>>>> again I'll report right away and write down the exact circumstances. I
>>>> think it might be possible that it happens only in very special
>>>> circumstances, maybe dependant on which other software you're running
>>>> while working with AOO 4.
>>> 
>>> I also gave it a try on Windows 8 (64 bit) and there's no sign of a
>> crash.
>>> 
>>> Elaborating further on particular conditions. Maybe it's related to
>>> specific hardware, e.g. graphics card?
>>> 
>>> @Samer: As you seem to be able to reproduce the issue constantly, do you
>>> have any special hardware?
>> 
>> it is not easy for me to decide at the moment. What do others think? A
>> respin means rebuilding all platforms, signing and uploading the new
>> files. And then another vote cycle of 72 hr.
>> 
> 
> I don't have an issue with NOT re-voting. This is after all, ONE
> (significant) bug fix as opposed to the integrity of the whole product.
> Will changed source with one date be a problem with existing sig files?
> That's my only concern.
> 
> 
>> 
>> I personally will run into a time problem because I have to move into a
>> new flat and will be offline for some days until Thursday of next week.
>> It's no big deal and somebody else can do the work and a good release is
>> of course important ;-)
>> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> If we want a respin than we have to decide today and ideally until 3:00
>> pm (UTC +2).
>> 
>> 
>> Juergen
>> 
>>> 
>>> Peter
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Max
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Am 16.07.2013 11:48, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
>>>>> On 7/16/13 9:56 AM, Herbert Duerr wrote:
>>>>>> On 15.07.2013 22:47, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Samer Mansour 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I logged my comments in the bug, I searched the db before I opened
>>>>>>>> a new
>>>>>>>> bug sorry if its a duplicate.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> It is windows 8 64-bit. Crashes on copy and cut.  Paste seems to
>>>>>>>> not be
>>>>>>>> affected.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The four steps Rob gave in the bug are the minimum required steps to
>>>>>>>> reproduce.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> An update on this crash.  I was eventually able to reproduce it on
>>>>>>> Windows 8, 64-bit.  This was an initial install, not an upgrade.
>>>>>>> Samer saw it on an upgrade install.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I worked on the stack trace with Herbert (fortunately my Windows 8
>>>>>>> machine had a debugger installed).  Herbert gave me a patch to test.
>>>>>>> It appears to work on my machine.  We're waiting to hear back from
>>>>>>> Samer on whether it worked for him.
>>>>>> If anyone else was able to reproduce the problem then we'd love to
>> know
>>>>>> whether the DLL at http://people.apache.org/~hdu/sysdtrans.dll
>>>>>> solves the problem. It contains the patch I suggested in issue 122752.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> To test it please
>>>>>> - download the DLL
>>>>>> - copy it into the OpenOffice program folder, on most systems this
>> will
>>>>>> be the folder C:\Program Files 

Re: Draft Blog Post: Rejected

[Dave Fisher]

It is worth a mention that here was at least one -1 from a PMC member in the 
VOTE due to this issue - from Raphael.

Regards,
Dave

On Jul 16, 2013, at 7:14 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> A quick and timely post:
> 
> https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=rejected
> 
> 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: [URGENT] AOO binary files are missing - Please help!

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 16, 2013, at 6:03 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 2:00 AM, Roberto Galoppini
>  wrote:
>> We couldn't find a valid top-level dir to even begin to look for the 4.0
>> files.
>> Until we get precise instructions how to locate those files we can't
>> populate our system and eventually our mirrors.
>> 
>> Please help with this issue asap.
>> 
> 
> Hi Roberto -- I think we're holding right now.  We confirmed a last
> minute crash bug on Windows 8.  We're discussing in another thread
> whether to respin the build.

Regardless, someone does need to engage Infra on this issue in parallel.

Regards,
Dave


> 
> -Rob
> 
>> thanks,
>> 
>> Roberto
> 
> -
> 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

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 14, 2013, at 11:51 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Rob Weir  wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo) 
>>> 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

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 14, 2013, at 11:33 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Rob Weir  wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo) 
>> 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 Weir  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Juergen Schmidt>> 
>>>>> 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:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>

Re: [DISCUSS] New localization requirements policy needed for releases

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 14, 2013, at 11:19 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Marcus (OOo)  wrote:
>> Am 07/14/2013 07:11 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>> 
>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Marcus (OOo)
>>> 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 com

Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE]: Release OpenOffice 4.0 (RC)

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 12, 2013, at 9:11 AM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
>> Does anyone have a script to verify signatures and hashes for a release?
>> 
>> In previous releases I'd download everything and do some ad-hoc
>> commands, but not as automated as it could be.  Since we have a
>> regular directory structure it should be possible to have a script
>> that would verify everything and produce a report.
> 
> unless you are trying to verify the download, there is no need to
> download anything, just ssh to people.apache.org and check the
> integrity in place once moved to the  /www/www.apache.org/dist/
> folder.
> Something like:
> 
> arielch@~$ for i in
> /home/jsc/public_html/developer-snapshots/RC/4.0.0/binaries/*/*.asc ;
> do echo "Checking $i" && gpg2 --verify $i;done

To properly vote on a release requires some verification steps. Rob's idea is 
one I have been thinking about as well.

To the point of a 72 hour VOTE. I think that ONE WEEK would be good for the 
project if only because it would allow people to adjust their schedules.

Personally I prefer the weekend, but a VOTE on Apache OpenOffice took me about 
4-8 hours of work for 3.4 and 3.4.1 - and my time is committed this weekend.

So, if I have time I'll vote. Otherwise, thanks and I trust the PMC to do what 
is best for the project.

Regards,
Dave




> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> -
> 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: Hello - new volunteer

[Dave Fisher]

Hi Dave,

Welcome! The first step in volunteering is to subscribe to this dev list.

If you would like to help us with building installation packages for WIndows 
platforms then you should start by learning how to build from here:

http://openoffice.apache.org/source.html

This may be a difficult place to start, but it would be a prerequisite to 
building an installation package.

Please ask questions on the list as you explore.

One of the big areas we need help is with secure digital signatures of 
installation artifacts. Anything that you could add to how we can make this 
happen in very few steps would be helpful. The ASF has strict standards which 
no one has met your expertise may prove helpful.

Regards,
Dave

On Jul 6, 2013, at 8:16 AM, Dave Ashelman wrote:

> Hello Open Office Developers:
> Good morning:
> I hope this eMail finds you well.  My name is David Ashelman and I have 
> bachelor degrees in computer information systems and mathematics.
> I really believe your software is very robust and extremely reliable.
>  
> I have a lot of experience writing MSI database application setups also 
> teaching computer theory to new MSI crafters.  If I can help, then let me 
> know how I can improve your already remarkable software.
> Since 1996, I've been a network administrator, a software design support 
> engineer, an InstallShield technical trainer, a software Release/Build 
> technician, a Windows migration consultant, and an application packaging 
> engineer. 
> 
> I have good technical skills and experience with people and software 
> engineering.
> * Two (2) Technical College Degrees (Computer Information Systems + Math) 
> * Four (4) years of experience employed by the corporation Flexera, who made 
> AdminStudio. I was responsible for supporting and training users of that 
> software (Flexera Admin Studio)
> * I worked at InstallShield from 1999 - 2003 the time when software packaging 
> began 
> 
> From 2000-2003, I taught software application packaging, software design Best 
> Practices, and Windows migration around the United States, Canada, & Great 
> Brittan while working for Flexera, Macro Vision, or InstallShield.
> 
> During that time, I saw how very difficult understanding software builds, 
> releasing, and installs was for certain software application developers. So, 
> instead of simply reciting the InstallShield product examples, I wrote a book 
> illuminating and shedding light on hard to grasp concepts and how to best 
> handle those concepts in computer data transfer. Multiple illustrations and 
> mathematical proofs and equations explain everything you need to know to make 
> great software and application installations. 
> 
> * Fourteen (14) years software build/release, software installation 
> authoring, application packaging engineering, & Windows migrations 
> 
> From 2003-13 I have been around the United States meeting great people, 
> solving complex Windows migrations, solving software application packaging 
> projects, creating software build releases, and authored multi-platform 
> software installations. 
> 
> With a little luck, hopefully we can work together. I’d like to help you 
> improve your software solutions.  Your future is bright.
> 
> Kind regards 
> 
> David W. Ashelman
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Hello - new volunteer

[Dave Ashelman]

Hello Open Office Developers:
Good morning:
I hope this eMail finds you well.  My name is David Ashelman and I have
bachelor degrees in computer information systems and mathematics.
I really believe your software is very robust and extremely reliable.

I have a lot of experience writing MSI database application setups also
teaching computer theory to new MSI crafters.  If I can help, then let me
know how I can improve your already remarkable software.

Since 1996, I've been a network administrator, a software design support
engineer, an InstallShield technical trainer, a software Release/Build
technician, a Windows migration consultant, and an application packaging
engineer.

I have good technical skills and experience with people and software
engineering.
* Two (2) Technical College Degrees (Computer Information Systems + Math)
* Four (4) years of experience employed by the corporation Flexera, who
made AdminStudio. I was responsible for supporting and training users of
that software (Flexera Admin Studio)

* I worked at InstallShield from 1999 - 2003 the time when software
packaging began

>From 2000-2003, I taught software application packaging, software design
Best Practices, and Windows migration around the United States, Canada, &
Great Brittan while working for Flexera, Macro Vision, or InstallShield.


 During that time, I saw how very difficult understanding software builds,
releasing, and installs was for certain software application developers.
So, instead of simply reciting the InstallShield product examples, I wrote
a book illuminating and shedding light on hard to grasp concepts and how to
best handle those concepts in computer data transfer. Multiple
illustrations and mathematical proofs and equations explain everything you
need to know to make great software and application installations.

* Fourteen (14) years software build/release, software installation
authoring, application packaging engineering, & Windows migrations

>From 2003-13 I have been around the United States meeting great people,
solving complex Windows migrations, solving software application packaging
projects, creating software build releases, and authored multi-platform
software installations.

 With a little luck, hopefully we can work together. I’d like to help you
improve your software solutions.  Your future is bright.

Kind regards

David W. Ashelman

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Problem accessing web site

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 4, 2013, at 8:18 AM, Pedro Marquez wrote:

> Dear Sir:
> 
> I´ve been trying to download the OpenOffice software from:
> http://www.openoffice.org/es/descargar/
> 
> However, it always respond with: 
> 
> 
> 
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/localized/es/3.4.
> 1/Apache_OpenOffice_incubating_3.4.1_Win_x86_install_es.exe/download
> 
> Server not found
> 
> 
> 
> I´ve asked to my systems administrator about, and he tells me that the
> security system “Fortinet” we use blocks it. What can I do?

(1) You can download from here:

http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/ooo/files/localized/es/3.4.1/

But you don't get the mirror system offered by sourceforge.net to our project 
(and many other non-Apache.)

(2) Ask Fortinet or your admin to whitelist sourceforge.net.



Marcus/Kay - Have we thought more about offering downloads from the Apache 
Mirror system for these exceptional cases?

Regards,
Dave



> 
> Thank you in advance,
> 
> -Pedro Marquez, Prof.
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Mercurial repository at hg.services.openoffice.org

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 1, 2013, at 1:28 PM, Andrew Rist wrote:

> 
> On 6/27/2013 9:00 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>> The Mercurial repository at http://hg.services.openoffice.org/ is no longer 
>> current but it is still useful since it contains important historical 
>> information.
>> 
>> It is still hosted by Oracle and it is now down.
>> 
>> Any plans to restore it?
> It will not be restored.  (but there are copies in the wild, the 
> https://bitbucket.org/mst/ooo340 one mentioned in this thread, for instance)

Two years was a long time. Thanks.

Regards,
Dave


> Andrew
>> We might also want to store it (read-only) somewhere at Apache, but that 
>> resource should remain available.
>> 
>> 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
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: missing mails (to moderators)

[Dave Barton]

 Original Message  
From: janI 
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 11:34:17 +0200

> Hi.
> 
> Our mwiki have tried to sent mail to dev@openoffice.apache.org
> 
> I have created a new user WikiAdmin with dev@ as e-mail, as a consequence
> mwiki have sent confirmation mails to dev@ which needs to be replied to.
> 
> I cannot see the mails on the list, so I assume that they are hold back on
> some moderator list.
> 
> Please confirm these mails, so mwiki can sent mail to dev@
> 
> thx in advance.
> jan I.

I have just released one of the confirmation emails to the dev list. I
will leave you to do the rest.

Dave



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

[DISCUSS] Contributing Existing Works [Was: Re: Can somebody please commit the update of the de-websites]

[Dave Fisher]

On Jun 21, 2013, at 7:21 AM, Peter Junge wrote:

> On 6/21/2013 9:59 PM, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
>> 
>>>> What is the problem?
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> The CD is not from the Apache OpenOffice project.  It was not reviewed
>>> and approved for release by the project.  It is a 3rd party product.
>>> The website says it is from "Verein Freies Office Deutschland e.V..":
>> 
>> No, this is absolutely *not* true!
>> 
>> The "Verein Freies Office Deutschland e.V.." is NOT the creator of the 
>> PrOOo-box, but that's us (Detlef, Jan and I) three members of the 
>> AOO-Community in Germany.
>> 
>> You can see my entry here:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Directory+of+Volunteers
>> 
>> and I can gladly Jan and Detlef ask to register there.
>> 
>> The "Verein Freies Office Deutschland e.V. is the *only* one who pays us the 
>> hosting of the Box (850 euros per year).
>> 
>> *We would be pleased if the Apache paid. Apache wants to do that?*
> 
> As far as I understand the Apache way: Apache products must be hosted by 
> Apache infrastructure(*), but as the PrOOo-Box certainly contains also 
> non-Apache products it cannot be hosted at Apache. Seems a Catch-22 to me. 
> Does someone has any good idea how to fix this? It would certainly be a good 
> thing to continue the PrOOo-Box within the AOO community.
> 
> (*) Apache strictly requires to avoid community fragmentation like it had 
> happened with OOo.

I would like to continue this discussion with a different approach. Let's 
discuss the process for PrOOo-Box to become part of the Apache OpenOffice 
product. There are several steps and it is worth exploring. Of course I must 
preface this with "I am not a lawyer." The following would need to be 
considered:

(1) License / IP Clearance. A review of the non-Apache products included in 
PrOOo-Box is necessary. If these are compatible then it is possible to include 
them in a "release". If not then they are other considerations which would 
depend on packaging and all kinds of legal and technical challenges.

(2) Copyright. If the three of you own the unique aspects then you may need to 
re-license these to AL2.0 - the Apache LIcense.

(3) Individual Contributor License Agreements (ICLA) help. If there is a large 
amount of unique IP then a Software Grant may be requested.

(4) The AOO PMC would have to accept the donation through a VOTE or LAZY 
CONSENSUS.

We can all learn something from the PrOOo-box team.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> Best regards
> Peter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>>> But these are still 3rd party distributions.
>> 
>> No, this is the Box of german Members of the AOO-Community!
>> 
>> 
>> But that is not the problem, because the question is a Others, namely how we 
>> can make local work on AOO when we can not even provide information users 
>> need?
>> 
>> A notice in a news-teaser is anyway only a temporary entry. What is the 
>> problem?
>> 
>> 
>> Rob, you have, tell me here on the list, the following:
>> 
>> * it's okay to get involved locally for AOO and Apache welcomes such 
>> activities
>> 
>> * I should self make a choice
>> 
>> 
>> However, I live in Germany, and here I know the OpenOffice users for more 
>> than 8 years, and I know what users need for assistance.
>> And we all have to do something otherwise AOO lost in Germany. Sorry, but 
>> that *is* the truth.
>> 
>> 
>>> So we are fair and we don't give special prominence to any single 3rd
>>> party distribution.
>> 
>> But that is *not* what is needed.
>> 
>> There shall be *no* permanent link, but only a *temporary* news-teaser. This 
>> teaser is automatically replaced by someone else, as soon as there are new 
>> news.
>> 
>> What is the problem?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Greetings,
>> Jörg
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> 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: Can somebody please commit the update of the de-websites

[Dave Fisher]

On Jun 22, 2013, at 9:09 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Jun 21, 2013, at 9:40 AM, Dr. Michael Stehmann wrote:
>> 
>>> Am 21.06.2013 17:06, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:56 AM, RA Stehmann
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>> Hi Rob,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I can understand your concerns, but they aren't drasticly.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm with you, that we have to make clear, the Box isn't a product of
>> the
>>>>> ASF but distributed by the "Verein Freies Office Deutschland e.V..".
>>>>> 
>>>>> But on the other hand the "Verein Freies Office Deutschland e.V.."
>> isn't
>>>>> any old third party.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> We need to be fair.  Treating one 3rd party special is not fair.
>>> 
>>> Treating equal things unequal isn't fair, but it's also unfair treating
>>> unequal things equal. You have to make the decision, what's equal and
>>> whd what's unequa and in what aspect. That's the sense of "suum cuique
>>> tribuere".
>> 
>> My recollection of the discussion was.
>> 
>> (1) Have a 3rd party page.
>> 
>> (2) Each language may have their own 3rd party page.
>> 
>> (3) Each language can have their own news feed.
>> 
>> (4) Each news item may link to a 3rd party page.
>> 
>> Conclusion.
>> 
>> DE page can have news about PrOOo and point to a link on the 3rd party
>> page.
>> 
>> Do we all agree?
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>> 
> 
> Could these points be placed in their own [PROPOSAL] thread so they could
> be discussed on their own?
> 
> If we could do that and either vote, or at least have a consensus, I think
> it would be a good idea to further clarify this topic by adding a new "Web
> guidelines" page to the project site --  http://openoffice.apache.org/

Done. I certainly want to separate this ... let's move forward. Saying less can 
be saying more. (A paraphrase of Mies van der Rohe's "Less is More")

Regards,
Dave

> 
> 
> 
>>>> 
>>>>> It's a charitable german entity supporting Free office software. It's
>>>>> still supporting Apache OpenOffice. The computer an the monitor at our
>>>>> Fosdem stand were provided by "Verein Freies Office Deutschland e.V..".
>>>>> 
>>>>> Disclaimer: I'm no member of that club, but know persons who are.
>>>>> 
>>>>> So IMO it's ok to put that news in the news line of the homepage,
>> making
>>>>> clear, who's the distributor of that product.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I'd be much happier if the German community listened to what I am
>>>> saying and took steps to address the full issue. IMHO you need to add
>>>> a page that gives equal access to all 3rd party ports and
>>>> distributions, and not just favor a single one with a news
>>>> announcement.
>>> 
>>> see above.
>>> 
>>> IMO you like to treat uneqal things equal.
>>> 
>>> Making a page presenting third party products makes sense.
>>> 
>>> But it don't makes sense, presenting all third party products in the
>>> news. And it makes IMO sense presenting the box there.
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> If you then give announcements of updates to these distributions,
>>>> whenever they occur, and do such announcements fairly, not for just a
>>>> single 3rd party, then this might be OK.   So if you really want to
>>>> move this forward I'd highly recommend creating and maintaining a
>>>> German version of the porting page:
>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Doing one thing doesn't mean to drop another.
>>> 
>>> Regards
>>> Michael
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> -
> MzK
> 
> "If you stick with a vision, it might not all work,
> but some of it will be absolute genius."
>   -- Kim Cattrall


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

[PROPOSAL] Language Specific Third Party Pages

[Dave Fisher]

Hi -

To make it official and so that we are all clear.

The following rules apply to links to third party products and related new 
announcements only.

(1) Have a project wide 3rd party page in English.

(2) Each language community may choose to have a separate 3rd party page. (For 
example a Germanophone third party page.)

(3) Each language may choose to maintain their own news feed to make language 
community specific announcements.

(4) A news item may link to any 3rd party page in openoffice.org.

(5) 3rd party pages may link to 3rd parties. Who the 3rd party is should be 
clear on 3rd party page. It should be clear that the 3rd party is not the ASF 
and is not the Apache OpenOffice Project.

Conclusion.

DE page can have news about PrOOo and point to a Germanophone 3rd party page.

Regards,
Dave


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Can somebody please commit the update of the de-websites

[Dave Fisher]

On Jun 21, 2013, at 9:40 AM, Dr. Michael Stehmann wrote:

> Am 21.06.2013 17:06, schrieb Rob Weir:
>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:56 AM, RA Stehmann
>>  wrote:
>>> Hi Rob,
>>> 
>>> I can understand your concerns, but they aren't drasticly.
>>> 
>>> I'm with you, that we have to make clear, the Box isn't a product of the
>>> ASF but distributed by the "Verein Freies Office Deutschland e.V..".
>>> 
>>> But on the other hand the "Verein Freies Office Deutschland e.V.." isn't
>>> any old third party.
>>> 
>> 
>> We need to be fair.  Treating one 3rd party special is not fair.
> 
> Treating equal things unequal isn't fair, but it's also unfair treating
> unequal things equal. You have to make the decision, what's equal and
> whd what's unequa and in what aspect. That's the sense of "suum cuique
> tribuere".

My recollection of the discussion was.

(1) Have a 3rd party page.

(2) Each language may have their own 3rd party page.

(3) Each language can have their own news feed.

(4) Each news item may link to a 3rd party page.

Conclusion.

DE page can have news about PrOOo and point to a link on the 3rd party page.

Do we all agree?

Regards,
Dave

>> 
>>> It's a charitable german entity supporting Free office software. It's
>>> still supporting Apache OpenOffice. The computer an the monitor at our
>>> Fosdem stand were provided by "Verein Freies Office Deutschland e.V..".
>>> 
>>> Disclaimer: I'm no member of that club, but know persons who are.
>>> 
>>> So IMO it's ok to put that news in the news line of the homepage, making
>>> clear, who's the distributor of that product.
>>> 
>> 
>> I'd be much happier if the German community listened to what I am
>> saying and took steps to address the full issue. IMHO you need to add
>> a page that gives equal access to all 3rd party ports and
>> distributions, and not just favor a single one with a news
>> announcement.
> 
> see above.
> 
> IMO you like to treat uneqal things equal.
> 
> Making a page presenting third party products makes sense.
> 
> But it don't makes sense, presenting all third party products in the
> news. And it makes IMO sense presenting the box there.
> 
>> 
>> If you then give announcements of updates to these distributions,
>> whenever they occur, and do such announcements fairly, not for just a
>> single 3rd party, then this might be OK.   So if you really want to
>> move this forward I'd highly recommend creating and maintaining a
>> German version of the porting page:
>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>> 
> 
> Doing one thing doesn't mean to drop another.
> 
> Regards
> Michael
> 
> 
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: AOO 4.0 Logo: We're not done yet!

[Dave Fisher]

On Jun 20, 2013, at 11:46 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> In case you are not following the discussion on the dev list, Juergen,
> the 4.0 Release Manager, has proposed an endgame schedule for the AOO
> 4.0 release:
> 
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openoffice-dev/201306.mbox/%3C51C16876.402%40gmail.com%3E
> 
> The date relevant to the logo is Monday July 1th.  That is the
> deadline for getting the logo changes integrated into Subversion for
> the OpenOffice product.
> 
> Changes on the website and social networking don't have a hard
> deadline and can come later, perhaps synched up with the actual
> release of AOO 4.0, which is planned for later in July.
> 
> So what needs to be done?
> 
> 1) Kevin said he wanted to make some fine tuning of the text kerning
> in the logo.
> 
> 2) Alexandro said something about adjusting the colors.  But I'm not
> certain I understood that correctly.
> 
> 3) We need to update the graphics in the product.  And there are a lot
> of them, around 25 of them, which I've laboriously transcribed onto
> the wiki:
> 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Product+Logo+Use
> 
> Most of them will be simple.  It is just a matter of replacing one
> logo with another, and preserving the right formats, dimensions, color
> depths, etc.
> 
> A few exceptions, of placements which will require some more thought:
> 
> a) The splash screen is here:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/default_images/introabout/intro.png
> 
> It has integrated text and graphics and the text is rather ugly.  Can
> we do better here?  This is a place where some "wow" is appropriate.

Consider

(1) Take the logo SVG
(2) Add "4"
(3) Scale to the 550 x 365 px size.
(4) Add updated and well written text in the same font.
(5) Add quality Apache Feather.
(6) Include trademark.
(7) Cool contextual graphics?
(8) Create a PNG from the SVG.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> b) Some of the placements have "high contrast" versions, needed for
> when this mode is enabled in the operating system.  This improves
> visibility for users with low vision.  For example:
> 
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/default_images/framework/res/backing_hc.png
> 
> I think we need to consult with someone with expertise in this to know
> exactly what we should be doing here.
> 
> c) This is from the SDK install:
> 
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/inc_sdkoo/windows/msi_templates/Binary/Image.bmp
> 
> As you can see it is a more elaborate, 3D image showing
> "OpenOffice.org" in the title bar.  This will require someone skilled
> with their graphics editor to replace that text and make it look
> natural.  Or redo the image.
> 
> So plenty of work to do here for anyone who is good with a graphics
> editor and wants to help.
> 
> But first we need Kevin and Alexandro to make their changes to the
> master SVG.  After that we can work in parallel on the remaining
> pieces.
> 
> The master SVG, from Chris, is here:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/marketing/art/galleries/logos/aoo-working/
> 
> We have a little more than a week to do this, so can I strongly
> suggest that Kevin and Alexandro make their changes ASAP, and by
> Monday June 24th at the latest?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> -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: Article on the Register

[Dave Fisher]

On Jun 11, 2013, at 4:57 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
>> 
>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Kay Schenk 
>>> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Andrea Pescetti >>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> RGB ES wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 2013/6/11 Rob Weir
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Andre Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> It is sad that it has the usual misinformation:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I was quite surprised to read it. At least, if a journalist had to
>>> pick a
>>>>>> recent blog post from the OpenOffice blog, the one about release
>>> schedules
>>>>>> is definitely less interesting than other recent ones...
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> You should find the email of the publication's news editor and write a
>>>>>>>>> polite yet firm complaint
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Or just post a comment. Andre, did you try doing so? Maybe they will
>>>>>> rectify some clear factual errors in the article. I strongly recommend
>>> that
>>>>>> you post your comments there and not only here on the list.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> So the best strategy is to ignore the the FUD and push accurate and
>>>>>>>> useful information onto our website.  That approach reaches more
>>>>>>>> users, and is under our control.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> +1. Talking about sites like El Reg means promoting them, and
>>> promotion
>>>>>>> means more weight on search engines for those lies
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> +1, yes, it's untrue and insulting but our actions DO speak louder than
>>>>> these words.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Note that the highly visible site is http://www.openoffice.org and not
>>>>>> the blog; the site is linked to the blog only through a link that is
>>> at the
>>>>>> bottom of the page and, moreover, is hidden under a JavaScript layer.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> So something that we should do immediately is to create a simple block
>>>>>> with the titles of our latest three blog posts (from the official
>>> blog) and
>>>>>> put it on the homepage. And keep it updated manually, at least when
>>> it's
>>>>>> worth doing so.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> A good idea! I too feel the blogs are a bit too submerged. Let's see
>>> what
>>>>> we can come up with for this.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> How about adding it to the top-nav, where we currently have:
>>>> 
>>>> Product
>>>> Download
>>>> Support
>>>> Extend
>>>> Develop
>>>> Focus Areas
>>>> Native Language
>>>> 
>>>> Put a new entry there for "News" or "Blog" and have that link to the
>>> blog.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I went ahead and did this.  Easily reversible if we don't like it.
>>> 
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/
>>> 
>>> -Rob
>>> 
>> 
>> Well...I would have preferred calling it something else besides "News"
>> because now I think it's confused/associated with the left "News" items.
>> 
> 
> Oh, good point.
> 
>> When Andrea brought this up, I guess I was thinking he wanted actual Blog
>> headlines listed/highlighted, but maybe the top nav bar is good if we come
>> up with something a bit more "catchy".  But...I got nothin. :/
>> 
> 
> The problem we have (and maybe this is not a problem but just a
> different form of success) is that the blog is now updated quite
> frequently, but the stories on the home page never seem to change.  

Re: Congratulations to Andrea and Andrew!

[Dave Fisher]

On Jun 11, 2013, at 9:20 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 4:06 AM, Rob Weir  wrote:
> 
>> Both Andrea Pescetti and Andrew Rist were among those elected as new
>> ASF Members.
>> 
>> Congratulations for the well-deserved recognition!
>> 
>> -Rob
>> 
> 
> YES! Congratulations indeed...
> 
> https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation_welcomes2

Yes, congratulations indeed! Welcome to ASF Membership!

Best Regards,
Dave

> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> MzK
> 
> "You can't believe one thing and do another.
> What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
> -- Leonard Peltier


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Certified DEVs

[Dave Fisher]

On Jun 9, 2013, at 9:40 AM, Ian Lynch wrote:

> My main thought was market confidence. If LO can say they have 26
> developers working on code it would be interesting to have a
> comparison on a similar "like for like" basis.

Before we can make a like for like comparison we need to understand the TDF 
process:

From the page you cite:
> Certified Developers are present TDF members, were nominated by the 
> Certification Committee, and subsequently peer-reviewed by the Engineering 
> Steering Committee.

But there is also a disclaimer (with a grammatical error of translation):
> Notes on the aforementioned entries: our list of certified developers is for 
> your information, alphabetically sorted, and not necessarily complete nor 
> up-to-date. Specifically does TDF not recommend nor endorse any of the listed 
> companies. Interested parties are asked to individually assess if the listed 
> companies are suitable for their respective requirements. If you notice 
> mistakes or inaccuracies, please inform us ati...@documentfoundation.org.

Unless we can replicate this process I am afraid that any "like for like" 
comparison may be fodder for press FUD.

We would need to use a publicly measurable approach like "more than X commits 
to the code base". It is likely that X would need to be supported by examining 
the commit logs of LO and comparing with their list finding the person with the 
least commits who is on their list.

If someone can provide this comparison then I would support a blog post. This 
could also point to our full committer count to show that the project values 
all contributions.

We can also emphasize that at the ASF it is individuals and not companies that 
are contributing.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> On 9 June 2013 17:24, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>> 
>> On Jun 9, 2013, at 7:36 AM, janI wrote:
>> 
>>> On 9 June 2013 16:04, Ian Lynch  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I noticed that LibreO has 26 Certified Developers.
>>>> 
>>>> http://www.documentfoundation.org/certification/developers/
>>>> 
>>>> While we have the concept of a committer here at AOO is there
>>>> something specific for active code developers? Would it be worth
>>>> considering such a thing?
>>>> 
>> 
>> The LO page is more about the people who are "certified" coders. This is a 
>> functional equivalent to an svn auth list on the codebase - those AOO 
>> committers who work on the codebase as opposed to QA, Infra, Marketing and 
>> most importantly Translation.
>> 
>> Apache is a flat organization. We don't make this distinction. Do we want to 
>> start playing a marketing game of numbers, or do we want to put our energy 
>> into writing the best code? [4]
>> 
>>> 
>>> I think the committer status, covers much of the "certification", if we do
>>> such a thing for developers, we should also do it for
>>> QA, documenters etc.
>> 
>> Exactly. If anything we should highlight our differences. We are an 
>> organization where active contribution and engagement of all kinds is 
>> important. It is community over code. [1]
>> .
>>> I do like the lo page, as such, because it clearly shows who (and from
>>> where) are paid, and who are volunteers. Such a list would be nice to have
>>> for newcommers, especially if it included a line or two about the interest
>>> of each.
>> 
>> We have built similar information. Committers just need to maintain it.
>> 
>> It is currently in the CWiki here [2]
>> 
>> Originally it was here [3]
>> 
>> We could add more here, or we could describe that the project is a community 
>> of volunteers, etc. We could remind committers to update their details on 
>> the wiki or request help with doing so.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>> 
>> [1] http://communityovercode.com/
>> [2] 
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Directory+of+Volunteers
>> [3] http://openoffice.apache.org/people.html
>> 
>> [4] I don't want to restart this discussion, but this is one reason why I am 
>> against having a different svn auth list for the codebase unless there is a 
>> demonstrated problem. This may be done in private. If I have inexplicably 
>> changed my mind later then it will be because a real security threat to the 
>> AOO codebase is manifest.
>> 
>>> 
>>> rgds
>>> jan I.
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Ian
>>>> 
>>>> Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications
>>>> 
>>>> Headline points in 

Re: Certified DEVs

[Dave Fisher]

On Jun 9, 2013, at 7:36 AM, janI wrote:

> On 9 June 2013 16:04, Ian Lynch  wrote:
> 
>> I noticed that LibreO has 26 Certified Developers.
>> 
>> http://www.documentfoundation.org/certification/developers/
>> 
>> While we have the concept of a committer here at AOO is there
>> something specific for active code developers? Would it be worth
>> considering such a thing?
>> 

The LO page is more about the people who are "certified" coders. This is a 
functional equivalent to an svn auth list on the codebase - those AOO 
committers who work on the codebase as opposed to QA, Infra, Marketing and most 
importantly Translation.

Apache is a flat organization. We don't make this distinction. Do we want to 
start playing a marketing game of numbers, or do we want to put our energy into 
writing the best code? [4]

> 
> I think the committer status, covers much of the "certification", if we do
> such a thing for developers, we should also do it for
> QA, documenters etc.

Exactly. If anything we should highlight our differences. We are an 
organization where active contribution and engagement of all kinds is 
important. It is community over code. [1]
.
> I do like the lo page, as such, because it clearly shows who (and from
> where) are paid, and who are volunteers. Such a list would be nice to have
> for newcommers, especially if it included a line or two about the interest
> of each.

We have built similar information. Committers just need to maintain it.

It is currently in the CWiki here [2]

Originally it was here [3]

We could add more here, or we could describe that the project is a community of 
volunteers, etc. We could remind committers to update their details on the wiki 
or request help with doing so.

Regards,
Dave

[1] http://communityovercode.com/
[2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Directory+of+Volunteers
[3] http://openoffice.apache.org/people.html

[4] I don't want to restart this discussion, but this is one reason why I am 
against having a different svn auth list for the codebase unless there is a 
demonstrated problem. This may be done in private. If I have inexplicably 
changed my mind later then it will be because a real security threat to the AOO 
codebase is manifest. 

> 
> rgds
> jan I.
> 
>> 
>> --
>> Ian
>> 
>> Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications
>> 
>> Headline points in the 2014 and 2015 school league tables
>> 
>> www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940
>> 
>> The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth,
>> Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and
>> Wales.
>> 
>> -
>> 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: Location for logo source?

[Dave Fisher]

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 7, 2013, at 4:55 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
>> Rob Weir wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/art/galleries/logos/
>>> 
>>> I like this area more.  Maybe the images/AOO_logos is better for the
>>> concrete website PNG image, and the marketing/art/galleries area could
>>> be for the source, etc.?  We can then set expectations/permissible
>>> uses, etc., on the existing web pages.
>> 
>> 
>> Seems good. Actually, we could even shorten it to
>> http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/logos/
>> for better reachability in SVN ("art" would still be meaningful, but
>> "galleries" seems misleading). This is just a minor preference of course.
> 
> I checked it in earlier just so those who are interested in helping
> with it can access it:
> 
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/marketing/art/galleries/logos/aoo-working/
> 
> I'd like to clean up the /marketing tree in general, to move the old
> logo(s) to a history page, etc.  This whole area of the website is in
> need of a cleanup.   Or maybe migration into the wiki?  Most of the
> project-facing marketing work is probably better done on the wiki than
> in static pages.  In the end I'd only want things like logos, where we
> do not want to give public write-access, to be in SVN.
> 
> Make sense?

Yes +1. Thanks for your leadership on this.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> Regards,
> 
> -Rob
> 
>> 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
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Draft blog post: When will OpenOffice version X be released?

[Dave Fisher]

On Jun 8, 2013, at 5:34 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

> On 06/06/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
>> https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=when_will_openoffice_version_x
>> Since we get this question frequently, I thought it would be good to
>> have a canonical response we can point people to.
> 
> It's good but I'd add pointers so that people who want to get involved can do 
> so.
> 
> It is time to give more visibility to development snapshots, for example: a 
> link to 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshotfullsets
>  would help in getting more feedback. Or a link to any QA resource leading to 
> it. We don't want to make them too visible since they are unofficial, but 
> hiding them too much does not help either, especially when the release comes 
> closer.

We can discuss developer snapshots on list, but I think it is outside of ASF 
policy to publish URLs elsewhere - like in Blog posts.

We should point those interested in development to the dev ML and then on the 
ML point them to development resources ad hoc.

> 
> Same for translations. It would be good to include a link to
> http://openoffice.apache.org/translate.html

Definitely.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> 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: [VOTE] Logo selection for Apache OpenOffice 4.0

[Dave Barton]

>> Please use enter your preferences using logo names from one of the
>> following sources:

My ranked preferences for the AOO 4.0 logo are:
1st Choice: Our current logo


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: updates.openoffice.org

[Dave Fisher]

 within the next 72
>>> hours,
>>>>> it
>>>>>> will be implemented as you propose.
>>>>> 
>>>>> An extra step will be needed.  Presumably we want the Apache CMS
>>>>> enabled so it publishes files from the SVN dir to the website dir.
>>>>> This doesn't happen automatically.
>>>> 
>>>> that is not only an extra step, that can turn out to be a bigger
>>> challenge.
>>>> Having CMS enabled
>>>> is a very valid request, but then please choose a location inside the
>>>> web-site where CMS is already enabled.
>>> 
>>> We already have two separate CMS publish targets from our SVN:  /site
>>> (openoffice.apache.org) and /ooo-site (www.openoffice.org).  Having a
>>> third one should not be a problem.  I'd like to avoid the complexity
>>> that would occur if we had the same SVN dir connected to two different
>>> CMS targets.
>> 
>> of course it can be done its software, its just more work and more admin
>> afterward.
>> 
>> You would not have one svn dir connected to two different cms targets if
>> target dir is inside www.openoffice.org (which is what I suggested).
>> 
>> updates.openoffice.org is logically just a pointer, and would normally
>> point inside the www domain (that is the simple solution), but can point
>> outside the www domain (which requires changes to httpd.conf, and an extra
>> cms setup).
> 
> from Oliver's commmunication [1], it seems that updates.openoffice.org has
> been suggested to be *outside* the current web site domain, and followed by
> his comments --
> 
> "My opinion: I believe it would be good to have the update resources
> separated from the website resources. It would mean to move
> ^/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/projects/aoo40/check.Update to
> ^/openoffice/updates-site/trunk/aoo40/check.Update"
> 
> I feel we should NOT point the new update to any area within the existing
> www domain (we had some BIG problems initially trying to enable updates
> through the web server), so a new CMS would be needed. Hopefully, this is
> not a horrendous task.

Infra will likely svnpubsub the new part of svn that has the update logic as 
bare files. Projects are not required to use CMS, but are required to use 
svnpubsub,

I see no reason this needs to be pushed through CMS. None, it's too much extra 
work.

Thanks Oliver and Jan.

Regards,
Dave


> 
> 
> 
>> rgds
>> jan I.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> -Rob
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> rgds
>>>> jan i.
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Rob
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> rgds
>>>>>> jan I.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 05.06.2013 00:22, janI wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 5 June 2013 00:05, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 5:59 PM, janI  wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On 4 June 2013 22:36, Andrea Pescetti 
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On 03/06/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I think the concern is this:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) We want SSL for 4.0.http://update.openoffice.org<
>>>>>>>>>>> http://update.openoffice.org> is not HTTPS.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) The URL https://ooo-site.openoffice.apache.org<
>>>>> http://apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>> https://ooo-site.openoffice.**apache.org<
>>>>> https://ooo-site.openoffice.apache.org>>
>>>>>>>>> supports SSL, but is
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> not considered "long term stable".  The URL is an artifact of
>> the
>>> CMS
>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) We're looking for a stable URL.  One could be
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://updates.openoffice.org, but that requires an SSL
>>> cert
>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>> *.openoffice.org.  But will that be supported in time for the
>>> AOO
>

Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS] Logo selection for Apache OpenOffice 4.0

[Dave Barton]

 Original Message  
From: Rob Weir 
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org , Dennis
Hamilton 
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 08:45:32 -0400

> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
>> I think if the "Apache" is made thicker by using Bold and a touch darker 
>> grey, it will work much better, at least as positioned in the Rottensteiner 
>> Stage 2 refinement.  It also gives "Apache" more (symbolic) weight without 
>> overpowering the "OpenOffice" part.
>>
>> I agree one wants to use the best of resampled PNG and regenerated SVG at 
>> the lower size.  Also, if the SVG has hints about the visually-intended size 
>> (at whatever pixel resolution), the fonts may be adjusted automatically to 
>> avoid excessive thinning at smaller presentation sizes.  Then there are the 
>> tricks needed when rasterization also becomes significant.
>>
> 
> Right.  And I hope that no one thinks that we're voting for pixels
> carved in marble.  We're voting on a design.  I'd expect ordinary
> technical adjustments to be made to suit the scale and medium of a
> particular use.  It should feel the same to a user, of course.  That's
> the advantage of having the vector source to a logo.  With the current
> logo it has been difficult to work with, since we only have the orb as
> a bitmap.
> 
> -Rob

Maybe I am missing something here (very possible), but I have the
current logo and a couple of variants in svg format. If required I would
be happy to upload them.

If someone would be kind enough to advise me how to create a public html
page ~bmcs (like https://people.apache.org/~arielch/), I will put all
the OOo & AOO related svg images I have collected there.

Dave

>>  - Dennis
>>
>> I don't have enough personal knowledge about SVG implementations and font 
>> hinting (although Adobe has information about it).  I do know that Knuth had 
>> to introduce anomorphic scaling into his fonts because the smaller ones 
>> would become visually too thin at the smaller point sizes if simply scaled 
>> geometrically.  It's a human vision thing.  He was producing images for 
>> production publishing systems and had a luxury of pixels; there was more 
>> involved that nudging pixel alignments.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 04:54 PM
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS] Logo selection for Apache OpenOffice 4.0
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>
>>> Staring a [VOTE][DISCUSS] thread parallel to the [VOTE] thread.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>>>
>>> .
>>> .
>>> .
>>>>
>>>> My comments with some very preliminary testing: the VERY LIGHT gray
>>>> "Apache" in any form doesn't scale well going smaller.  The very thin
>>>> letters also don't scale well going smaller.
>>>>
>>>
>>> How did you scale the image?  By resizing the PNG file?  If so that
>>> probably doesn't give the optimal quality.
>>
>>
>> yes, this is what I did...
>>
>>
>>>  If we resize from the SVG
>>> source, and if the SVG references a vector font with "hinting", then
>>> it is possible that the text will be clearer at smaller sizes.  In
>>> theory that should help with the letter scaling.  Not sure about the
>>> light gray.
>>>
>>
>> Well maybe someone could  resize appropriately. Our current "web" logo is
>> only 200 x 100. I actually used 300 x ??? (kept the aspect ratio) and
>> things were not great on any of these with that very light gray
>> "Apache"...even slightly darker would help I think.
>>
>>
>>> -Rob


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS] Logo selection for Apache OpenOffice 4.0

[Dave Barton]

 Original Message  
From: Rob Weir 
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org , Dennis
Hamilton 
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 08:45:32 -0400

> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
>> I think if the "Apache" is made thicker by using Bold and a touch darker 
>> grey, it will work much better, at least as positioned in the Rottensteiner 
>> Stage 2 refinement.  It also gives "Apache" more (symbolic) weight without 
>> overpowering the "OpenOffice" part.
>>
>> I agree one wants to use the best of resampled PNG and regenerated SVG at 
>> the lower size.  Also, if the SVG has hints about the visually-intended size 
>> (at whatever pixel resolution), the fonts may be adjusted automatically to 
>> avoid excessive thinning at smaller presentation sizes.  Then there are the 
>> tricks needed when rasterization also becomes significant.
>>
> 
> Right.  And I hope that no one thinks that we're voting for pixels
> carved in marble.  We're voting on a design.  I'd expect ordinary
> technical adjustments to be made to suit the scale and medium of a
> particular use.  It should feel the same to a user, of course.  That's
> the advantage of having the vector source to a logo.  With the current
> logo it has been difficult to work with, since we only have the orb as
> a bitmap.
> 
> -Rob

Maybe I am missing something here (very possible), but I have the
current logo and a couple of variants in svg format. If required I would
be happy to upload them.

If someone would be kind enough to advise me how to create a public html
page ~bmcs (like https://people.apache.org/~arielch/), I will put all
the OOo & AOO related svg images I have collected there.

Dave

>>  - Dennis
>>
>> I don't have enough personal knowledge about SVG implementations and font 
>> hinting (although Adobe has information about it).  I do know that Knuth had 
>> to introduce anomorphic scaling into his fonts because the smaller ones 
>> would become visually too thin at the smaller point sizes if simply scaled 
>> geometrically.  It's a human vision thing.  He was producing images for 
>> production publishing systems and had a luxury of pixels; there was more 
>> involved that nudging pixel alignments.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 04:54 PM
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS] Logo selection for Apache OpenOffice 4.0
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>
>>> Staring a [VOTE][DISCUSS] thread parallel to the [VOTE] thread.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>>>
>>> .
>>> .
>>> .
>>>>
>>>> My comments with some very preliminary testing: the VERY LIGHT gray
>>>> "Apache" in any form doesn't scale well going smaller.  The very thin
>>>> letters also don't scale well going smaller.
>>>>
>>>
>>> How did you scale the image?  By resizing the PNG file?  If so that
>>> probably doesn't give the optimal quality.
>>
>>
>> yes, this is what I did...
>>
>>
>>>  If we resize from the SVG
>>> source, and if the SVG references a vector font with "hinting", then
>>> it is possible that the text will be clearer at smaller sizes.  In
>>> theory that should help with the letter scaling.  Not sure about the
>>> light gray.
>>>
>>
>> Well maybe someone could  resize appropriately. Our current "web" logo is
>> only 200 x 100. I actually used 300 x ??? (kept the aspect ratio) and
>> things were not great on any of these with that very light gray
>> "Apache"...even slightly darker would help I think.
>>
>>
>>> -Rob


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: New BZ Component: General/Legal

[Dave Fisher]

Hi Rob,

On May 29, 2013, at 1:37 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Donald Whytock  wrote:
>> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
>> 
>>> Description is: "Issues related to NOTICE, LICENSE files, trademarks
>>> or similar legal or policy requirements."
>>> 
>> 
>> Is this specifically issues internal to AOO?  As opposed to reports of
>> trademark abuse or requests for approval of trademark use?
>> 
> 
> For issues related to the product itself.  So on the trademark side
> that would be quite narrow, e.g., a trademark statement in the About
> box, and maybe recognition of 3rd party trademarks in printed
> materials, e.g., "Microsoft Windows".

I know where to go. :-)

> 
> For permission on using trademarks and logos the process is to send
> the request to the private mailing list:
> http://openoffice.apache.org/trademarks.html

Good. Thank you.

> 
> We're not currently tracking such requests in BZ.

Nor should we. These are usually private matters.

Regards,
Dave


> 
> -Rob
> 
> 
>> Don
> 
> -
> 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: Naming and Trademark Concerns

[Dave Fisher]

On May 28, 2013, at 3:03 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

> On 5/28/13 4:12 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On May 27, 2013, at 8:28 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi -
>>> 
>>> I just now reviewed Jürgen's latest snapshot build and I have some 
>>> trademark concerns. The current UI and Help file seem to be out of Apache 
>>> Branding policy[1][2] in two ways.
>>> 
>>> (1) The most prominent use of the brand in many place is "OpenOffice" when 
>>> it ought to be "Apache OpenOffice." This is the case in many places 
>>> throughout the UI and Help files.
>>> 
>> 
>> Can you give some examples?
> 
> I agree we need concrete examples. We discussed the usage of OpenOffice
> instead of Apache OpenOffice her eon the list weeks/month ago. I am
> wondering why this pops up now.

Understood. I took some time to search for uses of "productname" and there are 
a large number. Let's just say that I am bringing it up now so that we can 
start on it early for 4.1. We can add a shortproductname and choose when we say 
"Apache OpenOffice" and "OpenOffice".

We need to do this in a way that helps the ASF and the AOO PMC defend the brand.

Since this is large let's let this happen immediately after the 4.0 release. 
Let it be a branding effort, call it 4.1.

> 
> The intro and about clearly state Apache OpenOffice. Many other
> occurrences are simply OpenOffice, the term that all use normally.

Let's pay attention to these screens as we update to the new logo and the below:

> 
>> 
>>> (2) There is no trademark attribution in the application UI.
>>> 
> 
> What exactly do you have in mind?
> 
> We can add or change the intro image to
> 
> ##
> Apache, the Apache feather logo, and OpenOffice are trademarks of The
> Apache Software Foundation. OpenOffice.org and the seagull logo are
> registered trademarks of The Apache Software Foundation. Other names
> appearing on the site may be trademarks of their respective owners.
> ##
> 
> maybe we can add a short form to the start center but I am not sure. I
> have never seen it in a prominent place in an application.

Yes it can be something like this maybe a fourth tab. Trademarks on the dialog 
with Readme, License, and Notices. Since it is is legalese it can always be in 
English. Is this what you mean? If so, good.

We also should write "TM and Copyright" on the About.

> 
> But we can for sure add an untranslated version in the about box and the
> intro

How can I help?

Regards,
Dave

> 
> Juergen
> 
> 
>>> I'm willing to help mitigate these issues if someone wants to point me 
>>> towards the correct action.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>> 
>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/responsibility.html
>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs
>>> -
>>> 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: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection

[Dave Fisher]

Hi,

Kevin's "book birds" use perspective drawing techniques and converge on the 
horizon. They are going somewhere.

The standard gulls are more like two birds in the standard "wingman" formation. 
OpenOffice is your "wingman" to take you where you want to go.

Regards,
Dave

On May 28, 2013, at 10:12 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

> @Kevin,
> 
> It never occurred to me that those were flying books.  Taking another look, 
> it still doesn't work.  If made more obviously as books, I'm not sure how 
> that will occur as indicative of an office productivity suite.  (I have no 
> idea how birds in flight do that either, but it is probably better to avoid 
> trying for a literal connection.)
> 
> - Dennis
> 
> Looking Closer:
> 
> The first visual distraction for me is the difference in orientation.  The 
> foreground (larger) object is angled differently and it has a very different 
> feel.  I don't know why.  (One might be that your large foreground object 
> seems viewed from above, especially if it is supposed to be a book, whereas 
> in the other forms, it is easier to see them as viewed from below -- I get it 
> is totally an optical illusion that there is a particular viewpoint 
> orientation, but that is how they occur to me on first glance.)
> 
> The only way I can visualize the book notion is that I am seeing an unfolded 
> piece of paper.  If this is two facing pages of an open book, the problem is 
> there is nothing to suggest the rest of the book.
> 
> I think this goes to show that seeing a book at the abstracted level of this 
> symbol is a definite stretch.  
> 
> "Your ideas taking flight" is a great catch-phrase though.  That works with 
> any of them.  In that regard, the symbol Chris used has the advantage of the 
> foreground wing extending beyond the edge of the orb.  I tend to see that as 
> being in front of the orb, although one can also consider that we are seeing 
> them on the outside of a round aperture.  My immediate subjective response is 
> to see the flyers in front of the orb.  I have no idea how consistent that is 
> with the initial perception of others, if there is any consistency at all.
> 
> As far as this kind of imagery goes, the flat symbol is an improvement on the 
> orb in the current logo, which has the appearance of a button or globe 
> standing on a surface.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Kevin Grignon [mailto:kevingrignon...@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 05:44 AM
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Cc: marketing; dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> I wanted to share some design rationale for the gull/book pages enhancement 
> in my logo. 
> 
> In my design I wanted to make the "gulls" into flying books. I made them 
> broader and more active. I was going for the whole, "OpenOffice helps give my 
> thoughts and ideas wings", versus "gills at sunset". 
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Kevin 
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Naming and Trademark Concerns

[Dave Fisher]

Hi -

I just now reviewed Jürgen's latest snapshot build and I have some trademark 
concerns. The current UI and Help file seem to be out of Apache Branding 
policy[1][2] in two ways.

(1) The most prominent use of the brand in many place is "OpenOffice" when it 
ought to be "Apache OpenOffice." This is the case in many places throughout the 
UI and Help files.

(2) There is no trademark attribution in the application UI.

I'm willing to help mitigate these issues if someone wants to point me towards 
the correct action.

Regards,
Dave

[1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/responsibility.html
[2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection

[Dave Fisher]

On May 27, 2013, at 3:55 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

> [This was cross-posted, so I'm not clear what list was intended.  Makes 
> tracking the discussion difficult.]
> 
> I'll bite:
> 
> I prefer Chris's latest.  The weight of the lettering is more powerful. I 
> think the "Apache" should not be so thin. The form used by Samer works 
> better.  I also think down-scaling will work better in this case.
> 
> As far as the orb goes, Chris's could be a tad larger, but not by much.  I 
> prefer the orientation of the foreground bird to Kevin's, which has a more 
> threatening feel in my subjective experience.  

These are good observations.

I would like to see it with an "ffi" ligature.

I think we should leave the 4 out. Others have mentioned that 4 is an unlucky 
number is some cultures. Perhaps we have compromise and have both versioned and 
un-versioned logo designs. If so then I think a treatment like "Version 4.0" in 
grey and blue might work.

Regards,
Dave


> 
> - Dennis
> 
> PS: Interesting that we've come around to a close variant of the current logo.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 03:22 PM
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; market...@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Next steps for AOO 4.0 Logo Selection
> 
> What we've done so far:
> 
> 1) Called for logo submissions from the community
> 
> 2) Many designers responded and we received 40 submissions.  There was
> a lot of "cross-fertilization" of ideas, as designers saw what others
> had come up with, what worked, and borrowed ideas.
> 
> 3) We did a survey of user responses to the 40 logo submissions.  Over
> 5000 users offered their ratings and written comments.
> 
> 4) Publish report and blog post on the results of the logo survey.
> 
> 5) Invited the designers of the top-rated logos to read over the
> survey comments and refine their designs and submit an updated
> version.
> 
> That's where we are now.  The updated logos (three of them) are on the wiki 
> now:
> 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Stage+2+Logo+Refinement
> 
> As you can see there is quite a bit of convergence on a design occurring.
> 
> So what next?
> 
> I'd like to propose some next steps.
> 
> A) Let's discuss the three designs on the mailing list for the next
> week.   The discussion might lead to further refinement.
> 
> B) If at the end of the week there is consensus on a single design
> we'll go with that one.
> 
> C) If at the end of the week there is not consensus on a single
> design, and the discussion is not leading us closer toward consensus,
> then we'll have a 72-hour vote of PMC members to pick the logo.
> 
> 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
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [RELEASE]: proposed further schedule towards AOO 4.0

[Dave Fisher]

On May 27, 2013, at 2:46 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:58 PM, janI  wrote:
>> On 27 May 2013 17:17, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I would like to discuss our further schedule towards AOO 4.0 and the
>>> problems I see. And I would like to discuss a proposal how to address
>>> these problems.
>>> 
>>> We are behind our schedule a little bit and we have identified some
>>> problems regarding the 64bit port on MacOS that I will try to explain
>>> below (hopefully without too many technical details that everybody can
>>> understand it).
>>> 
>>> Proposal
>>> 
>>> - Move MacOS 64 bit version to 4.1 and merge stlport relevant changes
>>> (all platforms) asap into trunk and include them in AOO 4.0.
>>> 
>>> - Move into showstopper mode next week, beginning with June 3th. Means
>>> we integrate only showstopper flagged issues and new translations. And
>>> potentially new art work if we get a new logo and icons in time.
>>> Deadline for new art work should be June 10th.
>>> 
>>> I understand your motivation and will not be the showstopper. but my
>> honest opion is that the reasons for calling it 4.0 get very thin.
>> 
> 
> You might want to put your negative quotes into their own threads to
> make it easier for those opposed to the project to find it and put it
> into Wikipedia or an article.
> 
>> Getting a 64 bit release for mac (and possible in linux) is something (as
>> you write) for a major version and not a minor version like 4.1.
>> 
> 
> We already have Linux 64 bit.
> 
>> I am against (but will vote -0) of making a release just to hold the
>> deadline, I would very much prefer to see what a realistic deadline would
>> be.
>> 
> 
> Fortunately publishing a release at Apache requires only three +1 PMC
> votes and there are no vetos.  The process is biased toward making it
> easy to release.

The main process is mechanical. My check list:

(1) Is the packaging complete?
(2) Are the signatures and checksums on the packages correct?
(3) Is the signature that of the Release Manager?
(4) Are the LICENSE and NOTICE file included and correct?
(5) Does the source release match a checkout of the release tag from svn?
(6) Is the RAT report on the source package clean? If not, are only a few files 
incorrect?

If any of the above is a definitive "NO" then I am "-1" for good technical 
reasons.

An answer of "NO" to (6) becomes a judgement call on the meaning of "few".

If all are "YES" then I am "+1".

Following the above protects our users by assuring that the IP is properly 
licensed and that released packages can be authenticated by them.

(Leaving out the fact that this authentication is hard and non-standard. 
Leaving out any discussion about digital signatures.)

Given the large number of packages in our releases I would like to discuss how 
we can automate performing our checks. A good starting point would be 
configuration that is used to support the download page.

Regards,
Dave


> 
> -Rob
> 
>> rgds
>> jan I.
>> 
>> Ps. You do a great job as release manager, but someone has to be "devils
>> advocate".
>> 
>> 
>>> - Intensive QA with the stlport changes to detect potential problems
>>> 
>>> - Create a AOO 4.0 branch 1 week later, June 10th, where we hopefully
>>> have integrated already returned translations.
>>> 
>>> - Translation deadline will be set to June 14th to have some time for
>>> the integration and further testing. Further translations can we release
>>> at a later time as a special language update release (TBD)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I would still like to keep the end of June date because everything else
>>> looks quite nice and we should give our users the new sidebar.
>>> 
>>> A shifted release date won't really help us because we will move in the
>>> vacation time and I think it is better to bring the 4.0 version out before.
>>> 
>>> Once we have solved the mozilla problem for the 64bit version we can
>>> decide if we want release a 4.1 immediately or later together with
>>> further improvements, fixes and further languages.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Background Explanation
>>> ==
>>> 
>>> Herbert did a great job with his ongoing work to port AOO to 64bit on
>>> the MacOS platform. This work is mainly triggered and motivated by the
>>> deprecation of some system abi's and 

Re: Official code signing certificate

[Dave Fisher]

Hi Rob,

This is a very well written summary of the situation with Code Signing.

The main concern that the ASF has with digitally signing with a singular 
apache.org certificate for the whole foundation is keeping it in strict 
control. For some this means physical machines. This is a high bar.

I wonder if the ASF would allow AOO to experiment with an OpenOffice.org 
codesigning certificate?

We never thought we would get the wildcard certificate, but hey who knows?

Regards,
Dave

On May 24, 2013, at 2:43 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

> And I should mention that pushing the code signing side is probably
> premature until we have the build side more solidly automated.
> 
> Every discussion we have had code signing led to the conclusion that
> if something is signed it must come from a trusted build traceable to
> an SVN revision.  So the pre-req for code signing would be to get the
> Windows and MacOS builds, in full release form, with all languages,
> built via buildbots.
> 
> So moving this forward means moving forward things like:
> 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4902
> 
> Then it would be possible to introduce daily builds signed with a
> self-signed test certificate.  And then, once this is working
> end-to-end, we would use a real certificate.
> 
> Code signing is well-understood.  It has been part of Windows
> development for nearly 20 years.  The technology is not novel, hard to
> understand or difficult to implement.   The main issues are more
> procedural than technical.  ASF projects have a release procedure that
> is decentralized, whereas code signing works most cleanly in a
> centralized/controlled release environment.  That is why the initial
> focus should be on getting the releases spun directly from the
> buildbots, traceable to approved source revisions.
> 
> -Rob
> 
> 
> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
>> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:01 PM, janI  wrote:
>>> On 24 May 2013 22:30, Juergen Schmidt  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Am Freitag, 24. Mai 2013 um 19:50 schrieb janI:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi.
>>>>> 
>>>>> we are not alone in ASF wishing code signing, but we might get run over
>>>> (as
>>>>> I did today on IRC) if we do not formulate our requirements very clearly.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> decisions are made on mailing lists, correct? That is what I learned at
>>>> Apache, what not happened on a mailing list, is not relevant ;-)
>>>> Well it seems that infra is always special.
>>>> I tried several times to discuss it on the infra mailing list and I
>>>> believe I have described very clearly what we need and how it works today
>>>> for OpenOffice if we would have a cert. I also proposed a solution that can
>>>> work from my point of view and I started to collect the info on a wiki page
>>>> as suggested.
>>>> There might be other solutions to do it but I have no in place and nobody
>>>> convinced me that my proposed approach can not work.
>>>> I agree that it's not easy and I simply have no energy to discuss further
>>>> at the moment. I have enough other things to do.
>>>> 
>>>> Juergen
>>>>> 
>>>>> rgds
>>>>> jan I.
>>>>> 
>>>>> -- Forwarded message --
>>>>> From: Scott Deboy 
>>>>> Date: 24 May 2013 18:59
>>>>> Subject: Re: Official code signing certificate
>>>>> To: infrastructure-...@apache.org
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Logging Services has a simple requirement:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Have the Chainsaw build artifacts signed by a Java code signing cert
>>>>> that is signed by a trusted/root CA so the jars can be downloaded via
>>>>> WebStart without the user receiving a warning that the signed jars
>>>>> aren't trusted.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The Chainsaw maven script supports signing jars - infra just needs to
>>>>> point it to the cert.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I don't know whether or not an ASF-wide Java code signing cert makes
>>>>> sense or a Logging Services-specific Java code signing cert makes
>>>>> sense. I don't even know if it is possible to have TLP-specific Java
>>>>> code signing certs. I defer to infra on that decision.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I believe the code signing service WRowe described will meet our
>>>

Re: Request for Blog Access

[Dave Fisher]

Hi Don,

You should have received your invitation.

Regards,
Dave

On May 15, 2013, at 3:16 PM, Donald Whytock wrote:

> Hi Marcus/Dave...
> 
> I have a Roller account now, and my proposal went through for blog access.
> Please grant blog access to "dwhytock".
> 
> Thanks...
> 
> Don


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Moderated messages not reaching the original poster

[Dave Barton]

 Original Message  
From: janI 
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 11:38:59 +0200

> On 14 May 2013 11:31, Peter Junge  wrote:
> 
>> On 4/16/2013 11:04 AM, Peter Junge wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/16/2013 7:19 AM, RGB ES wrote:
>>>
 2013/4/16 Donald Whytock 

  On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Donald Whytock 
> wrote:
>
>  When non-subscribers email the list, do they at least get an
>> autoresponse
>> that says, "You're not a subscriber to this email list, so you might
>> not
>> see responses to your email.  Subscribe by clicking here!"?
>>
>>
>>  Far as I can tell, the answer is no.  Is this something that can be
> done?
>
>
 I don't think that, in case something like this is possible, all people
 will be willing of subscribing the dev mailing lists, so a better message
 could be "You're not a subscriber to this email list, so you might not
 see
 responses to your email.  Read all the messages sent to the list here
  or subscribe by clicking here".

>>>
>>> Very good idea.
>>>
>>
>> Did someone ever file an issue or checked out if the proposed solution
>> works for infra?
>>
> 
> I cannot find an open jira issue, so problaly not. There has been a couple
> of mail threads with infra to the subject.
> 
> I think the right way would be to file an issue, not with the discussion,
> but with the outcome and a request for it to be implemented.
> 
> rgds
> jan I.
> 
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Peter
>>
>>
>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> --**--**-
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>>> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>> --**--**-
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>> dev-unsubscribe@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: Moderated messages not reaching the original poster

[Dave Barton]

 Original Message  
From: Peter Junge 
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 17:31:24 +0800

> On 4/16/2013 11:04 AM, Peter Junge wrote:
>> On 4/16/2013 7:19 AM, RGB ES wrote:
>>> 2013/4/16 Donald Whytock 
>>>
 On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Donald Whytock 
 wrote:

> When non-subscribers email the list, do they at least get an
> autoresponse
> that says, "You're not a subscriber to this email list, so you might
> not
> see responses to your email.  Subscribe by clicking here!"?
>
>
 Far as I can tell, the answer is no.  Is this something that can be
 done?

>>>
>>> I don't think that, in case something like this is possible, all people
>>> will be willing of subscribing the dev mailing lists, so a better
>>> message
>>> could be "You're not a subscriber to this email list, so you might not
>>> see
>>> responses to your email.  Read all the messages sent to the list here
>>>  or subscribe by clicking here".
>>
>> Very good idea.
> 
> Did someone ever file an issue or checked out if the proposed solution
> works for infra?
> 
> Best regards,
> Peter
> 
> 
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> -
>> 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: Statistic over committer activity.

[Dave Fisher]

On May 11, 2013, at 11:17 AM, Rob Weir  wrote:

> On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton  
> wrote:
>> +1 +1 +1 ...
>> 
>> When a project that is committed to working in public raises the draw 
>> bridge, circles the wagons, or goes dark in any way, the detractors win by 
>> seeing their insecurities and animosities confirmed in us.
> 
> And no one has said otherwise.  My point is merely that one should be
> careful about labeling a data point "this year" in comparison with
> "last year" if this year is not actually 12 months long yet.  This is
> not rocket science, but it does require some thinking to appreciate
> that the comparisons are sloppy and will be likely confused by the
> casual reader of the list.
> 
> 
>> Be of strong heart and goodwill.  Stay the course.
>> 
>> - Dennis
>> 
>> PS: I am vicariously proud of the work that Rob Weir does to provide an 
>> account for data sources and what the analytics are for the resulting tables 
>> and visuals.  That is great, transparent work.  When others provide concrete 
>> improvements, rather than using the unavoidable uncertainties to impeach the 
>> work, it raises the bar for all of us.  There are those whose adversarial 
>> view of the world only admits the blemishes and not the accomplishments.  I 
>> am pleased that such impoverished views be ignored in favor of furthering 
>> the Apache Way.
> 
> My suggestion for improvement, in case you missed it, was to compare
> equal time periods, e.g. January-April 2012 with January-April 2013.

Even those types of comparisons are difficult. For example to look at number of 
file commits in 2011 would see a lot of arist, Kay and wave activity which was 
entirely related to AL2 headers and transferring OOo-site.

Also people's activity ebbs and flows as  a function of interest and workload. 
Currently my workload is very high. Lots of 12 hour days at $dayjob.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> -Rob
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
>> Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2013 06:23
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Statistic over committer activity.
>> 
>> [ ... ]
>> 
>> We chose to respect the Apache Way and hold all our discussions in
>> public: all project planning is done on this public list. This is a big
>> challenge. We have no other channels, so any discussions on how to
>> attract new developers and any supporting figures that can help that
>> kind of discussions belong necessarily here.
>> 
>> On the other side, people who've been around for a while know (and now
>> Jan knows too!) that numbers that may be functional to support certain
>> claims will be selectively taken and republished without any kind of
>> disclaimers or analysis. This happens and will continue to happen, and
>> if people cannot find figures on this list they will make them up, or
>> hand-wave, or whatever.
>> 
>> [ ... ]
>> 
>> So, more than the numbers themselves (all numbers have problems,
>> especially when analyzing commits and doing that over different periods
>> of time), let's keep the good discussion on how we can make contributing
>> easier for newcomers and occasional contributors. We will always need it.
>> 
>> 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
> 
> -
> 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: Got a problem

[Dave Barton]

Copy to Oliver Trautmann - Non-Subscribed Poster

 Original Message  
From: janI 
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 11:12:46 +0200

> On 9 May 2013 11:05, Rory O'Farrell  wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 9 May 2013 01:53:21 -0700 (PDT)
>> Oliver Trautmann  wrote:
>>
>>> I don't know enough about computers to figure it out on my own and
>> nothing at your website helps; my English (US) spellchecker marks every
>> word as misspelled and that's annoying on so many levels.
>>>
>>> Help
>>>
>>> Oliver
>>
>> Delete your User Profile Details are at
>> http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=12426
>> and restart OpenOffice _completely_ (Easiest to power of /on your
>> computer, with proper shutdown).
>>
>> If that doesn't work, please post a query to the Forum at
>> http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/
>>
>> It does not need to be soo bad, even though I should know better Writer
> gave me the same problem sometime ago.
> 
> I have multiple languages installedand writer had for some obscure
> reason decided that my english document was spanish, after a bit of
> research (looking at the status line) I found the problem...simple solution
> select all, and set language.
> 
> rgds
> jan I.
> 
>>
>> --
>> Rory O'Farrell 



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Results from AOO 4.0 Logo Poll

[Dave Fisher]

On May 6, 2013, at 10:44 AM, Donald Whytock wrote:

> On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 12:16 AM, Fernando Cassia  wrote:
> 
>> I personally wouldn't lose any time redesigning the visual identity UNLESS
>> the new design is clearly superior with the old one, and there's concensus
>> that there's SOMETHING WRONG with the old one to begin with.
>> 
> 
> Well, a woman did say a bit back that the seagulls were similar to what's
> used on a feminine hygeine product...

The same was said about the iPad.

Regards,
Dave


> 
> Don


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Crowdfunding revisited

[Dave Fisher]

A caution and something to keep in mind and I am speaking from experience.

Payment to a developer for working on a feature must not be tied or made 
contingent on that feature becoming part of the product. The developer 
ultimately has no control over the inclusion of a feature in a release.

Including a feature in a release is something that only the PMC decides and we 
do it on our own schedule without regards to anyone else's plans.

Regards,
Dave

On May 1, 2013, at 1:08 PM, Donald Whytock wrote:

> We can take it from both directions...mention BountySource in the context
> of people offering money for changes, and Catincan for people asking for
> money for changes.  As examples of business models, along with VAR and
> consulting.
> 
> 
> On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 3:40 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 3:16 PM, Donald Whytock  wrote:
>>> The answer from Catincan is, a developer is someone who can commit
>> changes
>>> to the project.  "The person listing the project has to be able to have
>> it
>>> merged into the main branch or have the approve of a developer that can.
>>> Our goal is to have all users be able to benefit from whatever features
>> are
>>> crowdfunded opposed to unsupported forks."
>>> 
>> 
>> The tricky thing for us is that no committer's work is inviolable.
>> Every committer has the ability to cast a technical veto.  So one
>> would need to be careful how one expresses expectations.
>> 
>> Extreme hypothetical:  Someone offers to pay a committer $10,000 if
>> they add an advertisement to the splash screen of OpenOffice for
>> www.OnlinePoker.com.  There is nothing we (Apache) can do to stop that
>> work from being contracted.  But we can and would veto it from being
>> included in a release.  But the committer could certainly provide a
>> private build of that change to their customer, modulo any trademark
>> issue that might occur.
>> 
>> So one should not promise (in a contractual sense) to add a feature or
>> a bug fix to the official AOO release, since the contents of a release
>> is determined by the PMC via their release votes, and not any one
>> committer.
>> 
>> 
>>> And the funding can go to either the individual or the project.  So
>> someone
>>> can kick off a fundraiser for himself to submit a change, or the AOO PMC
>>> could perhaps kick off a fundraiser that'd be paid to the ASF.
>>> 
>>> Was there ever a page made about possible AOO-related business models?  I
>>> thought there was a discussion about it.
>>> 
>> 
>> It was an idea for a blog post I had.  It is still on my "list".  But
>> if we decide to do something with Catincan it could prompt an even
>> earlier post.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> -Rob
>> 
>>> Don
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Donald Whytock 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Working my way down the crowdfunding list found at
>>>> 
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_crowd_funding_services
>>>> 
>>>> ...I find Catincan (catincan.com).  Catincan lets people start
>>>> fundraising efforts for opensource software feature development, but
>> only
>>>> existing developers on existing projects. You can't use Catincan to
>> start a
>>>> new project, and they won't accept your fundraising drive unless you're
>> an
>>>> existing developer.
>>>> 
>>>> Not sure how this would apply to AOO...whether being a committer on the
>>>> project would be considered being a developer, and whether said
>> committer
>>>> could accept funds on his own behalf to do coding as opposed to it
>> having
>>>> to go to the ASF.  That would take an inquiry.
>>>> 
>>>> Don
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 9:34 AM, janI  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 25 April 2013 13:38, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:46 PM, Donald Whytock >> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hey all...
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> We talked a couple months ago about a Kickstarter-like scheme for
>>>>> paying
>>>>>>> for bug fixes and enhancements.  Actually, it seems this sort of
>> thing
>>>>>>> exists in the other direction:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> http://en.wiki

Re: restricted by GSA ADP Schedule Contract with IBM Corp.

[Dave Fisher]

Hi,

I have confirmed that this particular header does not occur anywhere else in 
the active codebase.

Regards,
Dave

On Apr 30, 2013, at 6:07 AM, Marc Rabell wrote:

> Thanks for clarifying Andre.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Marc
> 
> Marc Rabell
> twitter <https://twitter.com/mrabell> |
> linkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcrabell>
> 
> 
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Andre Fischer  wrote:
> 
>> On 30.04.2013 13:30, Andre Fischer wrote:
>> 
>>> On 30.04.2013 12:27, Marc Rabell wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Dear All,
>>>> 
>>>> Why this file restricted rights ?
>>>> 
>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/**openoffice/trunk/main/sfx2/**
>>>> inc/sfx2/sidebar/**propertypanel.hrc?view=markup<http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/trunk/main/sfx2/inc/sfx2/sidebar/propertypanel.hrc?view=markup>
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> This license header was just overlooked by the one who migrated it. But
>>> this is a good opportunity to rename this file to something that better
>>> describes its current function: just a bag of defines (sizes, distances,
>>> offsets) used in various sidebar resource files.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Is it fixable ?
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Yes, easily.  Thanks for finding this.
>>> 
>> 
>> Created issue 122194 for this.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> -Andre
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Marc Rabell
>>>> twitter <https://twitter.com/mrabell> |
>>>> linkedIn<http://www.linkedin.**com/in/marcrabell<http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcrabell>
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> --**--**-
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>> dev-unsubscribe@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: Proposal: Improve security by limiting committer access in SVN -- KEYS Compromise Exposure

[Dave Fisher]

On Apr 29, 2013, at 6:56 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

> @Daniel,
> 
> Right, this is about poisoning the committer keys but not touching the SVN, 
> instead, counterfeiting a binary release downstream, but faking the asc, md5, 
> and sha1 too.  (These would not be at dist, and depend on folks not noticing 
> because the instructions for how to check correctly are so obscure.  It is 
> very far-fetched, since there are easier exploits that rely on user's not 
> being equipped to verify what they are getting and not relying on the 
> authentic download location.
> 
> Another way would be to attack the release candidate in the release manager's 
> ASF FreeBSD account, although someone who checks the signature might notice 
> that it is by an unexpected committer.  Again, reasonably far-fetched.  Two 
> committers would have to be compromised, or the Release Manager would have to 
> be compromised and not notice that there is a new fingerprint in the RM's 
> profile.  I like that last one.  It has a certain movie-plot plausibility.  
> Who ever looks for funny business in their profile, or odd materials in their 
> keys entry?  (Note that it is the binaries that are compromised, there is no 
> messing with the source tarballs.)

When I vote on a release I am looking at the fingerprint. This is where looking 
for a fingerprint that is on the "Web of Trust" is important.

http://people.apache.org/~henkp/trust/

I like Henk's opinion here:

> what can I trust, ultimately ?
> 
> The short answer is nothing.
> For the ultra sceptics there is no hope.
> 
>   • you can't trust the things you did yesterday, because you can't trust 
> your memory
>   • you can't trust software you didn't write or hardware you didn't build
>   • you can't overlook the possibility that apache.org is a fake, set up 
> especialy to lure you into using bad software
> 


Regards,
Dave

> 
> - Dennis
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Shahaf [mailto:danie...@apache.org] 
> Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 15:58
> To: Dennis E. Hamilton
> Cc: dev@openoffice.apache.org; pesce...@apache.org
> Subject: Re: Proposal: Improve security by limiting committer access in SVN 
> -- KEYS Compromise Exposure
> 
> Dennis E. Hamilton wrote on Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 10:31:14 -0700:
>> 5. This is sufficient to poison a download mirror site with
>> a counterfeit download so long as the ASC, SHA1, and MD5 locations
>> can also be spoofed without the user noticing.  
> 
> Right.  The normal answer here is "They will have to commit to the dist/
> repository which will cause a post-commit mail which someone will
> notice".  I'd be interested in hearing (on infra-dev@) how you break
> this without assuming a mirror gets compromised (if _that_ happens,
> it's game over for users who don't verify PGP sigs).
> 
> -
> 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: un subscribe

[Dave Barton]

 Original Message  
From: Wright Grant Omar Rivelino 
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org 
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 17:56:36 +

> Can you remove rant_o...@hotmail.com  from Open Office I dont use it, and I 
> reseave several massage
>  
> Thanks 
>  
> Omar

You are subscribed as grant_o...@hotmail.com

Send an email from grant_o...@hotmail.com to
dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
To complete the automated unsubscribe process, reply to the confirmation
request email you receive.

Dave


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: tech support

[Dave Fisher]

This query was moderated into the list. I've included Martin in the response.

On Apr 27, 2013, at 12:36 AM, Rory O'Farrell wrote:

> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 00:02:54 -0700 (PDT)
> Martin Obrien  wrote:
> 
>> I am trying to get help with a sudden aberration I am experiencing with Open 
>> Office.  Can you please send me in the right direction?
>> 
> The Forum at http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/ offers good support for 
> Users dealing with OpenOffice problems.  You will need to give full details 
> of your Operating System, OpenOffice version and the problem.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Rory O'Farrell 
> 
> -
> 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: Translation for AOO 4.0

[Dave Fisher]

Guys,

http://openoffice.apache.org/list-conduct.html

And if you are posting so many times in a single thread then I wonder if the 
purpose is immolation or what? The oxygen is certainly sucked out of what is an 
important decision - the community decision about releasing and when.

We should go with what we have when we are ready and certain things as in ANY 
software release - corporate, commercial, or whatever - will need to go to the 
backlog.

Tomorrow is another day and there will always be another thread.

Thanks JanI - your many efforts and enthusiasm are appreciated, but when times 
are brittle take a break. I've there myself on many occasions.

Thanks Rob your position is well moderated and intelligent, no need to have the 
last word. Sometimes it is good to let others articulate your position for you.

Peace and enjoy your weekends!

Best Regards,
Dave  

On Apr 26, 2013, at 1:24 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 3:39 PM, janI  wrote:
>> On 26 April 2013 20:42, Rob Weir  wrote:
>> 
>>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:10 PM, janI  wrote:
>>>> On 26 April 2013 18:52, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Claudio Filho 
>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Em 26/04/2013 12:13, "janI"  escreveu:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> for the record, this was not what I saidI simply believe that a
>>>>>>> feature without help (and documentation) is not complete and if
>>> released
>>>>>>> should be highlighted because our average user depend on help in many
>>>>>>> situations.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Only to give an out perspective, this "highlighted" can return against
>>>>> we,
>>>>>> as a incomplete or immature development.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Imho, an important feature of aoo project is its concern in bring and
>>>>>> deliver a product with high quality. So, the PoV of Ariel and Jan are
>>>>> solid.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Then all the more reason for someone who cares to enter an issue into
>>>>> BZ for this.  Don't you agree?
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I have not seen BZ yet for problems/shortcomming with new features in
>>>> development (e.g. where are the detailed outstandings of IA2, jsc 3 layer
>>>> change etc). The help/documentation issue is part of the general sidebar
>>>> development, but of course  we can make one big extra BZ for the 4.0
>>>> release just to please the administrative overhead.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Actually, we just completed a test pass of the Sidebar, a "new
>>> feature", and 65 new defects reports are in BZ.   We use Bugzilla for
>>> tracking these things, even for new features.  Once the developers
>>> have integrated the code into the trunk, posted a build and asked for
>>> testing to begin, then we use BZ for tracking issues.
>>> 
>>>> making BZ for problems/missing with ongoing development is highly
>>>> problematic, I could f.x. make about 10 BZ for genLang, and I am pretty
>>>> sure the sidebar developers/documenters/testers could make about at least
>>>> 100 BZ if they wanted to. It would simply flood BZ, make real problems
>>>> harder to spot, and put an extra burden on the people doing the work.  I
>>>> f.x. have a simply list with my outstandings,which is quite normal during
>>>> the development/initial test phase.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> genLang isn't checked into the trunk, a build posted and a call for
>>> testing started, right?  See the difference?
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> making a special BZ for this issue, is in my opinion just an
>>> administrativ
>>>> trix, it does not change 1 millimeter about the fact, that we have both a
>>>> challenge. And also I dont understand why you separate this issue from
>>> all
>>>> the other open issues with sidebar.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I don''t see why you are separating this issue from all the other
>>> sidebar issues, which are, as I indicate, in BZ already.
>>> 
>>>> We should be focussing a lot more on solving our challenges !!
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> And one way you can help is to enter issues with integrated features
>>> into Bugzilla.  Though obviously you are just refusing, for
>>> stu

Re: unsubscribe please!

[Dave Barton]

 Original Message  
From: CHERYL ANN 
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:24:35 -0400

> Could you please remove cnr0...@gmail.com from your mailing list. I
> do not use Open Office and don't know why I get several emails daily
> from users. Thanks

I have already replied to the poster off-list regarding the unsubscribe
procedure. She is not subscribed to the email address she has used here.

Dave


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: HTML5 animation module for impress

[Dave Fisher]

On Apr 22, 2013, at 2:13 AM, Andre Fischer wrote:

> On 22.04.2013 09:03, Alexandro Colorado wrote:
>> Idea is pretty simple, with impress you can generate swf files with
>> the slides from Impress. The animation code was broken for several
>> ages. However, swf format has been somewhat fall on obsolecense.
>> However HTML5 fileformat is gaining popularity.
> 
> I think HTML5 to use for showing Impress animations is a good idea. 
> Animations are encoded in SMIL (the animation part of SVG) anyway. The 
> biggest problem is probably to get a good representation of the shapes (ie 
> not bitmaps).  If done right the result could be better then what Impress 
> does today.

I agree SVG is a nice subset of HTML5. Rendering to SVG is the path towards ODF 
on any browser.

I think that the combination of Apache Flex, OpenOffice, POI, and PDFBox would 
be incredible. Any document on any device.

The Apache Flex project is working on compiling Flex / ActionScript to HTML5 / 
Javascript.

Regards,
DAve

> 
> -Andre
> 
>> 
>> JS has some vectorial dominance on Canvas and SVG, having a JS engine
>> that can interprete the OpenOffice animation instruction into an JS
>> animation.
>> 
>> Here is a Canvas animation stress test example:
>> http://www.html5canvastutorials.com/labs/html5-canvas-kineticjs-animation-stress-test/
>> 
>> On 4/22/13, Galileo Teco Juárez  wrote:
>>> how? a module, functioning in Impress, developed in HTML5?
>>> i did not understand the  idea  :D
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2013/4/21 Alexandro Colorado 
>>> 
>>>> Hi I wonder if an animation module for impress on HTML5 would be a
>>>> good idea for GSoC. Something similar to Prezi, but on a more
>>>> traditional Impress style. There is the CSS2 'screen' or presentation
>>>> style which can get regular presentations and slide from one to the
>>>> next. However a JS powered animation would be powerful enough to
>>>> rebind the most standard animations like the typing, floating text,
>>>> and even 3D transitioning.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Alexandro Colorado
>>>> Apache OpenOffice Contributor
>>>> http://es.openoffice.org
>>>> 
>>>> -
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> *Galileo Teco Juarez*
>>> *Web:* http://80bits.wordpress.com
>>> *Twitter:* @genitalico <http://twitter.com/genitalico>
>>> *Linkedin:* http://mx.linkedin.com/pub/galileo-teco-ju%C3%A1rez/30/690/797
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -
> 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: Official survey service? (Was: Re: Conversation: Pick A Logo)

[Dave Fisher]

On Apr 19, 2013, at 5:37 AM, janI wrote:

> On 19 April 2013 13:48, Rob Weir  wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 7:39 AM, janI  wrote:
>> 
>>> On 19 April 2013 13:29, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 7:20 AM, janI  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 18 April 2013 21:58, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> janI wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 18 April 2013 13:13, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> If we want I can put a poll up on http://openofficesurvey.org.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Where would like survey.openoffice.org to point to ?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Indeed, let's avoid using unofficial domains when we can redirect
>> an
>>>>>> official subdomain. Redirecting the DNS won't pose a big burden on
>>>> Infra
>>>>>> and just requires (lazy) consensus here.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>  Andrea.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 23 hours, not bad for "month-long wrestling match with
>>>>> Infra to get something like this set up" !!!
>>>>> 
>>>>> The patch I made for dns is up and running. you can open "
>>>>> survey.openoffice.org". BUT something is not working in the other
>> end,
>>>>> reply comes from hostmonster, with a possibilities to buy cars erc.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> The DNS stuff had to happen first, and only then I can get it working
>> on
>>> my
>>>> end.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> and yes I am a direct person, I like to tell people when they do
>>>> something
>>>>> good and visa versa, but I dont like assuming ill behaivourbut
>> that
>>>> is
>>>>> just my way, and I am sorry if my direct way offended someonebut
>>> look
>>>>> infra got their part done, without wrestling.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> I'm not assuming bad behavior.  I was just stating that I don't have
>> the
>>>> time to guess whether this is an occasion where we get a fast response
>>> or a
>>>> slow one.  The response time from Infra, IMHO, is entirely
>> unpredictable.
>>>> I have another DNS-related Infra request that are no more complicated
>> and
>>>> have waited almost a year.  It looks like we were fortunate this time.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> or we have a better connection now :-) think about the other infra things
>>> that have happened lately (wiki, new translate, proxy setup), the ones I
>>> know off have all had resonable response time
>>> 
>>> I was not trying to shoot at you, I just have another impression of
>>> infra...but of course, I am not neutral.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Our need to pick a logo design is very predictable and the time line for
>>>> that must go forward.  So I was happy to move forward with this either
>>>> way.  If I can avoid a dependency on Infra that is a good thing, not a
>>> bad
>>>> one.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> completely correct, but if the price is to have a non openoffice.orgsite,
>>> it is at least a high price to pay.
>>> 
>>> Using a non-openoffice.org site is a non-issue.  We've gathered user
>>> opinions on Google Moderator and Facebook, without problems.  Other
>> groups
>>> in the ASF have used Google Docs-based surveys.   No one has ever raised
>>> concerns about using 3rd party services for this.  This is not a "high
>>> price to pay".
>>> 
>> 
>> In any case, my practice remains -- and I'm sure most in Infra would agree
>> with me here -- if you can do something without having a dependency on
>> Apache Infra it is a good thing.  Let them focus on things that only they
>> can do.  Self-service is a good thing.
>> 
> 
> No problem, everybody is entitled to have their opinion...I just try to
> help.
> 
> You  wrote earlier "I have another DNS-related Infra request that are no
> more complicated and
> have waited almost a year"
> 
> I had a look in jira to find the issue, to see if I could solve it, but I
> cannot find any open

Re: Draft blog post: Welcome GSoC Students!

[Dave Fisher]

On Apr 9, 2013, at 4:08 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Alexandro Colorado  wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Marcus (OOo)  wrote:
>> 
>>> Am 04/09/2013 11:46 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>> 
>>>> https://blogs.apache.org/**preview/OOo/?previewEntry=**
>>>> welcome_to_gsoc_students<
>> https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=welcome_to_gsoc_students
>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Nice short text. And always a well-fitting picture. :-)
>>> 
>> 
>> Actually I would comment on the picture, having an all women picture could
>> be misconstrude. Something similar happened to me when we assign a hreoin
>> character as the face of a tech event saying it was somewhat sexist,
>> specially since most of our atendees are male. The character stayed but it
>> did remind me that picture to the issue we had.

It does need some proof reading.

s/Foundation is "mentoring/Foundation is a "mentoring/
s/.  So w/. W/
s/.  So t/.T/
s/Mentors/GoSC mentors/

Otherwise great.

Regards,
Dave

>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Marcus
>>> 
>>> --**--**-
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
>> dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Alexandro Colorado
>> Apache OpenOffice Contributor
>> http://es.openoffice.org
>> 
> 
> I like the post, and I LOVE the picture, but  I understand Alexandro's
> point as well. A gender mix might be better, but, well I wouldn't spend too
> much time worrying over this. This one is really great as far as I'm
> concerned.
> 
> -- 
> 
> MzK
> 
> "Achieving happiness requires the right combination of Zen and Zin."


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: wiki, forum, www performance upgrade.

[Dave Fisher]

On Apr 6, 2013, at 2:51 AM, janI wrote:

> Hi.
> 
> Now that our wiki (mwiki) runs smoothly and performs quite well, it is
> slowly time to take a look at our other services.
> 
> In order to determine what should/can be done, I need some figures.
> 
> Can anybody help me with traffic figures for
>   wiki.o.o, forum.o.o (total for the vm not per language) and www.o.o
> 
> Does end-users download directly from www.o.o or from a secondary site ?
> 
> I need the following numbers (if possible):
>   - daily number of clicks (average)
>   - peak number of clicks within a short period like 1 hour
> 
> I would like to tune at least forum before we release 4.0 to prepare for a
> higher load. Tuning of www depend on a discussion with infra, because it is
> a shared service.

The website is as tuned as can be. All that is served is static content with 
server side includes.

It is served along with www.apache.org and all the other TLPs. Everyone 
publishes using staging and svnpubsub. It is a standard. I think we should 
focus on our unique environments and conform to Infra for www.

An exception would be is the project wanted some type of CRUD service. In that 
case we are where we are with the MWiki and Forum. Likely building a custom 
LAMP or Java/Tomcat stack on a VM.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> Translate-vm also needs tunings, but that is in progress, and infra has
> been very kind and prepared an extra vm, so we/I install/tune without
> affecting the active system.
> 
> thx in advance for figures.
> rgds
> jan I.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Conversation: Pick A Logo

[Dave Fisher]

On Apr 5, 2013, at 8:02 AM, janI wrote:

> On 5 April 2013 16:52, Rob Weir  wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 10:37 AM, janI  wrote:
>> 
>>> On 5 April 2013 14:50, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 3:33 AM, Jürgen Schmidt >>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 4/5/13 6:01 AM, Samer Mansour wrote:
>>>>>> Hello Everyone,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Can I propose we move forward with this logo:
>>>> http://imagebin.org/252847
>>>>>> I kept the current official blue for both the logo and word 'Open'
>> in
>>>> the
>>>>>> wordmark because the word 'Open' gets less emphasis with the
>> lighter
>>>>> blue.
>>>>>> I also gave the text Apache a placement inside the valley made by
>> the
>>>> two
>>>>>> O's as many people's designs had suggested.
>>>>>> The font is Roboto Condensed which is Apache 2.0 Licensed.
>>>>> 
>>>>> mmh, I don't think that it would be a good approach if we simply move
>>>>> forward with this one. We collected several proposals over weeks now
>>> and
>>>>> it is still not easy to pick the serious ones.
>>>>> 
>>>>> We should summarize what we have, maybe drop the obvious bad ones and
>>>>> start a first vote. the 3 best voted proposals will be reviewed in
>> more
>>>>> detail if they fulfill our requirements and if we can appropriate
>>>>> further brand elements like icons, app icon, etc.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> Maybe call the initial thing a "poll" rather than a "vote".  It is a
>> form
>>>> of testing, really, gathering feedback in a structured way.  But it is
>>> not
>>>> a decision-making process.  We could put the top 3 into a blog post and
>>>> gather feedback and preferences on blog, mailing list, facebook, etc.
>>>> We'll also get 'expert opinion' from those who understand logos well.
>>> This
>>>> all gives the PMC some solid information, from community members,
>> users,
>>>> experts, etc., to make a final decision.  Ideally these sources concur
>> on
>>>> their preferences.  But there might be divergent views.  But the PMC
>>>> decides in the end.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I have lost the overview of how many logos are in competition, since it
>> do
>>> not follow this theme intensively. I have seen at least one I really
>> liked,
>>> but to fair I think we should make one page (mwiki/cwiki or something
>> else)
>>> where everybody can see the competing logos side by side. The logos
>> should
>>> each be structured as Web-logo, software-logo and favicon (many seems to
>>> forget this important part). With such a page the community can give
>> their
>>> opinion (I agree with rob, no vote just a poll), and the 3 best, go in a
>>> second round, and of course pmc officially decide, but I am pretty sure
>>> they will follow the opinion of the community.
>>> 
>>> I personally would not take the 3 best to a blog/facebook etcthis is
>>> "our" product, and we the community decide how to present it to the
>>> end-users.
>>> 
>>> 
>> I think of the Facebook thing would be more a poll then a decision making
>> process.  It is another source of info.  As a PMC member, the more data I
>> have to help make decisions the better.  I'd weigh heavily community
>> opinion on our mailing lists, but I'd also be interesting in taking the
>> pulse of ordinary users who are seeing these things for the first time with
>> a fresh perspecitve,  as well as the opinions of experts.  It is all data.
>> It is all good.
>> 
>> It is "our" product, yes, but the logo is not for our private adoration.
>> It is functional, in the sense that its distinctiveness and recognizably is
>> as important as its aesthetics.  Personally, to make up my mind, I need to
>> have feedback on how "outsiders" see and mentally process the logo, and not
>> just how project "insiders" see it.  I think it needs to work well for all.
>> 
> 
> Point taken, now I understand your view better and agree with it. But I
> would still like to see all logos on a single page in the 3 variants, that
> would help me and others make up our minds, and give you as

Re: [Website] Re-locate images from "download/images/" to "images/"

[Dave Fisher]

All image directories and img links can be discovered and converted in an 
offline checkout of the site.

It could be automated. Different image files of the same name can be diffed. It 
is all discoverable.

Doing it manually is a mess. I discovered this during the ooo-site port from 
Oracle's Kenai which was actually a recent port from CollabraNet that was 
rather broken.

The point is that OOo is a mess different project sites did different things. 
There are some beautiful yurts on the Mongolian site: 
http://www.openoffice.org/mn/

Regards,
Dave


On Apr 4, 2013, at 3:32 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:

> Am 04/05/2013 12:18 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 5:27 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>> 
>>> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Marcus (OOo)  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Am 04/01/2013 03:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>> 
>>>>  On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Marcus (OOo)
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Rob,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I want to cleanup the structure and remove 1 of the 2 directories for
>>>>>> images.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Therefore I've added the images from "download/images" also to
>>> "images/"
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> updated the "download/index.html" to point to the new location.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Please tell me, is it save to remove the "download/images/" directory?
>>> If
>>>>>> not what else has to be updated?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm not sure I like the idea of having a global images directory
>>>>> rather than having images scoped to the subtree where they are
>>>>> actually used.  Having a single global directory increases the changes
>>>>> of having accidental conflicts.  But if you want to make this change,
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> That's not what I want. Please read again. I just want to get rid of 1 of
>>>> the 2 images directories in the "download/" sub-dir.
>>>> 
>>>> Of course it doesn't make sense to have a single images dir for the
>>> entire
>>>> website. ;-)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Actually I don't think a single "images" directory for the whole site is
>>> such a bad idea. We could subdivide it by area -- e.e. images/download.
>>> Maybe worth discussing at some point?
>>> 
>>> 
>> What advantage do you see to that?  I could see that for common images that
>> were essentially "global" this might make sense.  But otherwise having
>> images contained in the subtree that uses them gives more isolation,
>> prevents name collisions, accidental side effects, etc.
>> 
>> Of course from an information standpoint foo/bar and bar/foo are equally
>> expressive. But I think we're more likely to copy, move, translate, etc.,
>> subsites as a whole, so having, e.g., /download be self-contained is a nice
>> property.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  be sure to test each of the "Help spread the word" links for
>>>>> Twitter/Facebook/Google+ to make sure those applications are finding
>>>>> the right images.  I don't mean the image on our page.  I mean the
>>>>> image on the post once it is on Facebook, etc.  Since hundreds of such
>>>>> posts have already been made, we probably don't want to break any of
>>>>> those links.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> You mean Twitter/Facebook/Google+ articles are referring to
>>>> ".../download/images/*" files? That's bad, then we won't never be able to
>>>> move such kind of files in the future.
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> I don't know this.  I'm just suggesting that it is something we should
>> check.   We have over 7 million external links into www.openoffice.org.  So
>> it is hard to make any significant changes without breaking something.  But
>> that shouldn't prevent us from making improvements.  But if we make any big
>> changes we'll want to go back and see if any critical external sites need
>> to be notified/updated.
> 
> When I see this correct, then the files that you have checked-in into 
> "www.oo.org/download/images/" are not that old - much more recent than the 
> files in "www.oo.org/download/cachedimages/". IMHO not enough to get 
> wide-spreaded like other data on our website.
> 
> Do you remember where you have used the image files? Then I (or you) could 
> change the links to the new files in "www.oo.org/images/". And any more 
> broken links can be changed then.
> 
> So, can you help me with this?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 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: [Proposal]: Call for donations

[Dave Fisher]

We can easily copy the "Donate" button from the footer to the topnav.

We can request that l10n teams add a translated donate button for their 
language. If they haven't translated their brand and topnav now would a time to 
do so. We would want to translate the fundraising page, too.

Is this a vehicle for incrementally starting the new web hierarchy? Some 
variation on the plans that many of us have kicked around?

On Apr 4, 2013, at 4:05 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:

> You might want to talk to fundraising@ before you do anything --- not as
> much for permission as for ideas on how to frame the "Please donate"
> request.
> 
> (fundraising@ is privately-archived)
> 
> Joseph Schaefer wrote on Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 18:38:18 -0400:
>> FWIW last time I checked there was a huge increase
>> in paypal donations once OpenOffice adjusted it's
>> contribution page accordingly.
>> 
>> 
>> On Apr 4, 2013, at 6:21 PM, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
>> 
>>> Raphael Bircher wrote:
 Am 04.04.13 14:22, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
> And opinions or further ideas how we can improve this? It shouldn't be a
> big problem for us to collect the money we need.
 I disagree. Yes, we can help with foundings for ASF, but please do this
 on ASF Level. Founding money is not the task of a ASF project, It's the
 task for the foundation.
>>> 
>>> The Foundation is made by its projects, so OpenOffice should definitely 
>>> help with fundraising. Consider that OpenOffice (downloads excluded!) 
>>> generates as much web traffic as all the other Apache projects put 
>>> together, or something reasonably close to that. Also, the OpenOffice 
>>> infrastructure requirements (buildbots, management) generates additional 
>>> expenses for the Foundation that only benefit the OpenOffice project.
>>> 
>>> In short: if OpenOffice can use its web traffic and popularity to drive 
>>> more donations to the Foundation, it will surely directly benefit from most 
>>> of them. So I agree with Juergen that we should solicit donations.
>>> 
>>> 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
>> 
> 
> -
> 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: Proposal: Improve security by limiting committer access in SVN

[Dave Fisher]

On Apr 4, 2013, at 12:17 PM, janI wrote:

> On 4 April 2013 21:03, Rob Weir  wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Greg Stein  wrote:
>> 
>>> Your proposal to alter the community structure is premised upon a
>>> strawman risk. First, that it would occur. Second, that it wouldn't be
>>> noticed. Third, that it would find its way into users' hands.
>>> 
>>> 
>> So you are asserting that someone who put their name down on the Incubator
>> wiki in July 2011 and was named a committer by that act, but never ever
>> showed up after that, never joined the dev list, never posted to the dev
>> list, never contributed code or anything else other than a name on a wiki,
>> is a member of our community and it would be altering the committee
>> structure if we removed their authz to our source code, even with the
>> proviso that we would immediately restore it on request?
>> 
>> Really?
>> 
> 
> Just a stupid question from someone who have not been here for ages...the
> person just described should loose the committer role, or are we granted
> commitership for lifetime ??

Correct. The chances of committership being revoked are very, very tiny. Such 
matter is private as it is personnel.

Some people, even on this project, have been inactive for many years between 
being committers on any project. They are still a committer, just not on a 
project.

Regards,
Dave


> 
> jan I.
> 
>> 
>> -Rob
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> In the past, the Foundation has *explicitly* said that we would accept
>>> a certain level of risk to maintain our communities.
>>> 
>>> I find your strawman at a level even *lower* than the scenario that
>>> I'm thinking about(*).
>>> 
>>> If you're worried about stale committers suddenly inserting trojans,
>>> then just use 'svn log' to find those outliers. No need to create
>>> division within the community. Run a simple histogram. There are many
>>> solutions to your purported attack vector, than to divide into groups.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> -g
>>> 
>>> (*) a certain large company's lawyer (ahem) was trying to scare the
>>> ASF ("the risk!!") into adopting certain procedures; we shut her down
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 02:33:12PM -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Greg Stein  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Also, let me say one more thing:
>>>>> 
>>>>> This notion of creating divisions among committers ... it is
>> "solving"
>>>>> a problem that has never occurred here.
>>>>> 
>>>>> NEVER. OCCURRED.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> So frickin' what?  That is entirely irrelevant.   My house has never
>>> burnt
>>>> down either, but I still don't leave open flames around unattended.  In
>>>> fact you might think this is naive view, but avoidance of such risks
>>> might
>>>> even be correlated with lack of house fires.  Hmmm
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> In the Foundations's 14+ year history, we have never seen a trojan
>>>>> commit. Our servers have been compromised a handful of times. When we
>>>>> were back on CVS, we even had to audit source control to verify no
>>>>> trojan injection. But we have NEVER had a case of a malware commit.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> Again, that proves nothing.   I'm sure the first time apache.org was
>>> rooted
>>>> that it had never happened before either, right?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> So back to IMO: dividing and partitioning and separate privilege
>>>>> levels... there is no reason. It creates a social problem to "solve"
>> a
>>>>> non-existent issue. Net result: more problems.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Greg, we already do this.  Does every ASF Member have credential for
>>> Infra
>>>> root?  Does ever ASF Member have access to legal-private mailing list.
>>> No.
>>>> No. We even do this in the AOO project, with separate authz for
>>>> openoffice-security, which by the way also includes an SVN tree.
>>>> 
>>>> Anyone who thinks this is a question of dividing and privilege is
>>>> expressing a knee-jerk reaction, without thinking of the risks.  We
>>&

Re: Proposal: Improve security by limiting committer access in SVN

[Dave Fisher]

I'm going to top-post. I agree that this is a good idea, but I want to define 
it expansively as a positive.

(1) The current authz that defines all of the AOO committers must be preserved. 
This is used to generate foundation information like:

http://people.apache.org/committers-by-project.html#openoffice

(2) Let's focus only on adding one new authz list for the code tree. Call it 
openoffice-coders and populate it with those who HAVE any commit activity in 
the current code tree. With ta coders authz everyone knows who is on the list 
by checking:

http://people.apache.org/committers-by-project.html#openoffice-coders

People can then really know who to bug to get their patch committed.

(3) Andrea as PMC Chair or any Apache Member has karma to add or remove people 
on the coders authz. 

We can debate the rules, but those don't effect the structure implied.

Let's look for Consensus on the structure first. Once that is out of the way we 
can easily describe how this new structure is a significant improvement and 
that it is a win all around without a real downside. (Some will spin a downside 
and parrying that is a different discussion.) 

Regards,
Dave

On Apr 3, 2013, at 1:30 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
> 
>> Jürgen Schmidt wrote: [...]
>> 
>>> On 3 April 2013 14:39, Rob Weir  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> one change to our current process that will, I think, greatly increase
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> security.  This would be to restrict SVN authorization for the code
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>> I don't think this would greatly increase security, since the current
>> review model would still be the better defense. But surely this doesn't
>> decrease security and doesn't impact on people who are not using it.
>> 
>> 
> Good to think in layers of security.  An account that is not authorized is
> an account we don't need to worry about at all.
> 
> Note:  we have people currently authorized for our source code, who have
> *never* checked in code and who have *never* posted on the mailing list.  I
> have a heard time believing that they are following best practices to avoid
> losing control of their Apache login credentials.
> 
> 
>> 
>> I see also no problem if we handle it more careful and give svn access
>>> to the code on demand only. Nobody should take it personal
>>> 
>> 
>> Before we manage again to make simple discussions complex, let's see:
>> - All committers have the right to have write access to the source code
>> 
> 
> 
> Yes, though the "right" is a de jure right, not exactly equivalent to the
> technical authorization.  But one should lead to the other on demand.
> 
> 
> 
>> - By default 3 subtrees (trunk, tags, branches) are read-only
>> - Any committer can receive write access to the 3 subtrees immediately, by
>> sending an e-mail here
>> 
>> This could be fine for me, provided that:
>> 
>> 1) We have the right way to manage this (another LDAP group does not look
>> like the right solution: people who don't want to understand correctly will
>> invent that this is a multi-level hierarchy while it would simply be a
>> permission that we enable on demand)
>> 
>> 2) Enabling write access is extremely simple, especially if this is
>> something that I must take care of! Something like the current "
>> modify_unix_group.pl" scripts currently used for the committers group.
>> 
>> 
> I'd do it like this:
> 
> 0) Call it "active" and "dormant" statuses.  This doesn't change status as
> a committer, just status of SVN authorization.
> 
> 1) By default the active list includes only those who have made commits to
> those trees in the last 12 months (or some other suitable time period).
> "Ever" would be a fine time period as well.
> 
> 2) Everyone else has authorization for /site, /ooo-site and /devtools
> 
> 3) Any committer can be added to the active list on demand.
> 
> 4) New committers are explained this when they are voted in and asked if
> they want to be on the active list for Subversion.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -Rob
> 
> Regards,
>>  Andrea.
>> 
>> 
>> --**--**-
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>> dev-unsubscribe@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: Exit moderation mailing

[Dave Barton]

Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Albino Biasutti Neto wrote:
>> I am moderator of mailing doc,api @ o.a.o.
>> Today I am out of time to moderate, I ask to remove moderation. Thanks.
>
> Do we have someone willing to replace Albino, preferably (but not
> necessarily) in the American time zones? It is better to replace a
> moderator rather than removing one.
>
> The task is very easy and not very time-consuming: you will receive a
> notification for every posting attempt to the doc@ and api@ lists by a
> non-member, and (if it's not spam) you simply reply to the
> notification message to approve the post.
>
> Regards,
>   Andrea.

When Albino first mentioned that he was unable to continue moderation of
the api list (19.3.2013), I offered to be his replacement. I already
moderate for dev, doc and marketing. For the time being, there is not a
lot else I can usefully contribute to the project. Hopefully, this will
change in the near future.

Feel free to add me to the list of api moderators. My time zone is UTC+1

Regards
Dave


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Writer suggestion

[Dave Barton]

Donald, Since you are not subscribed to this list you may not have seen
these replies.

 Original Message  
From: Donald Mayse 
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 19:47:01 -0400

> I recently started a document with 4 columns.  I then tried to have no
> columns on subsequent pages.  As far as I can tell, it can't be done
> without removing the columns from the first page.  Can you incorporate
> some method of easily discontinuing columns in a document?

> chengjh wrote:
>> Hi Donald,
>>
>> Please add page break with a different page style, and then to modify the
>> column setting for the subsequent page..In AOO, the page settings are
>> applied to page style. So, you need to use page style for your scenarios.
>> Hope it helpful for you.Thanks.

> tj wrote:
>> Hi, Donald,
>>
>> Columns are a property of page styles and sections. For what you want, 
>> simply assign a different page style to your second page: one with only one 
>> column. The "Default" style will probably suffice. The new style will 
>> propagate to the following pages.
>>
>> Questions like yours are better directed to our users' mailing list:
>> 
>> or to the forum.
>>
>> HTH,
>> /tj/ 

> Fernand Vanrie wrote:
>>  Donald ,
>>
>> make 2 page styles
>> - one with 4 columns and with "next" style no columns.
>> - one with no columns and "next" style 4 columns
>>
>> swith from page style when wanted
>>
>> hope it helps
>>
>> Fernand 

For more detailed information about page styles please see the
"Documentation" link on the Apache OpenOffice "Support" page:
http://www.openoffice.org/support/

Regards
Dave


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org