Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
On 03/12/2010 05:48, Sonic4Spuds wrote: On 12/02/2010 10:27 AM, Sigrid Carrera wrote: Hi Marc, 2010/12/2 Marc Paré Le 2010-12-02 02:29, Jean-Baptiste Faure a écrit : Although a good idea, I would still like to see an installer do this rather than the language pack. Hmm, on MS-Windows language packs are installed by an installer in the same way as the core application. The difference is that this installer is localized. There is nothing to add in the language packs, only to modify them in order they are able to drive the installer of the core application. Best regards JBF Ah .. I am just looking at the language packs for linux distributions. Could anyone on the list explain how users install language packs on LO (I'm using the .rpm version as reference point here). It looks like they come in a ".tar.gz" file and when uncompressed a folder is created with a lot of .rpm files. There doesn't seem to be an installer that comes along with them and the user is left to use console to install. It this right? Why ship an installer, when it is preferred to use the package manager from your Linux distribution? For Mandriva (on the console) do the following: - go to the directory that has all the rpm packages - su - (enter password) - urpmi *.rpm That installs all packages in the necessary order, you don't have to do anything else. As alternative, it should also be possible to use the gui: (I did not test this, but it should be easily doable) - Use konqueror / nautilus / dolphin or any other file manager, change into the folder, that has all your rpms you want to install - Mark all the files you want to install - Do a right click and choose "Open with Software installer" - Enter your root password in the popup - Installation should be done automatically. [...] Sigrid I think an installer is important because not everyone is on the internet. It would be great for these people to be able to grab the installer at the library, bring it home and install. I was in this situation for a while:-( and found it disappointing and disgusting when projects didn't offer single installers for Linux:-) For years I only had a connexion in cyber cafes, so I dowloaded the tars on an external device (or sometimes several) and installed at home on my computer. I don't see what you're talking about, your distro has all what you need to install the downloaded archives and manage dependencies. The only issue that I see still existing currently is the size of the download. When you have a very slow and expensive connexion, it makes LibO very difficult to get and distribute. Kind regards Sophie -- Founding member of The Document Foundation -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
On 12/02/2010 10:27 AM, Sigrid Carrera wrote: Hi Marc, 2010/12/2 Marc Paré Le 2010-12-02 02:29, Jean-Baptiste Faure a écrit : Although a good idea, I would still like to see an installer do this rather than the language pack. Hmm, on MS-Windows language packs are installed by an installer in the same way as the core application. The difference is that this installer is localized. There is nothing to add in the language packs, only to modify them in order they are able to drive the installer of the core application. Best regards JBF Ah .. I am just looking at the language packs for linux distributions. Could anyone on the list explain how users install language packs on LO (I'm using the .rpm version as reference point here). It looks like they come in a ".tar.gz" file and when uncompressed a folder is created with a lot of .rpm files. There doesn't seem to be an installer that comes along with them and the user is left to use console to install. It this right? Why ship an installer, when it is preferred to use the package manager from your Linux distribution? For Mandriva (on the console) do the following: - go to the directory that has all the rpm packages - su - (enter password) - urpmi *.rpm That installs all packages in the necessary order, you don't have to do anything else. As alternative, it should also be possible to use the gui: (I did not test this, but it should be easily doable) - Use konqueror / nautilus / dolphin or any other file manager, change into the folder, that has all your rpms you want to install - Mark all the files you want to install - Do a right click and choose "Open with Software installer" - Enter your root password in the popup - Installation should be done automatically. [...] Sigrid I think an installer is important because not everyone is on the internet. It would be great for these people to be able to grab the installer at the library, bring it home and install. I was in this situation for a while:-( and found it disappointing and disgusting when projects didn't offer single installers for Linux:-) $0.02 -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
Le 2010-12-02 11:27, Sigrid Carrera a écrit : Why ship an installer, when it is preferred to use the package manager from your Linux distribution? For Mandriva (on the console) do the following: - go to the directory that has all the rpm packages - su - (enter password) - urpmi *.rpm That installs all packages in the necessary order, you don't have to do anything else. As alternative, it should also be possible to use the gui: (I did not test this, but it should be easily doable) - Use konqueror / nautilus / dolphin or any other file manager, change into the folder, that has all your rpms you want to install - Mark all the files you want to install - Do a right click and choose "Open with Software installer" - Enter your root password in the popup - Installation should be done automatically. [...] Sigrid I had actually not installed any of the language packs as I just assumed that they would work. But now that I am trying to add them I downloaded the appropriate packs of English UK and French, unpacked them and installed them. But the language don't show in the language setting in the Tools->Options. They are all for 64-bit version. Are these disabled? Am I missing something? Marc -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] HC issue
hey guys i think i have a solution to the high contrast issue with a dark desktop theme. how come we aren't using the app selection menu from OOo? it works just fine in regards to a dark colored background. attached there are the images. one in white is the LO with a dark theme, and white app selection menu. if you high light over the text it will appear if not it vanishes into the menu due to the text being white. the other image is the OOo app selection which works just fine in regards to a dark theme. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
Le 2010-12-02 13:08, Sveinn í Felli a écrit : Well, that depends on what you define as an 'user'. 'Normal Linux users' (as of today = *buntu/Mint etc) use their respective package managers to set up software. Developers should be capable to pull their nightly dose directly from git, the users in question (which are likely to install LibreOffice from those packages) are either adventurous or participating as translators/QA or such. Even for translation/QA/testing users, offering repositories could be an easier way to go and probably less resource-hogging. Of course it would be easiest if there was one metapackage/script for installing the repo and the chosen language packs. OpenSuse has an 'One Click Install' system on their web, which is just a simple script witch initiates the PM with information about the repository in question. Centralised PM's have become the 'Linux-way', picking up packages in various places on the web is so 'passé'... ;-) Just thoughts, Sveinn í Felli Thanks Sveinn and Sigrid Sorry about that. Of course the PM is the way to go with Linux boxes. I just had one of those moments. :-) Marc -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Responsible FreeDesktop Bugzilla
drew schrieb: Just getting a chance to check mails, I see you volunteered yourself today- however if you are still looking for someone to help here I'm happy to pitch in. Hi, it's not my decision who will do the job. I believe someone with more or less daily bugzilla contact should do that. If you think you can do that please wirte a comment in the bug. Thank you for your offer and best regards Rainer -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
- Original Message > From: Robert Derman > I remember that optical disks started to replace floppies in about 1995 >because Win-95 came either way. Win-98 was CD only. I will admit that DVD >burners didn't become affordable until about 2005, but most of what I built in > >2000 through 2004 had either a CD burner and a DVD read only, or from 2003 on >combo drives, CD burn, DVD read only. But my point here is that 2004 and >older >machines are horribly obsolete today, and the vast majority of them have been >scrapped! Also most of these old clunkers are only found in the more >technologically advanced countries, because the 3rd world countries didn't >start >to get computers in any significant numbers until after the time of the old >floppy based machines. > FYI - there are a lot of organizations that take any computer they can - regardless of age - and refurb it and ship it to 3rd world countries so that some people can simply _have_ a computer. Doesn't matter that it's 10 or 15 years old - as long as it runs and runs well. They'll find a configuration that will run on it. Granted, most of such computer do meet the trash can; but they are out there and should not be discounted. $0.02 Ben -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] the distortion in chinese font in writer
Hi ! On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 7:33 AM, Jih-Yao Lin wrote: > when i select one line of my chinese font article, there will be some > distortion at the beginning and the end of the high light line. Please file a bugreport and provide a screenshot, and if possible an export to PDF and the original document. https://bugs.freedesktop.org/ , LibreOffice component If possible, also mention what font you use/whether that occurs with all fonts. Preferrably try with freely available fonts, so it can be easily reproduced. Also very important of course is to mention the operating system used :-) ciao Christian -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] [ooofuture] actual figures TDF - end of Nov 2010
2010/12/2 Thomas Krumbein > Hey, > > as you know, the OOoDeV temporaly take over the cost and founds for the > upcoming TDF. > > So I will give in monthly intervals a short report about those figures: > > Since Sep, 28 we recieved a lot of small to very small amounts of money > mainly via PayPal - so PayPal charge some fees of each recieved amount. > The sums are: > recieved from Sep, 28 to Sep., 30 :939,76 EUR > recieves form Oct, 01 to Oct, 15 :709,36 EUR > recieves from Oct, 16 to Oct, 31 :545,11 EUR > recieves fro, Nov, 01 to Nov, 30 : 2.172,05 EUR > additional recieved via bank account: 491,00 EUR > > Founds summery: 4.857,28 EUR > > Costs since starting up the Foundation: > Mainly hardware (Server) cost and domain-registration, up to now: > 1.036,98 EUR > Fees for trademark "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation": > 1.800,- EUR > Costs for the layer: 1.092,- EUR > > Sum costs: 3.928,98 EUR > > That means, up to now we do have a surplus of 928,30 EUR. > > Best regards > Thomas Krumbein > Well, Thomas, I presume you are familiar with the Dickensian definition of happiness (from David Copperfield) : Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery. The Foundation seems to be well on the road to happiness !... Henri -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
On fim 2.des 2010 15:58, skrifaði Marc Paré: - Ah .. I am just looking at the language packs for linux distributions. Could anyone on the list explain how users install language packs on LO (I'm using the .rpm version as reference point here). It looks like they come in a ".tar.gz" file and when uncompressed a folder is created with a lot of .rpm files. There doesn't seem to be an installer that comes along with them and the user is left to use console to install. It this right? So, if this is the case, we would then have to a common installer where the user would identify the language pack(s) needed. It doesn't look like the language pack installers would be a good place as the language installation methods are different from one OS to the other. Does this make sense? Well, that depends on what you define as an 'user'. 'Normal Linux users' (as of today = *buntu/Mint etc) use their respective package managers to set up software. Developers should be capable to pull their nightly dose directly from git, the users in question (which are likely to install LibreOffice from those packages) are either adventurous or participating as translators/QA or such. Even for translation/QA/testing users, offering repositories could be an easier way to go and probably less resource-hogging. Of course it would be easiest if there was one metapackage/script for installing the repo and the chosen language packs. OpenSuse has an 'One Click Install' system on their web, which is just a simple script witch initiates the PM with information about the repository in question. Centralised PM's have become the 'Linux-way', picking up packages in various places on the web is so 'passé'... ;-) Just thoughts, Sveinn í Felli -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
NoOp wrote: On 11/30/2010 02:43 AM, plino wrote: The point here is that OOo has a small installer with 140Mb (no Java, and only English, Spanish and French dictionaries). Why is LO going in the opposite direction with 299 and 466Mb??? The current packages (including in the smallest option 56 language packs!!!) makes no sense IMO as I mentioned in this post http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/A-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-LibreOffice-tp1954148p1973749.html I think that an English only version of LibreOffice and then separate Language Packs (10-40Mb) which include the translation for the interface and dictionaries, spelling, etc is the best option. Actually the point that I was trying to make, but apparently you've snipped all (including attribution as to who you were replying to) is this: Those that think including additional bits such as documentation in any initial download need to consider the impact of both the user and the download method. The current download (as has been explained in other threads) is large due to the added language add-on's. No worries, as the LO is still beta. However my post was to remind others that downloading an application such as LO is very much an issue. Whether the download be 100Mb or 300Mb, the result is large for dial-up users. Another post indicated that dialup users are used to large downloads & let them run overnight. Fair enough... but it's obvious that that poster doesn't use dialup. It's analogous to assuming that all users have DVD readers... I test multiple OS's, multiple open-source programs, and I just checked; out of 10 systems that I have running, only 4 have DVD readers, 2 have DVD r/w, and all exept one have floppy drives. BTW: I live and work in "Silicon Valley". My opinion is to *not* add documentation to the inital download. Instead reduce the initial download as much as possible, and improve the Help section to ensure it is correct, and to instruct and or point a new user additional documentation. I simply MUST disagree for one simple reason, I just don't think that there should be one single take-it-or-leave-it download package! there must be a choice of packages, one without anything extra, and ALSO others with certain amounts of extras added. That way you could find a package that is right for your needs and your download capability. NoOp, it sounds like a lot of your computers are almost antiques. I tossed the last of my floppy disks in the trash a couple of months ago. I am a retired system builder, and I now am down to just 2 computers, (from about a dozen at one point) my tower which I built, Athlon 64 bit dual core, SATA HD and DVD burner, and my Toshiba laptop, also Athlon 64 bit dual core, 320 gig HD and DVD burner. I remember that optical disks started to replace floppies in about 1995 because Win-95 came either way. Win-98 was CD only. I will admit that DVD burners didn't become affordable until about 2005, but most of what I built in 2000 through 2004 had either a CD burner and a DVD read only, or from 2003 on combo drives, CD burn, DVD read only. But my point here is that 2004 and older machines are horribly obsolete today, and the vast majority of them have been scrapped! Also most of these old clunkers are only found in the more technologically advanced countries, because the 3rd world countries didn't start to get computers in any significant numbers until after the time of the old floppy based machines. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
Hi Marc, 2010/12/2 Marc Paré > Le 2010-12-02 02:29, Jean-Baptiste Faure a écrit : > >> Although a good idea, I would still like to see an installer do this > >> rather than the language pack. > > Hmm, on MS-Windows language packs are installed by an installer in the > > same way as the core application. > > The difference is that this installer is localized. There is nothing to > > add in the language packs, only to modify them in order they are able to > > drive the installer of the core application. > > > > Best regards > > JBF > > > > Ah .. I am just looking at the language packs for linux distributions. > Could anyone on the list explain how users install language packs on LO > (I'm using the .rpm version as reference point here). It looks like they > come in a ".tar.gz" file and when uncompressed a folder is created with > a lot of .rpm files. There doesn't seem to be an installer that comes > along with them and the user is left to use console to install. It this > right? > Why ship an installer, when it is preferred to use the package manager from your Linux distribution? For Mandriva (on the console) do the following: - go to the directory that has all the rpm packages - su - (enter password) - urpmi *.rpm That installs all packages in the necessary order, you don't have to do anything else. As alternative, it should also be possible to use the gui: (I did not test this, but it should be easily doable) - Use konqueror / nautilus / dolphin or any other file manager, change into the folder, that has all your rpms you want to install - Mark all the files you want to install - Do a right click and choose "Open with Software installer" - Enter your root password in the popup - Installation should be done automatically. [...] Sigrid -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
Le 2010-12-02 07:05, plino a écrit : > > NoOp, I think we agree on the minimal installer size. > > I apologize for the reply mess. I'm not used to this mailing list tool. If I > reply via nabble, I can't quote. If I reply via Gmail, I can't quote but the > reference to whom the reply was doesn't work... > > It is clear that the huge installer is temporary but a smaller installer > plus all language packs takes less than 2Gb, which seems negligible... > > It would be nice to have some feedback from the developers on which path > they are following (I know this isn't the dev mailing list...) > > Please someone setup a proper Forum ASAP ;) Hi Plino: If you are suggesting a forum for the developers, I don't this there is one. There is a mailing list: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice that is listed on the LibreOffice page: http://www.documentfoundation.org/develop/ It wouldn't surprise me if there was a developer on this list. Marc -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
Le 2010-12-02 02:29, Jean-Baptiste Faure a écrit : >> Although a good idea, I would still like to see an installer do this >> rather than the language pack. > Hmm, on MS-Windows language packs are installed by an installer in the > same way as the core application. > The difference is that this installer is localized. There is nothing to > add in the language packs, only to modify them in order they are able to > drive the installer of the core application. > > Best regards > JBF > Ah .. I am just looking at the language packs for linux distributions. Could anyone on the list explain how users install language packs on LO (I'm using the .rpm version as reference point here). It looks like they come in a ".tar.gz" file and when uncompressed a folder is created with a lot of .rpm files. There doesn't seem to be an installer that comes along with them and the user is left to use console to install. It this right? If this is the case, I can see why you (Jean-Baptiste) and I had different opinions as the installation process is different from the Win and Linux platforms. I imagine that this is also the case with the Apple platform. So, if this is the case, we would then have to a common installer where the user would identify the language pack(s) needed. It doesn't look like the language pack installers would be a good place as the language installation methods are different from one OS to the other. Does this make sense? Salut! Marc -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Why is LO/OOo so slow loading a spreadsheet?
Here is a table of loading times (in seconds) This test was carried out under Windows XP SP3 with the 300.000 lines sample I mentioned in a previous post, converted to the 4 formats. http://www.openoffice.org/nonav/issues/showattachment.cgi/66356/30_line_sample.xlsx http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/file/n2006665/Loading_times.png (NOTES: * LO/OOo only loads CSV files after a screen asking for encoding/delimiters; ** I'm not surprised that MS doesn't support .gnumeric but I think LO/OOo should) Notice that LO/OOo takes 4 times longer to load an ODS file than Gnumeric and 24(!!!) times longer to load the xlsx file than Excel and Gnumeric. Interestingly, ODS is also the slowest format to load in Gnumeric. These results show that some optimization is needed for both LO/OOo and the ODS format... (Loading ODS in Office 2007 used the latest version of the OpenXML/ODF Translator Add-in for Office http://sourceforge.net/projects/odf-converter/. No comments on the loading time :) ) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Why-is-LO-OOo-so-slow-loading-a-spreadsheet-tp2006665p2006665.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: accessibility mailing list
Le 2010-12-02 06:59, sophie a écrit : > Hi Christoph, > On 30/11/2010 02:13, Christoph Noack wrote: > [...] >> >> Concerning 3: This is the more technical part of a11y - and a very >> important one. Here, it might make sense to get (at least) a special >> interest group or a team. But I'm unable to suggest what they might need >> to do a proper job :-) > If you need, I was testing OOo with NVDA and Orca, also I used > Accerciser to test new UI parts, so I can do the same with LO, just tell > me where I can send you some feedback. > > Kind regards > Sophie > > Sorry, I should have posted that on the new mailing list. You can answer on the new mailing list if you are on it. Marc -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: accessibility mailing list
Le 2010-12-02 06:59, sophie a écrit : > Hi Christoph, > On 30/11/2010 02:13, Christoph Noack wrote: > [...] >> >> Concerning 3: This is the more technical part of a11y - and a very >> important one. Here, it might make sense to get (at least) a special >> interest group or a team. But I'm unable to suggest what they might need >> to do a proper job :-) > If you need, I was testing OOo with NVDA and Orca, also I used > Accerciser to test new UI parts, so I can do the same with LO, just tell > me where I can send you some feedback. > > Kind regards > Sophie > > Hi Sophie: I was just wondering if you were just testing the parts or if you were actually using these in any kind of environment. For example, I would be interested in testing some of these in an educational environment with kids. For that matter, are there any members who are using any aids to OOo in any kind of real life environment from the point of view of accessibility. I would be interested in your comments. Marc -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] Updated draft of the Community Bylaws
Hi, David Nelson wrote on 2010-12-02 11.28: > I added some numbering to the notes to allow for easier discussion here... hm... where? > [REVIEWER'S NOTE 06: COULD THERE MAYBE BE A SPECIAL ARRANGEMENT FOR > TAKING IN NEW MEMBERS FROM THE COMMUNITY WHO WERE NOT INVOLVED IN OOo? > IN ANY CASE, IS IT A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE THIS PURPORTEDLY TEMPORARY > PROVISION ABOUT OOo PEOPLE HARD-CODED INTO THE PERMANENT BYE-LAWS?] Good point... if we cannot change the bylaws (that easily), it maybe shouldn't be in there, as we might not need it after one or two years anymore. > [REVIEWER'S NOTE 07: PERHAPS THERE COULD BE A SPECIAL > "complai...@documentfoundation.org" MAIL ADDRESS THAT WOULD BE THE > PLACE TO SEND SUCH REQUESTS? THEREFORE, ONE COULD MAYBE MENTION THAT > ADDRESS HERE AS THE PROCEDURAL RULE?] > > [REVIEWER'S NOTE 08: PERHAPS THERE COULD BE A SPECIAL > "res...@documentfoundation.org" MAIL ADDRESS THAT WOULD PROVIDE AN > UNEQUIVOCAL RECORD OF WHETHER OR NOT A MEMBER IS DEEMED TO HAVE > RESIGNED? THEREFORE, ONE COULD MAYBE MENTION THAT ADDRESS HERE AS THE > PROCEDURAL RULE?] > > [REVIEWER'S NOTE 09: IMHO, A LOT MORE SPECIFIC INFO ABOUT THE > MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE WOULD BE A GOOD THING... HOW MANY MEMBERS? MEETS > HOW OFTEN? HOW WILL MEETINGS BE HELD (CONFCALL? > http://code.google.com/p/openmeetings/ ?)? WHAT VOTING RULES? MAYBE > THERE SHOULD BE EXPLICIT RULES CONCERNING APPEALS? HOW LONG IS THIS > "INTERIM PERIOD"?] Don't mention technologies or addresses in the bylaws, but rather refer to them as being online or the like. Otherwise, the same issue as with 06 kicks in - we cannot change it that easily, even if technology changes. > [REVIEWER'S NOTE 14: I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND THIS SENTENCE. IS THIS > A "MEETING OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS" OR A "MEETING OF THE MEMBERSHIP > COMMITTEE"? DOES THE ANNUAL CONFERENCE HAVE TO BE ATTENDED PHYSICALLY, > OR CAN WE USE AN ONLINE CONFERENCING SYSTEM LIKE > http://www.gotomeeting.com/fec/ (ACCOUNT WOULD HAVE TO BE SPONSORED BY > CITRIX ONLINE) OR http://code.google.com/p/openmeetings/ ?] Dito. Florian -- Florian Effenberger Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] Updated draft of the Community Bylaws
Hi Olivier, Olivier Hallot wrote on 2010-12-01 11.17: > 2) I really appreciate *oxygenation*. Letting a chairman "ad aeternam" > in place is a source of trouble and will let him build strong and > unbreakable ties with the BoD, the employees and selected sectarian > members of the Foundation (the "goodfellas"), aiming to preserve his > status and position and offering whatever is needed to keep support on him. > > A one or two year term with one further nominaton will ensure fresh air > (sort of) to the TDF Chairmanship. The leaving chairman can be > reconducted later, but only after another one took his place for at > least xxx month. > > Oxygenation also improves governance and transparency. I see the issues, and what I've said for the BoD goes for the Chairman as well: We don't want anyone sitting on their chair just because of tradition, but without doing anything (positive). However, on the other hand, if someone does a real good job, we shouldn't force him or her to leave just because of the rules. I propose that we do also annually or bi-annually voting of the Chairman, so fresh air can come in, but doesn't need to, if we all breathe like we want. :-) > Are we going to allow memebers of the BoD, AB, and the Chariman to be in > the MC? It doesn't make sense if people combine too many "powers", but in general, there should be no rule against being part of those two. Florian -- Florian Effenberger Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] A better idea for a download package.
- Original Message > From: Friedrich Strohmaier > BRM schrieb: > > From: Charles Marcus > >> On 2010-11-30 5:29 PM, BRM wrote: > >>> While that may currently be the case - that is absolutely > >>> ridiculous. TDF/LO should make a priority of resolving that > >>> issue. > >> Great, then I'm sure your contribution of these code changes will > >> be forthcoming soon? > >> Yes, I'm joking. > > As joking as you may be, I for one would do so if I had the time. > > As it is - I might in a few months, but I can't guarantee it right > > now. > > The cost/benefit would _be_ worth it. > I could not find Your mailadress in the developer's mailinglist. > Are You already subscribed there? > If not You could do so here: > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice I had not yet. However, not I have and I will move this part of the topic there. It might be a few days though before I'll be able to. > > Please stop discouraging this kind of work. If the effort is to be > > done at all, then we need to encourage this kind > > of work - even if in small incremental steps. But it has to start > > somewhere and with a goal in mind to accomplish. > Agreed. So don't hesitate to subscribe the dev list which is the best > place for Your proposal. > Ben -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: accessibility mailing list
Hi, the accessibility mailing list is now set-up: accessibil...@libreoffice.org: Accessibility discussions on LibreOffice Subscription: accessibility+subscr...@libreoffice.org Digest subscription: accessibility+subscribe-dig...@libreoffice.org Archives: http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/accessibility/ Mail-Archive.com: http://www.mail-archive.com/accessibil...@libreoffice.org/ GMANE: pending Florian -- Florian Effenberger Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
NoOp, I think we agree on the minimal installer size. I apologize for the reply mess. I'm not used to this mailing list tool. If I reply via nabble, I can't quote. If I reply via Gmail, I can't quote but the reference to whom the reply was doesn't work... It is clear that the huge installer is temporary but a smaller installer plus all language packs takes less than 2Gb, which seems negligible... It would be nice to have some feedback from the developers on which path they are following (I know this isn't the dev mailing list...) Please someone setup a proper Forum ASAP ;) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/A-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-LibreOffice-tp1954148p2005553.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] accessibility mailing list
Hi Christoph, On 30/11/2010 02:13, Christoph Noack wrote: [...] > > Concerning 3: This is the more technical part of a11y - and a very > important one. Here, it might make sense to get (at least) a special > interest group or a team. But I'm unable to suggest what they might need > to do a proper job :-) If you need, I was testing OOo with NVDA and Orca, also I used Accerciser to test new UI parts, so I can do the same with LO, just tell me where I can send you some feedback. Kind regards Sophie -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Survey: Usage of LibreOffice components
Sebastian G. skrev: > Do you use the quick starter? No Writer = 26% Calc = 55% Impress = 10% Draw = 7% Base = 0% Math = 2% Writer: Letters, business proposals, reports, business cards, flyers, assignments (several with objects from from Calc, Draw and Math) Calc: business proposals, provisions, business calculations, charts, stock system (AgerLager .ots-template) Impress: Presentasions of FOSS (FOSS in general, OOo/LibO, Linux and our Danish Open Source business accounting system SALDI). Draw: Diagrams, flowcharts and an origami CD/DVD case with info on front and back printed only on one side of the paper (used for promoting OOo 1.x in Scandinavia). Base: Only tested it Math: Assignments for a cource in Business Economic written in Writer. The cource in Business Economic is also a showcase for my self to use Writer, Calc and Math in the 4 hour exam. So at every lection I use them for notes and creating the spreadsheets and formulas which would be a great help for the exam. I haven't been at an exam for 15 years - and nowadays you can bring your own pc with everything you want except a connection to the rest of the world. When you're finish you copy your files to an USB stick and take to another pc where you print it out. This will be my finest written exam ever. -- .: Claus Agerskov :: c...@agercon.dk :: 27 59 69 96 :. .: Robinievej 129 :: 2620 Albertslund :. .: AgerCon :: www.agercon.dk :. .: Konsulentydelser inden for åbne standarder og fri software :. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] [ooofuture] actual figures TDF - end of Nov 2010
Hey, as you know, the OOoDeV temporaly take over the cost and founds for the upcoming TDF. So I will give in monthly intervals a short report about those figures: Since Sep, 28 we recieved a lot of small to very small amounts of money mainly via PayPal - so PayPal charge some fees of each recieved amount. The sums are: recieved from Sep, 28 to Sep., 30 :939,76 EUR recieves form Oct, 01 to Oct, 15 :709,36 EUR recieves from Oct, 16 to Oct, 31 :545,11 EUR recieves fro, Nov, 01 to Nov, 30 : 2.172,05 EUR additional recieved via bank account: 491,00 EUR Founds summery: 4.857,28 EUR Costs since starting up the Foundation: Mainly hardware (Server) cost and domain-registration, up to now: 1.036,98 EUR Fees for trademark "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation": 1.800,- EUR Costs for the layer: 1.092,- EUR Sum costs: 3.928,98 EUR That means, up to now we do have a surplus of 928,30 EUR. Best regards Thomas Krumbein -- ## Marketing deutschsprachiges Projekt ## http://de.libreOffice.org - www.LibreOffice.org ## Vorstand OpenOffice.org Deutschland e.V. ## Mitglieder willkommen: www.OOoDeV.org -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
