Re: [tdf-discuss] Bring up libreoffice.org website to world *now* (was:deb installer - have to manually modify link)
On Wed, 8 Dec 2010 00:18:52 +0100, Friedrich Strohmaier wrote: > I'd assume they wait for publishing. I can't see any reason, why to keep > the building process of the page behind the sceenes. Everything > regarding tdf is beta[1] - why not the website?? +1 I bet the content of the static site would be rpelicated within a day, and improving the live site would be much more motivating than playing with something that has *test* in its name :) -- 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] Three things to not forget to make LibreOffice (and ODF) succeed
On Tue, 07 Dec 2010 13:44:22 -0800, "Bradley D. Thornton" wrote: > On 11/29/2010 07:11 AM, Phil Hibbs wrote: > > Google Docs (and possibly other ODF implementations such as KOffice) > > compatability is also an issue. Are there ongoing efforts to get > > Google Docs to be more compatible with OOo/LibreOffice's > > implementation of ODF? > > I've been asking questions related to this for a while now w/o any > response, and didn't notice any responses to your post either! Probably, because this might be a bit misplaced to ask. How can *we* do anything to make Google Docs to be more compatible to OOo/LO. THis is best asked in a Google development place, isn't it? :-) Or did you mean the other way round? Sebastian -- 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] Three things to not forget to make LibreOffice (and ODF) succeed
On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 04:46 +0200, Hillar Liiv wrote: > http://www.docverse.com/ > It seems to be nice tool and very useful for people editing documents > together. Yes, but I'm missing a page where I can download some sort of developer tools. Without some sort of developer tools even an interested developer won't be able to write a plug-in for it. So, at this point the only people who are capable of writing such plug-in is Google itself. Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- 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: Bring up libreoffice.org website to world *now*
Le 2010-12-07 18:18, Friedrich Strohmaier a écrit : Hi Christian, *, just a short step in here.. Christian Lohmaier schrieb: [..] It is because just I don't know /why/ people don't add content. It still is not clear to me what they are waiting for. I'd assume they wait for publishing. I can't see any reason, why to keep the building process of the page behind the sceenes. Everything regarding tdf is beta[1] - why not the website?? [1] O.K. The software itself isn't any more ;o)). If there is no real plan by people keen to add content, let the questions and complaints of visitors be the priorizing and structuring criteria. :o)). snip of the "test", go world and wait, what it demands from You. I propose the following, i.e. focus the work on individual pages this week: * Home/Welcome page: Start now, continue till sunday (I'd like to have some nice graphics there, some updated buttons) Do it but do it publicly. Everything is prepaired to review contents before publishing while the site is "under traffic". [..] Gruß/regards I would like people to hold off for another week. David seems to have some ideas about what he would like to do with the site and its contents. I can help. The biggest problem with adding the content, IMO, is that there was no group organisation and dividing up of tasks. If this is done, the content would go up quicker. David seems to have taken the lead and I can help out. 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] Three things to not forget to make LibreOffice (and ODF) succeed
http://www.docverse.com/ It seems to be nice tool and very useful for people editing documents together. Hillar 2010/12/8 Kohei Yoshida > On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 13:44 -0800, Bradley D. Thornton wrote: > > I've asked, on two LO lists now, how the progress on the Google > > DocVerse Plugin is coming along, yet they were met w/silence. > > So, does this statement imply that someone *was* working on this !? > > BTW, I've never heard of such thing as DocVerse. Could you briefly > explain what it does, and what license it is released under, and where > to download its source code. > > Thanks, > > Kohei > > -- > Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc > > > > -- > 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 *** > -- 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] Three things to not forget to make LibreOffice (and ODF) succeed
On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 13:44 -0800, Bradley D. Thornton wrote: > I've asked, on two LO lists now, how the progress on the Google > DocVerse Plugin is coming along, yet they were met w/silence. So, does this statement imply that someone *was* working on this !? BTW, I've never heard of such thing as DocVerse. Could you briefly explain what it does, and what license it is released under, and where to download its source code. Thanks, Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- 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] Three things to not forget to make LibreOffice (and ODF) succeed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hey thanks Bernhard, I'll do just that. I've established contact and acquired a statement fo support from the DocVerse folks, who have promised to move ahead on this if there is interest in our (ODF) community, and will attempt to make a connection between them and our LO developers on the devel list. There's already a few threads w/considerable interest and support for this on both the OOo and the DocVerse forum/discussion sites, and will attempt to tie these in together and bring those interested parties into the fray as well. Thanks for your pointers and I'll move this thread on over to the devel list. I hope that others will follow, although with most projects, cluttering a devel list w/discussions not directly related to the coding itself isn't where the developers would like such topics addressed. Thanks again and I'll take up the discussion there. I already have a sizeable user doc for this, although it based on the behaviour and look that MS Office exhibits, yet a rewrite would be simple since it will only take a couple of screenshots and very little change in the verbiage considering the functionality would be primarily the same. Once the plugin is beta'd then I'll seek guidance on how to dump it into the LO user docs proj :) Kindest regards, Bradley. On 12/07/2010 02:13 PM, Bernhard Dippold wrote: > Hi Bradley, Phil, all > > I'm not a developer, have never used Google DocVerse (and probably won't > during the next time - so I might be the best person to reply ;-) > > Bradley D. Thornton schrieb: >> [...] >> Hi Phil, >> >> and thanks for asking :) >> >> pls see comments below... >> >> On 11/29/2010 07:11 AM, Phil Hibbs wrote: >>> Google Docs (and possibly other ODF implementations such as KOffice) >>> compatability is also an issue. Are there ongoing efforts to get >>> Google Docs to be more compatible with OOo/LibreOffice's >>> implementation of ODF? >> >> I've been asking questions related to this for a while now w/o any >> response, and didn't notice any responses to your post either! > > As these kind of questions relate to development and ODF compatibility, > they must be replied by our developers. > > But you probably know that most of them are volunteers working hard to > get LibO 3.3.0 in a state to be released (actually we have the first > Release Candidate for testing!). > >> >> I've asked, on two LO lists now, how the progress on the Google DocVerse >> Plugin is coming along, yet they were met w/silence. > > I don't know about the second list you mention - the best chance to get > a reply by any developer (and perhaps by someone involved in ODF > compatibility) is on our developer list: libreoff...@lists.freedesktop.org. > >> >> It may be that we have to wait for Google to finish and implement this >> on their own since there doesn't appear to be any impetus, interest, or >> the slightest amount of support from the LO staff, let alone interest by >> the community - judging by the silence pertaining to both your post and >> mine. > > You will probably know as well, that there is no LibO staff at all, so > it's up to interested community members like you and me to work on the > topics we want to see implemented. > > If you can't do any coding (like me), you might provide the contact > between LibO and Google developers - ask their questions on the > libreoff...@freedesktop list, invite them to join and help them by other > means to improve their plug-in. > > I'm quite sure that you will get friendly and positive replies when you > ask for help instead of complaining that nobody else is interested or > able to do the work you want to be done. > >> Many people have been asking for this at the Docverse support site as >> well as the OOo site for several months, and the only mention of >> interest or support came from the Google DocVerse folks - NOT the ODF >> camp! > > So please feel as part of the "ODF camp" - even if ODF is much more than > just LibreOffice. As part of our community you're welcome to help to > improve LibO in any way you think it is suitable. > > I don't know what needs to be done on our side - the ODF specifications > are open, extensions as well, if you know any more specific questions, > just ask them on the dev list. > > Best regards > > Bernhard > - -- Bradley D. Thornton Manager Network Services NorthTech Computer TEL: +1.760.666.2703 (US) TEL: +44.702.405.1909 (UK) http://NorthTech.US -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Find this cert at x-hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net iQEcBAEBAwAGBQJM/s2WAAoJEE1wgkIhr9j3RoUIAJIjzf3+e7xoAmunX5Z7t1rD 9Azg3pEu0g8wqyMoIwsSLQXXb9xFa8Atg08YYVZxKaFsp/L0mWheNwhxs5Af/2Od o6aA56ZEnyjJMlUx+tFBienVcm2HIymEJm5kJd4jE3s4qW/+zxXLfR6OoIGmh9kE Qb/E91cl3EVA9aWF9mbN9/PV0rStN6iiirAcXdxDvWbVV6zp6twwmk2IcQZlA6ZK YKj5Sb4G+p8pJrSTfzqxYzoK1WBG9n/ovGo/VhjhLUFN1BVFMtoGPIusB7jbu/BJ 6LaZfJxVa2Dch9u7LbjYYohc22s/Mcrav2UgLGFe6JYRwSWCS7MJfr2kkXAlfZ
[tdf-discuss] Bring up libreoffice.org website to world *now* (was:deb installer - have to manually modify link)
Hi Christian, *, just a short step in here.. Christian Lohmaier schrieb: [..] > It is because just I don't know /why/ people don't add content. It > still is not clear to me what they are waiting for. I'd assume they wait for publishing. I can't see any reason, why to keep the building process of the page behind the sceenes. Everything regarding tdf is beta[1] - why not the website?? [1] O.K. The software itself isn't any more ;o)). If there is no real plan by people keen to add content, let the questions and complaints of visitors be the priorizing and structuring criteria. :o)). snip of the "test", go world and wait, what it demands from You. >>> I propose the following, i.e. focus the work on individual pages >>> this week: * Home/Welcome page: Start now, continue till sunday >>> (I'd like to have some nice graphics there, some updated buttons) Do it but do it publicly. Everything is prepaired to review contents before publishing while the site is "under traffic". [..] Gruß/regards -- Friedrich Libreoffice-Box http://libreofficebox.org/ LibreOffice and more on CD/DVD images (german version already started) -- 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] Three things to not forget to make LibreOffice (and ODF) succeed
Hi Bradley, Phil, all I'm not a developer, have never used Google DocVerse (and probably won't during the next time - so I might be the best person to reply ;-) Bradley D. Thornton schrieb: [...] Hi Phil, and thanks for asking :) pls see comments below... On 11/29/2010 07:11 AM, Phil Hibbs wrote: Google Docs (and possibly other ODF implementations such as KOffice) compatability is also an issue. Are there ongoing efforts to get Google Docs to be more compatible with OOo/LibreOffice's implementation of ODF? I've been asking questions related to this for a while now w/o any response, and didn't notice any responses to your post either! As these kind of questions relate to development and ODF compatibility, they must be replied by our developers. But you probably know that most of them are volunteers working hard to get LibO 3.3.0 in a state to be released (actually we have the first Release Candidate for testing!). I've asked, on two LO lists now, how the progress on the Google DocVerse Plugin is coming along, yet they were met w/silence. I don't know about the second list you mention - the best chance to get a reply by any developer (and perhaps by someone involved in ODF compatibility) is on our developer list: libreoff...@lists.freedesktop.org. It may be that we have to wait for Google to finish and implement this on their own since there doesn't appear to be any impetus, interest, or the slightest amount of support from the LO staff, let alone interest by the community - judging by the silence pertaining to both your post and mine. You will probably know as well, that there is no LibO staff at all, so it's up to interested community members like you and me to work on the topics we want to see implemented. If you can't do any coding (like me), you might provide the contact between LibO and Google developers - ask their questions on the libreoff...@freedesktop list, invite them to join and help them by other means to improve their plug-in. I'm quite sure that you will get friendly and positive replies when you ask for help instead of complaining that nobody else is interested or able to do the work you want to be done. Many people have been asking for this at the Docverse support site as well as the OOo site for several months, and the only mention of interest or support came from the Google DocVerse folks - NOT the ODF camp! So please feel as part of the "ODF camp" - even if ODF is much more than just LibreOffice. As part of our community you're welcome to help to improve LibO in any way you think it is suitable. I don't know what needs to be done on our side - the ODF specifications are open, extensions as well, if you know any more specific questions, just ask them on the dev list. Best regards Bernhard -- 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: Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
Am Dienstag, den 07.12.2010, 21:23 +0100 schrieb Mirek M.: > 2010/12/7 Marc Paré > > > Le 2010-12-07 13:12, Christophe Strobbe a écrit : > > > > Hi, > >> > >> At 18:50 7/12/2010, Rainer Bielefeld wrote: > >> > >>> Rainer Bielefeld schrieb: > >>> > [...] but switch from Sxxx.exe to Lxxx.exe (LWRITER.EXEm ...) > >>> > >>> But if that might cause any trouble (for example Extensions > >>> referencing to current names of .exe files) I would leave all as it is. > >>> > >> > >> I agree. I am involved in the development of three OpenOffice.org > >> extensions: odt2daisy, odt2braille and a third one that will be released > >> in early 2011. odt2daisy and odt2braille (both available on SourceForge) > >> currently work with LibreOffice and I would like to preserve > >> compatibility. > >> > >> With regard to the original question: are there any surveys or data that > >> confirm that the names for Writer, Calc and Impress need to be improved? > >> (I wouldn't be surprised if this were the case for Impress; I don't see > >> a problem for the others.) > >> > >> Best regards, > >> > >> Christophe > >> > >> > >> > > I don't believe that any of this has been discussed as the SC and most > > communities see the move from OpenOffice to LibreOffice as a natural outcome > > of moving to a "foundation" organisation. We had originally wanted to have > > the use of the "OpenOffice" name. > > > > I can tell you from personal experience, over many years, with using > > OpenOffice in the classroom and with students at home, "Writer" and "Calc" > > are easily recognisable; "Impress" is not. > > > > We should perhaps consider that Oracle has decided to go on with OpenOffice > > and is using the "Writer", "Calc" and "Impress" names. Will people associate > > these names more with OpenOffice? Do these names conjure up the image of > > OOo? I would suspect yes. I can already imagine that people will be asking > > me if I am talking about OpenOffice or LibreOffice (when I use the module > > names)? > > > > We could also see this as somewhat of a standoff, do we own the moral or > > even legal rights to use the "Writer", "Calc" and "Impress" names or does > > OpenOffice? > > > > If we are to change, the names should be very descriptive and concise. And, > > as Christophe points out, the compatibility of extensions will have to be > > considered. > > > > Maybe now is not the time to change names? We could better plan for a later > > release if we do? > > > > I'd definitely wait a while before changing names. I mean, right now, > LibreOffice is basically the same piece of software as OpenOffice.org, just > with a few patches and different branding. Even the version numbers are the > same. > If LibreOffice is serious about really separating from the OOo codebase and > going its own way, then it's inevitable that, in the future, extensions for > one won't necessarily work with the other. > > When the two are different enough, that'll be the time for changing > application names. I am not very experienced with these things, but I think that it would be better to have all name changes now than "sometime in the future". LO is a Fork and I think it can have its own names. I think from a user's view it is confusing that it is no more OpenOffice, but LibreOffice they use. Then maybe they get used to that name after some time and then there is another name change, even of the applications they use every day. So I think a name change should be done now and not after some releases. Maybe we can keep the name "Writer", but I would change Impress and Calc. When I used OpenOffice first, I was always confused by Calc and Formula, I just wanted Excel. I always started Formula, because Calc sounded like Calculator and that's not a spreadsheet (I am German btw). Samuel M. > > > > > Just my thoughts. > > > > 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 *** > > > > > > -- > > Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? > A: http://five.sentenc.es > -- 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] Three things to not forget to make LibreOffice (and ODF) succeed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi Phil, and thanks for asking :) pls see comments below... On 11/29/2010 07:11 AM, Phil Hibbs wrote: > Google Docs (and possibly other ODF implementations such as KOffice) > compatability is also an issue. Are there ongoing efforts to get > Google Docs to be more compatible with OOo/LibreOffice's > implementation of ODF? I've been asking questions related to this for a while now w/o any response, and didn't notice any responses to your post either! I've asked, on two LO lists now, how the progress on the Google DocVerse Plugin is coming along, yet they were met w/silence. It may be that we have to wait for Google to finish and implement this on their own since there doesn't appear to be any impetus, interest, or the slightest amount of support from the LO staff, let alone interest by the community - judging by the silence pertaining to both your post and mine. Many people have been asking for this at the Docverse support site as well as the OOo site for several months, and the only mention of interest or support came from the Google DocVerse folks - NOT the ODF camp! This is how it works now when I want to use it (and a lot of people use it so they're just as inconvenienced when they zealously adhere to a policy of ODF/OOo/LO: I save from either OOo or LO to a native .ODT and then again as a .DOC file, then I open the .DOC file in any version of MS Office >= 2003. This is a MAJOR hassle, because we have to make sure that there are a few licensed copies of MS Office (As well as wYNdOZE) available for use in the Enterprise, instead of NONE - which we would prefer, and we have to boot it in a Virtual Machine! Next, the Google Docverse Plugin enabled MS Word, for example, asks me if I want to send up the file into the Google DocVerse cloud, and who the editors and readers (by email addy) are. Then it u/l's the doc(s) and notifies the editors/readers I've selected for that document that there are changes to an existing doc being collab'd or that there is a new doc for them to look at / edit. If the people designated don't have the DocVerse plugin installed in their copy of MS Office, then they d/l it and (without restarting) begin to use the collab features of Google DocVerse. If one of the editors makes comments/changes to the doc(s), then I'm immediately notified by email this has occurred - so I know WHEN it happens and workflow can be optimum wrt the pace of doc development. Great tool But it would really be nice If I didn't have to fire up a virtual machine running wYNdOZE just to run MS Office, pick up the .DOC version of the file, and then u/l it to DocVerse! The inverse is also kind of a pain too: I have to take the finalized doc, save it from MS Office in my Virtual Machine running wYNdOZE, then kill the VM, Open the .DOC in OOo/LO, and save it once more as an ODT file, for example, and once all of this has occurred I can circulate it amongst the rest of the folks in the enterprise. Does anyone know what the status of the DocVerse plugin for LO is??? Inquiring Minds want to know :) > > For instance, in a Google Docs spreadsheet, any random number formulae > are re-randomized every time anything changes in the spreadsheet. In > OOo/LO, a value is only re-randomized when the cell itself is edited, > which I think is a great improvement. > > Phil Hibbs. - -- Bradley D. Thornton Manager Network Services NorthTech Computer TEL: +1.760.666.2703 (US) TEL: +44.702.405.1909 (UK) http://NorthTech.US -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Find this cert at x-hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net iQEcBAEBAwAGBQJM/qq1AAoJEE1wgkIhr9j36TQH/3V1mPSyFqtpqhInLWnPO44t Hbt9q0TO5cWR6p+K/YRboSeVXtYC0pq5ibwZ6nXaWI8oaIexIaFzWgffWXjE+gvo 28SLyOG1VVyK64843ljKoYdRPRIBcvjaJytnP+I5keWaw1x1Up1CS0qVssqM9Mas OPZIwKHtxNIqJFcGGg5GQRnw6NC6dIFbo82/3RS6Xf0OF/rS7pLErRLLRtzWWjAD NORFK8N0d2jvPHDM+BmQVj6zxKBsP+4mlxQ7nIt4dfE+kG0NJsFyKGxhYAKmtQ66 ApLzu6eN35Q+OBFckaX9eITA6JI2wH20mOKEzkOYsRgdg5tl6o9cBQKhOoPqOVY= =z1/l -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- 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: Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
On 12/07/2010 02:23 PM, Mirek M. wrote: 2010/12/7 Marc Paré Le 2010-12-07 13:12, Christophe Strobbe a écrit : Hi, At 18:50 7/12/2010, Rainer Bielefeld wrote: Rainer Bielefeld schrieb: [...] but switch from Sxxx.exe to Lxxx.exe (LWRITER.EXEm ...) But if that might cause any trouble (for example Extensions referencing to current names of .exe files) I would leave all as it is. I agree. I am involved in the development of three OpenOffice.org extensions: odt2daisy, odt2braille and a third one that will be released in early 2011. odt2daisy and odt2braille (both available on SourceForge) currently work with LibreOffice and I would like to preserve compatibility. With regard to the original question: are there any surveys or data that confirm that the names for Writer, Calc and Impress need to be improved? (I wouldn't be surprised if this were the case for Impress; I don't see a problem for the others.) Best regards, Christophe I don't believe that any of this has been discussed as the SC and most communities see the move from OpenOffice to LibreOffice as a natural outcome of moving to a "foundation" organisation. We had originally wanted to have the use of the "OpenOffice" name. I can tell you from personal experience, over many years, with using OpenOffice in the classroom and with students at home, "Writer" and "Calc" are easily recognisable; "Impress" is not. We should perhaps consider that Oracle has decided to go on with OpenOffice and is using the "Writer", "Calc" and "Impress" names. Will people associate these names more with OpenOffice? Do these names conjure up the image of OOo? I would suspect yes. I can already imagine that people will be asking me if I am talking about OpenOffice or LibreOffice (when I use the module names)? We could also see this as somewhat of a standoff, do we own the moral or even legal rights to use the "Writer", "Calc" and "Impress" names or does OpenOffice? If we are to change, the names should be very descriptive and concise. And, as Christophe points out, the compatibility of extensions will have to be considered. Maybe now is not the time to change names? We could better plan for a later release if we do? I'd definitely wait a while before changing names. I mean, right now, LibreOffice is basically the same piece of software as OpenOffice.org, just with a few patches and different branding. Even the version numbers are the same. If LibreOffice is serious about really separating from the OOo codebase and going its own way, then it's inevitable that, in the future, extensions for one won't necessarily work with the other. When the two are different enough, that'll be the time for changing application names. Just my thoughts. 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 *** A name change would be beneficial for not only the point of view of differentiation and recognisability but also from a marketing and branding point of view. If a name change occurs purely subjective names should be avoided (such as Flow for the word app), but purely descriptive names could be equally bad. On the point of extension compatibility, I am no programmer but I would think that simlinks could be created that would provide compatibility. Or the user side of things could be changed and leave the executables names the same as current. $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 ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Non-removable extensions
Hello Michael PLease consider removing all these undesired dictionaries and extensions. Actually, I agree with OOo project where we should keep LO as lean as possible and offload collateral delevelopments to extensions, which by the way is a very nice feature. Now with no intent to spark flames, I am concerned in distributing LO to a corporation as large as 120K desktops. Every single useless extension is a source of concern for failure, doubts and support costs. 120.000 small annoyances is a huge problem, believe me. So I beg to remove them. All of them. I need to have LO focused in my locale, with only one or two upgradeable extensions (dicts, grammar checker) that I can manage for 120.000 users. The corporation I work for only allows extensions under strict business need. Thank you very much indeed. Olivier Em 01-11-2010 09:34, Michael Meeks escreveu: Hi there, On Sun, 2010-10-31 at 17:53 -0400, Michel Gagnon wrote: however I cannot modify my installation to remove the PDF Import and Persenter Console. So - there are lots of parts of LibreOffice that cannot be removed easily; such as the clipart gallery, or say, the Quattro Pro file filters, or whatever. The more interesting thing to me is - why would you want to remove the PDF Import ? or the Presenter Console ? If there are bugs that make these unususable, or particularly problematic - then, we should fix those instead IMHO. ie. can we fix the bug in the right place ? ATB, Michael. -- Olivier Hallot Steering Commitee 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: Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
2010/12/7 Marc Paré > Le 2010-12-07 13:12, Christophe Strobbe a écrit : > > Hi, >> >> At 18:50 7/12/2010, Rainer Bielefeld wrote: >> >>> Rainer Bielefeld schrieb: >>> > [...] but switch from Sxxx.exe to Lxxx.exe (LWRITER.EXEm ...) >>> >>> But if that might cause any trouble (for example Extensions >>> referencing to current names of .exe files) I would leave all as it is. >>> >> >> I agree. I am involved in the development of three OpenOffice.org >> extensions: odt2daisy, odt2braille and a third one that will be released >> in early 2011. odt2daisy and odt2braille (both available on SourceForge) >> currently work with LibreOffice and I would like to preserve >> compatibility. >> >> With regard to the original question: are there any surveys or data that >> confirm that the names for Writer, Calc and Impress need to be improved? >> (I wouldn't be surprised if this were the case for Impress; I don't see >> a problem for the others.) >> >> Best regards, >> >> Christophe >> >> >> > I don't believe that any of this has been discussed as the SC and most > communities see the move from OpenOffice to LibreOffice as a natural outcome > of moving to a "foundation" organisation. We had originally wanted to have > the use of the "OpenOffice" name. > > I can tell you from personal experience, over many years, with using > OpenOffice in the classroom and with students at home, "Writer" and "Calc" > are easily recognisable; "Impress" is not. > > We should perhaps consider that Oracle has decided to go on with OpenOffice > and is using the "Writer", "Calc" and "Impress" names. Will people associate > these names more with OpenOffice? Do these names conjure up the image of > OOo? I would suspect yes. I can already imagine that people will be asking > me if I am talking about OpenOffice or LibreOffice (when I use the module > names)? > > We could also see this as somewhat of a standoff, do we own the moral or > even legal rights to use the "Writer", "Calc" and "Impress" names or does > OpenOffice? > > If we are to change, the names should be very descriptive and concise. And, > as Christophe points out, the compatibility of extensions will have to be > considered. > > Maybe now is not the time to change names? We could better plan for a later > release if we do? > I'd definitely wait a while before changing names. I mean, right now, LibreOffice is basically the same piece of software as OpenOffice.org, just with a few patches and different branding. Even the version numbers are the same. If LibreOffice is serious about really separating from the OOo codebase and going its own way, then it's inevitable that, in the future, extensions for one won't necessarily work with the other. When the two are different enough, that'll be the time for changing application names. > > Just my thoughts. > > 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 *** > -- Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es -- 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: Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
Le 2010-12-07 13:12, Christophe Strobbe a écrit : Hi, At 18:50 7/12/2010, Rainer Bielefeld wrote: Rainer Bielefeld schrieb: > [...] but switch from Sxxx.exe to Lxxx.exe (LWRITER.EXEm ...) But if that might cause any trouble (for example Extensions referencing to current names of .exe files) I would leave all as it is. I agree. I am involved in the development of three OpenOffice.org extensions: odt2daisy, odt2braille and a third one that will be released in early 2011. odt2daisy and odt2braille (both available on SourceForge) currently work with LibreOffice and I would like to preserve compatibility. With regard to the original question: are there any surveys or data that confirm that the names for Writer, Calc and Impress need to be improved? (I wouldn't be surprised if this were the case for Impress; I don't see a problem for the others.) Best regards, Christophe I don't believe that any of this has been discussed as the SC and most communities see the move from OpenOffice to LibreOffice as a natural outcome of moving to a "foundation" organisation. We had originally wanted to have the use of the "OpenOffice" name. I can tell you from personal experience, over many years, with using OpenOffice in the classroom and with students at home, "Writer" and "Calc" are easily recognisable; "Impress" is not. We should perhaps consider that Oracle has decided to go on with OpenOffice and is using the "Writer", "Calc" and "Impress" names. Will people associate these names more with OpenOffice? Do these names conjure up the image of OOo? I would suspect yes. I can already imagine that people will be asking me if I am talking about OpenOffice or LibreOffice (when I use the module names)? We could also see this as somewhat of a standoff, do we own the moral or even legal rights to use the "Writer", "Calc" and "Impress" names or does OpenOffice? If we are to change, the names should be very descriptive and concise. And, as Christophe points out, the compatibility of extensions will have to be considered. Maybe now is not the time to change names? We could better plan for a later release if we do? Just my thoughts. 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] Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
> +1 > I also don't like the current names much either. IMHO, they don't sound very > good and they don't describe the apps well either. "Calc" makes the app > sound like it's an advanced calculator, not a spreadsheet app, "Impress" is > too generic, and "Writer" sounds like a specialized tool for writers. I do > like the names for "Draw", "Base", and "Formula", though. A fair point, but rebranding doesn't always help - it can cause confusion. Plenty of programs use names that are well-known, whether they always make sense or not. e.g 'Word' does more than just words. 'WordPerfect' can make mistakes. 'WordPro' can be used by amateurs too. 'Excel' does not always excel. '1-2-3' can manage big numbers too. 'PowerPoint' has nothing to do with AC electrical outlets. 'Photoshop' is about more than photographs. 'GIMP' can be used by normal people too. 'Paint.NET' does not require a brush. 'Firefox' has nothing to do with burning wild mammals. 'Chrome' is not an element. 'Scribus' is not just for midieval monks who copy manuscripts. 'Page Maker' isn't just for people who manufacture paper. 'Windows' isn't made of glass. 'Unix' can be used by anyone, not just eunuchs. -- 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] Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
> With regard to the original question: are there any surveys or data > that confirm that the names for Writer, Calc and Impress need to be > improved? (I wouldn't be surprised if this were the case for Impress; > I don't see a problem for the others.) If it ain't broke, don't fix it. -- 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] Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
On Tuesday, December 07, 2010 17:20:16 Samuel Mehrbrodt wrote: > Today there was an announcement that KOffice got a new name (Calligra) > and they also renamed some of the Applications. "KWord" became "Words", > "KSpread" became "Tables" and "KPresenter" was renamed to "Stages". > > I was wondering whether such a name change has been considered for the > LibreOffice Applications. The point is that I don't really like the > current names. I'm not a Name Designer, but Writer, Calc and Impress > don't really sound good in my ears and I would even say that most people > using OpenOffice would not know the names of the Applications they are > using, only that it's OpenOffice. > > If LibreOffice changed the names of the Applications shipping, that > might also help people to differentiate between OpenOffice and > LibreOffice in Future. > > Here a comparison of the names of text processing, spreadsheet and > presentation program of six Office Suites: > > MS Office: Word, Excel, PowerPoint > Apple iWork: Pages, Numbers, Keynote > Calligra(former KOffice): Words, Tables, Stages Stage, not Stages :-) > Softmaker Office: Textmaker, Planmaker, Presentations > Corel WordPerfect Office: WordPerfect, Quattro Pro, Presentations > OpenOffice.org: Writer, Calc, Impress > > I think MS Office, iWork and now Calligra have the best names for their > applications. It's easy to spell and easy to remember. > I would like to hear what everyone else is thinking about changing names > for LibreOffice applications. > > Samuel M. -- 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] Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
Hi, At 18:50 7/12/2010, Rainer Bielefeld wrote: Rainer Bielefeld schrieb: > [...] but switch from Sxxx.exe to Lxxx.exe (LWRITER.EXEm ...) But if that might cause any trouble (for example Extensions referencing to current names of .exe files) I would leave all as it is. I agree. I am involved in the development of three OpenOffice.org extensions: odt2daisy, odt2braille and a third one that will be released in early 2011. odt2daisy and odt2braille (both available on SourceForge) currently work with LibreOffice and I would like to preserve compatibility. With regard to the original question: are there any surveys or data that confirm that the names for Writer, Calc and Impress need to be improved? (I wouldn't be surprised if this were the case for Impress; I don't see a problem for the others.) Best regards, Christophe -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- "Better products and services through end-user empowerment" www.usem-net.eu - www.stand4all.eu --- Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other "social networks". You may have agreed to their "privacy policy", but I haven't. -- 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] Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
Rainer Bielefeld schrieb: [...] but switch from Sxxx.exe to Lxxx.exe (LWRITER.EXEm ...) But if that might cause any trouble (for example Extensions referencing to current names of .exe files) I would leave all as it is. 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 ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
Rainer Bielefeld wrote: > > Frank Esposito schrieb: >> I think the present names are good, but I could also see a need to >> differentiate from OO, > > +1 > +2 > I would leave the name-core, but switch from Sxxx.exe to Lxxx.exe > (LWRITER.EXEm ...) > > Regards > > Rainer > > +1 S replaces by L for the .exe names will be pretty good. Gérard -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Name-Change-for-LibreOffice-Applications-tp2034451p2034936.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] Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
2010/12/7 Samuel Mehrbrodt > Today there was an announcement that KOffice got a new name (Calligra) > and they also renamed some of the Applications. "KWord" became "Words", > "KSpread" became "Tables" and "KPresenter" was renamed to "Stages". > > I was wondering whether such a name change has been considered for the > LibreOffice Applications. The point is that I don't really like the > current names. I'm not a Name Designer, but Writer, Calc and Impress > don't really sound good in my ears and I would even say that most people > using OpenOffice would not know the names of the Applications they are > using, only that it's OpenOffice. > > If LibreOffice changed the names of the Applications shipping, that > might also help people to differentiate between OpenOffice and > LibreOffice in Future. > > Here a comparison of the names of text processing, spreadsheet and > presentation program of six Office Suites: > > MS Office: Word, Excel, PowerPoint > Apple iWork: Pages, Numbers, Keynote > Calligra(former KOffice): Words, Tables, Stages > Softmaker Office: Textmaker, Planmaker, Presentations > Corel WordPerfect Office: WordPerfect, Quattro Pro, Presentations > OpenOffice.org: Writer, Calc, Impress > > I think MS Office, iWork and now Calligra have the best names for their > applications. It's easy to spell and easy to remember. > I would like to hear what everyone else is thinking about changing names > for LibreOffice applications. > +1 I also don't like the current names much either. IMHO, they don't sound very good and they don't describe the apps well either. "Calc" makes the app sound like it's an advanced calculator, not a spreadsheet app, "Impress" is too generic, and "Writer" sounds like a specialized tool for writers. I do like the names for "Draw", "Base", and "Formula", though. > > Samuel M. > > > -- > 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 *** > -- Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es -- 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
Hello again, Le Tue, 07 Dec 2010 12:15:22 +, Michael Meeks a écrit : > > On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 11:59 +, Michael Meeks wrote: > > IMHO the "future commitment" is sufficiently built on an > > (already over-long) three month history with the project - I would > > like to see that removed. > > To expand on this; is it -really- our intention to deny > membership to people who have contributed a huge amount to > LibreOffice already, and are entirely new ? - having started work on > LibreOffice only when it was announced ? We needed to put a date, but reading that sentence I'm sure that there's enough flexibility to it to accommodate most of the tangential cases... (Eventually the Membership Committee is going to come up with all sorts of micro-rules and assessment that will give many of us a complete headache)... Best, Charles. > > There is a lot to dislike in this: > > "Every membership applicant must have been active for at least >three (3) months, and should make a moral commitment to at >least six (6) months activity (not counting the first three > (3) months of fulfillment of qualification)." > > Can we not simply defer to the "significant contribution" > piece ? ultimately, if someone has made a really significant > contribution in the last week, I'm well up for them not being > excluded from membership; and I think we cover that in the criteria > for membership elsewhere: good reputation, and doing non-trivial work. > > Or do we plan some special one-off thing for entirely new > contributors since we created LibreOffice ? > > Thanks, > > Michael. > -- Charles-H. Schulz Membre du Comité exécutif The Document Foundation. -- 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
Hello Michael, Le Tue, 07 Dec 2010 11:59:07 +, Michael Meeks a écrit : > Hi Charles, > > On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 11:08 +0100, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > > Last call: are we good on this? > > Sigh; I only just got to reading the final draft, busy day > yesterday. Overall it seems to be excellent, I have a few > un-addressed concerns: > > Members are expected to refrain from any kind of expression of > racism, xenophobia, sexism and religious or political > intolerance. > > This sounds like a vow of chastity :-) It appears to apply to > the whole of life, and not just to engagement with TDF etc. As such > is is somewhat offensive, and in itself an oxymoron: "I can't > tolerate your intolerance" ;-). Many communities have people with > strong, colorful and opposing views expressed in strong terms. This > to me is a sign of health and diversity - instead of some bland > pea-soup of non-expression :-) > > I'd like to excise that; though clearly we need some minimal > good behaviour policy I don't believe it belongs here. I rather prefer > relying on the much more helpful text in the "Revocation of > membership" section, that talks about ad-hominem, attacks, abuse, > insulting, etc. - sounds like a much more sensible line that is > supportable :-) > > Every membership applicant must have been active for at least > three (3) months, and should make a moral commitment to at > least six (6) months activity (not counting the first three (3) months > of fulfillment of qualification). > > Again - this moral commitment to future work is a problem for > people that take their commitments seriously. I can't commit to work > on LibreOffice for six months: anything could happen - I might be > incapacitated, die suddenly, loose my mind (arguably this has already > happened) :-) IMHO the "future commitment" is sufficiently built on an > (already over-long) three month history with the project - I would > like to see that removed. > > Continuity of membership section. > > This is much improved, I like the renewal process, makes a > lot of sense. > > Anyhow - otherwise, I am completely behind this, it seems > rather polished now, and the checks and balances seem more than > adequate. > > With the removal of one paragraph, and the end of that 'moral > commitment' sentence I'm 100% behind this. So I didn't write the first paragraph, and I believe it is of no consequence at all; as for the moral commitment I'm the one who added the term "moral". It might have been me using a french expression more than anything. By adding "moral" I was emphasizing that it wasn't "legal", meaning: you can commit "in spirit", but it's not a fundamental problem affecting your membership if you don't. Remember that non-members can contribute patches, submit bug reports, etc. If you want to become a member it's gotta be for a reason :-) Is this something that clarifies the sentence ? best, Charles. -- Charles-H. Schulz Membre du Comité exécutif The Document Foundation. -- 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] Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Steven Shelton wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 12/7/2010 11:40 AM, Eduardo Moreno wrote: >> El 07/12/10 10:20, Samuel Mehrbrodt escribió: >>> Today there was an announcement that KOffice got a new name >>> (Calligra) and they also renamed some of the Applications. >>> "KWord" became "Words", "KSpread" became "Tables" and >>> "KPresenter" was renamed to "Stages". >>> The KOffice name changes were _necessary_ for organizational reasons. The changes--names and more--provoked some valuable dynamics amongst the entire Calligra team. One minor change--KPresenter was renamed Stage (singular). Taken together, the Calligra application names communicate some interesting perspectives on what the applications do. In the case of LibreOffice, changing the names of applications would be an unnecessary handicap. Some part of the value of the names is the continuity with OpenOffice. I like the idea of an OOo fork that is driven by an independent, free team rather than a greedy megalomaniac. >>> I was wondering whether such a name change has been considered >>> for the LibreOffice Applications. >>> >>> >>> >> I like the names of the applications. > > > I do, too, and I think they are consistent, descriptive (what the heck > does "stages" mean?), and well-known throughout the community of > users. I don't see a need to change simply for the sake of change. > > - -- > Steven Shelton > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iEYEARECAAYFAkz+ZboACgkQXUonIzCvpdNNwACfXbpcEixZeC89qjR8iw0wzkLq > mPAAnit0ijubFx0a8Tlt8IVBjk3dTGUY > =rW61 > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > > > -- > 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 *** > -- 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] Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
Frank Esposito schrieb: I think the present names are good, but I could also see a need to differentiate from OO, +1 I would leave the name-core, but switch from Sxxx.exe to Lxxx.exe (LWRITER.EXEm ...) 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] Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
I think Frank has a good point.On 12/7/2010 10:55 AM, Frank Esposito wrote:I think the present names are good, but I could also see a need to differentiate from OO, especially if the plan is to rewrite LO and take a very different path, thus making it a significantly different application than its parent OO. -- 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] Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
On 12/7/2010 10:40 AM, Eduardo Moreno wrote: El 07/12/10 10:20, Samuel Mehrbrodt escribió: Today there was an announcement that KOffice got a new name (Calligra) and they also renamed some of the Applications. "KWord" became "Words", "KSpread" became "Tables" and "KPresenter" was renamed to "Stages". I was wondering whether such a name change has been considered for the LibreOffice Applications. The point is that I don't really like the current names. I'm not a Name Designer, but Writer, Calc and Impress don't really sound good in my ears and I would even say that most people using OpenOffice would not know the names of the Applications they are using, only that it's OpenOffice. If LibreOffice changed the names of the Applications shipping, that might also help people to differentiate between OpenOffice and LibreOffice in Future. Here a comparison of the names of text processing, spreadsheet and presentation program of six Office Suites: MS Office: Word, Excel, PowerPoint Apple iWork: Pages, Numbers, Keynote Calligra(former KOffice): Words, Tables, Stages Softmaker Office: Textmaker, Planmaker, Presentations Corel WordPerfect Office: WordPerfect, Quattro Pro, Presentations OpenOffice.org: Writer, Calc, Impress I think MS Office, iWork and now Calligra have the best names for their applications. It's easy to spell and easy to remember. I would like to hear what everyone else is thinking about changing names for LibreOffice applications. Samuel M. I like the names of the applications. I think what we have is fine -- maybe Write for Writer (the others are verbs, and a lot of users seem to think of it like that) and Present for Impress (seems more direct). PS -- I think some of the ones listed above are pretty awful, especially the Calligra Tables and Stages, -- 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] Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
I think the present names are good, but I could also see a need to differentiate from OO, especially if the plan is to rewrite LO and take a very different path, thus making it a significantly different application than its parent OO. -- 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] Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12/7/2010 11:40 AM, Eduardo Moreno wrote: > El 07/12/10 10:20, Samuel Mehrbrodt escribió: >> Today there was an announcement that KOffice got a new name >> (Calligra) and they also renamed some of the Applications. >> "KWord" became "Words", "KSpread" became "Tables" and >> "KPresenter" was renamed to "Stages". >> >> I was wondering whether such a name change has been considered >> for the LibreOffice Applications. >> >> >> > I like the names of the applications. I do, too, and I think they are consistent, descriptive (what the heck does "stages" mean?), and well-known throughout the community of users. I don't see a need to change simply for the sake of change. - -- Steven Shelton -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkz+ZboACgkQXUonIzCvpdNNwACfXbpcEixZeC89qjR8iw0wzkLq mPAAnit0ijubFx0a8Tlt8IVBjk3dTGUY =rW61 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- 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] Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
El 07/12/10 10:20, Samuel Mehrbrodt escribió: Today there was an announcement that KOffice got a new name (Calligra) and they also renamed some of the Applications. "KWord" became "Words", "KSpread" became "Tables" and "KPresenter" was renamed to "Stages". I was wondering whether such a name change has been considered for the LibreOffice Applications. The point is that I don't really like the current names. I'm not a Name Designer, but Writer, Calc and Impress don't really sound good in my ears and I would even say that most people using OpenOffice would not know the names of the Applications they are using, only that it's OpenOffice. If LibreOffice changed the names of the Applications shipping, that might also help people to differentiate between OpenOffice and LibreOffice in Future. Here a comparison of the names of text processing, spreadsheet and presentation program of six Office Suites: MS Office: Word, Excel, PowerPoint Apple iWork: Pages, Numbers, Keynote Calligra(former KOffice): Words, Tables, Stages Softmaker Office: Textmaker, Planmaker, Presentations Corel WordPerfect Office: WordPerfect, Quattro Pro, Presentations OpenOffice.org: Writer, Calc, Impress I think MS Office, iWork and now Calligra have the best names for their applications. It's easy to spell and easy to remember. I would like to hear what everyone else is thinking about changing names for LibreOffice applications. Samuel M. I like the names of the applications. -- Mi Office genera: Seguridad, Confianza y Ahorro J. Eduardo Moreno TOKONHU de México 044 55 2748 4840 -- 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] Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
Today there was an announcement that KOffice got a new name (Calligra) and they also renamed some of the Applications. "KWord" became "Words", "KSpread" became "Tables" and "KPresenter" was renamed to "Stages". I was wondering whether such a name change has been considered for the LibreOffice Applications. The point is that I don't really like the current names. I'm not a Name Designer, but Writer, Calc and Impress don't really sound good in my ears and I would even say that most people using OpenOffice would not know the names of the Applications they are using, only that it's OpenOffice. If LibreOffice changed the names of the Applications shipping, that might also help people to differentiate between OpenOffice and LibreOffice in Future. Here a comparison of the names of text processing, spreadsheet and presentation program of six Office Suites: MS Office: Word, Excel, PowerPoint Apple iWork: Pages, Numbers, Keynote Calligra(former KOffice): Words, Tables, Stages Softmaker Office: Textmaker, Planmaker, Presentations Corel WordPerfect Office: WordPerfect, Quattro Pro, Presentations OpenOffice.org: Writer, Calc, Impress I think MS Office, iWork and now Calligra have the best names for their applications. It's easy to spell and easy to remember. I would like to hear what everyone else is thinking about changing names for LibreOffice applications. Samuel M. -- 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: deb installer - have to manually modify link
Hallo plino, Am 07.12.2010 16:34, schrieb plino: > While you're at it could you please add Portuguese (pt) to the script? It wasn´t missing in the script, but there was a bug in my script. Fixed now. Stefan -- LibreOffice - Die Freiheit nehm' ich mir! -- 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: Non-removable extensions
31.10.2010 18:39, fyva пишет: 31.10.2010 18:32, Erich Christian пишет: They are not listed in the 'change' dialogue, there is a topic called extensions (de: Erweiterungen) which got an X by default. Set on true the installer 'copies new files' but the number of extensions doesn't change and the next time you call setup it is set on X again. What is it about? Same with WinXP. Please, confirm/unconfirm this behavior with RC1, and post your comments here: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32150 -- 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: deb installer - have to manually modify link
> I will fix this right now. I only unpublished the page while trying > out some pages I'd created (it is a *test* site after all)... While you're at it could you please add Portuguese (pt) to the script? Also, there is a mirror in Portugal which has not been updated since Beta1 http://mirrors.fe.up.pt/pub/tdf/ Portuguese ISPs in some cases have a ceiling for international downloads so it would be nice if this mirror could be updated. Thanks! -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/deb-installer-have-to-manually-modify-link-tp2026395p2034119.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] main LibO website content [was: deb installer - have to manually modify link]
Hi David, * This thread certainly belongs to webs...@libo, because such details should be discussed among all people interested in this area. As I read there, some community members already put content on these pages, and at least Marc and Michael wanted to contribute to the Silverstripe site too - so discussing here might result in double work. More comments below... David Nelson schrieb: [...] On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 22:04, Christian Lohmaier wrote: Well I'm kind of puzzled that after weeks and weeks, scores of messages in the lists and various conference calls, there's very little concrete progress with producing content. Yes, I'm also very disappointed at that, but I don't have an answer as to why that is so :-( I personally just did not have enough time to come up with content myself, and I was hoping for the marketing team to come up with some content... (and also with some artwork) Sorry for not providing any artwork - but there has not been any request, neither on webs...@libo, nor on marketing or des...@libo (the latter might be the appropriate list IMHO). Probably this is due to the fact that nobody really had the time / dedication to work on these pages. So I still hope this might change. I can propose an IA. Already we can work with the specific items you mentioned below. Let's get started with those, and I will probably find some suggestions to put to you. I'm quite sure that the people working on the pages up to now did have some ideas how to organize the website. Some of them already created native-lang pages, so you should ask them for their structure. Just "unpublishing" their content without contacting them on the list before might have annoyed them - they might have thought you don't respect their work on structure and content but just want to publish your ideas. I use Gimp and Photoshop, so I can do any needed stuff, too. If you want to, you're welcome to do so. Please be aware that the website should reflect our visual design - even if this is not finished yet, I'd like to see all artwork integrate the design of the TDF logo and the other graphics provided at the wiki: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Marketing/Branding You might also want to refer to the installer and start center images: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:LibreOffice-Initial-Artwork-Package.zip But it might be easier to ask at the design list for support in this area. [...] Source files: no, I only have the files as they appear on the site. https://github.com/tdf/cms-themes/tree/master/tdf/images/buttons They can already serve as a basis. We can see what else is needed as I start posting content for consideration. As already discussed in another thread, the buttons have either to be removed or to extended a lot in order to work with the improved download scripts proposed on webs...@libo. So I'd suggest to start with the structure and ask for graphics when the structure and content has been decided. Best regards Bernhard (working on too many other topics to contribute to the website in a substantially way...) -- 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] deb installer - have to manually modify link
Hi David, On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 3:26 PM, David Nelson wrote: > On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 22:04, Christian Lohmaier > wrote: > [...] >>> By the way, could you fix that problem about the missing CSS style >>> sheet(s) I mentioned in the ohter thread? > [...] > http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Style-sheets-and-pages-for-test-libreoffice-org-tp2031797p2031797.html OK, no old thread, but rather new, just did not arrive at that when working through the backlog. And no, those stylesheets are not missing. When I was asking for styles, I don't mean filenames, but the corresponding css-statements. As I duplicated the documentfoundation.org on pumbaa back then, I know that all styles used on documentfoundation.org are already available in the css. (typography.css for stuff that is also useful in the editor area (there was a bug in the css that did not apply it to the editorwindow, please delete your browser cache in case headings are still black in the editor window), and in layout.css for the stuff that is about positions, stuff that better is not reflected in the editor window. > Getting the styles.css would be the main solution. You'll see in the thread. No - what is missing from the css fiels at test.libreoffice.org what you would need? i.e. what css class/id selector and what style statement? But I'll reply in that other thread as well... 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] deb installer - have to manually modify link
Hi Christian, :-) David Nelson On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 22:04, Christian Lohmaier wrote: >> Well I'm kind of puzzled that after weeks and weeks, scores of >> messages in the lists and various conference calls, there's very >> little concrete progress with producing content. > > Yes, I'm also very disappointed at that, but I don't have an answer as > to why that is so :-( > > I personally just did not have enough time to come up with content > myself, and I was hoping for the marketing team to come up with some > content... (and also with some artwork) I can propose an IA. Already we can work with the specific items you mentioned below. Let's get started with those, and I will probably find some suggestions to put to you. I use Gimp and Photoshop, so I can do any needed stuff, too. > Well, the IA is defining what content to put where on the site, right? > The site structure of the (back then) published pages did reflect > that. You have home, you got Contribute, you got FAQ, Support, > Download Contact in the main hierarchy, in the toptabs, and then a > couple of subpages in the individual areas. > > As you notice yourself: Content is not contributed for whatever > reason. Thus it doesn't make sense to go into much more detail than > that. See above. > Source files: no, I only have the files as they appear on the site. > https://github.com/tdf/cms-themes/tree/master/tdf/images/buttons They can already serve as a basis. We can see what else is needed as I start posting content for consideration. > >> By the way, could you fix that problem about the missing CSS style >> sheet(s) I mentioned in the ohter thread? > > Sorry, don't remember you mentioned a missing css style - either I > didn't read it yet or I missed it. > >> You did say that if >> additional styles were needed then you'd fix the problem. So far you >> didn't even reply to that thread. > > Please give more details - what list, what time, what subject? > I mean it was yesterday night/today morning when I wrote that, > apparently you're referring to a much older thread. http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Style-sheets-and-pages-for-test-libreoffice-org-tp2031797p2031797.html Getting the styles.css would be the main solution. You'll see in the thread. > Yes, I'd love to see it ready for the user before Christmas (as > experience shows between the years nothing will be done because people > rather spend time with family and friends :-)) OK, well we can make that happen between us, no problem. Truthfully, often, a lot more real work gets done when there aren't too many people pulling in different directions. David Nelson -- 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] deb installer - have to manually modify link
Hi David, *, On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 2:39 PM, David Nelson wrote: > Hi, :-) > > On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 20:58, Christian Lohmaier > wrote: >> Stefan already pointed out that it is not a /test/ site. It is the >> site under construction. > > It's a "test" site in the sense that work is in progress, and that > nothing is stable right now. It's staging site. I'm not happy with calling it a test site though. > [...] But let's remember this: it takes 2 mouse clicks to > unpublish a page, and 2 more to put another page online in its place. Yes, I didn't meant to accuse you for destroying other peoples work, for messing up the site, etc. I just wanted to stress once again that the content on this site is the content that will go live. There is no other content waiting somewhere else. And by calling it a "test" site some people might be put off and say to themselves "I'd rather wait for the final site before providing content". > [...] > Well I'm kind of puzzled that after weeks and weeks, scores of > messages in the lists and various conference calls, there's very > little concrete progress with producing content. Yes, I'm also very disappointed at that, but I don't have an answer as to why that is so :-( I personally just did not have enough time to come up with content myself, and I was hoping for the marketing team to come up with some content... (and also with some artwork) > Sorry, buddy, but I don't see any IA there that gives me a clue as to > how to start writing copy without working at cross purposes with the > intentions of whoever the heck is supposed to be coordinating this > work. Well, the IA is defining what content to put where on the site, right? The site structure of the (back then) published pages did reflect that. You have home, you got Contribute, you got FAQ, Support, Download Contact in the main hierarchy, in the toptabs, and then a couple of subpages in the individual areas. As you notice yourself: Content is not contributed for whatever reason. Thus it doesn't make sense to go into much more detail than that. >> Now as to calling it a testing site - I'm not sure whether it is just >> poorly chosen wording, or a real misunderstanding on your part. Again >> I'm puzzled where that impression comes from. I think I always > > Maybe the impression that it's a testing and development site comes > from the domain name "test.libreoffice.org" Or does this seem a > far-fetched understanding to you? ;-) Of course not, but that makes it even more important to not refer to it as a playground area. >> [...] > Thanks, that much I knew... Yes, you might now. But I want all to know. Especially when the page keeps getting called staging area, testing site, etc. >>> +1 for getting the site online by the end of the week! ;-) >> >> I'd love to have it ready by then. So let's focus on one page at a time. > > OK, cool, now you're talking practical cooperation. Sorry if you had the impression that I was trying to just pick on you, just bashing around. It is because just I don't know /why/ people don't add content. It still is not clear to me what they are waiting for. >> I propose the following, i.e. focus the work on individual pages this week: >> * Home/Welcome page: Start now, continue till sunday (I'd like to have >> some nice graphics there, some updated buttons) > > Sure, can do. I'll start thinking about copy to write. And I think I > have a practical idea for the buttons that will fit in with the > current look. Do you have the source files of those current buttons? > Not a critical problem if not... Source files: no, I only have the files as they appear on the site. https://github.com/tdf/cms-themes/tree/master/tdf/images/buttons > By the way, could you fix that problem about the missing CSS style > sheet(s) I mentioned in the ohter thread? Sorry, don't remember you mentioned a missing css style - either I didn't read it yet or I missed it. > You did say that if > additional styles were needed then you'd fix the problem. So far you > didn't even reply to that thread. Please give more details - what list, what time, what subject? I mean it was yesterday night/today morning when I wrote that, apparently you're referring to a much older thread. > > Great, Christian. I'll be happy to cooperate and produce. Maybe we can > actually make some headway and get this site operational before > Christmas at least? Yes, I'd love to see it ready for the user before Christmas (as experience shows between the years nothing will be done because people rather spend time with family and friends :-)) 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] deb installer - have to manually modify link
Hi, :-) On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 20:58, Christian Lohmaier wrote: > Stefan already pointed out that it is not a /test/ site. It is the > site under construction. It's a "test" site in the sense that work is in progress, and that nothing is stable right now. It's staging site. Since there are various people wanting to contribute work to the task, and there is no clear coordination, there are bound to be occasions when the front end content shifts. But let's remember this: it takes 2 mouse clicks to unpublish a page, and 2 more to put another page online in its place. The important thing is not to act like a vandal and go deleting pages that people have put time into developing. > Also I'm kind of puzzled to read your message in the > documentfoundation irc channel backlog > > "Marc did the website guys ever get an IA figured out for the > SilverStripe site?" Well I'm kind of puzzled that after weeks and weeks, scores of messages in the lists and various conference calls, there's very little concrete progress with producing content. > As you've been participating in the conf-calls, have been following > the list, etc. I wonder what went so wrong that this isn't clear? See previous remark. > So the placeholder pages on the site *are* reflecting the IA that was > laid out for the site. Sorry, buddy, but I don't see any IA there that gives me a clue as to how to start writing copy without working at cross purposes with the intentions of whoever the heck is supposed to be coordinating this work. > Now as to calling it a testing site - I'm not sure whether it is just > poorly chosen wording, or a real misunderstanding on your part. Again > I'm puzzled where that impression comes from. I think I always Maybe the impression that it's a testing and development site comes from the domain name "test.libreoffice.org" Or does this seem a far-fetched understanding to you? ;-) > Obviously I suck at communicating the important parts :-( Well, you're certainly not alone in this tendency... It's due to the lack of structure and organization in TDF at this present time. > So again: test.libreoffice.org is the real site under construction. No > other content is available, the content will not be moved to another > site. The only change that will be done is changing the DNS name from > test.libreoffice.org to libreoffice.org. Nothing else will change. Thanks, that much I knew... >> +1 for getting the site online by the end of the week! ;-) > > I'd love to have it ready by then. So let's focus on one page at a time. OK, cool, now you're talking practical cooperation. > I propose the following, i.e. focus the work on individual pages this week: > * Home/Welcome page: Start now, continue till sunday (I'd like to have > some nice graphics there, some updated buttons) Sure, can do. I'll start thinking about copy to write. And I think I have a practical idea for the buttons that will fit in with the current look. Do you have the source files of those current buttons? Not a critical problem if not... By the way, could you fix that problem about the missing CSS style sheet(s) I mentioned in the ohter thread? You did say that if additional styles were needed then you'd fix the problem. So far you didn't even reply to that thread. > * Wednesday is Contribute page time. > * Thursday is for Support > * Friday for the FAQ > > Of course no hard limits, but the goal is to have the corresponding > page "ready for the end-user" at the end of the day. Great, Christian. I'll be happy to cooperate and produce. Maybe we can actually make some headway and get this site operational before Christmas at least? David Nelson -- 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] deb installer - have to manually modify link
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 4:23 AM, David Nelson wrote: > Hi, :-) > > On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 02:54, Stefan Weigel > wrote: >> Well, someone just changed http://www.test.libreoffice.org/download/ >> and made downloading again very inconvenient. >> >> The convenient script can still be found here >> http://s132649167.online.de/LibO_test/sw_download.php > > I will fix this right now. I only unpublished the page while trying > out some pages I'd created (it is a *test* site after all)... Stefan already pointed out that it is not a /test/ site. It is the site under construction. Also I'm kind of puzzled to read your message in the documentfoundation irc channel backlog "Marc did the website guys ever get an IA figured out for the SilverStripe site?" As you've been participating in the conf-calls, have been following the list, etc. I wonder what went so wrong that this isn't clear? The topic in the first conf call was that people felt uncomfortable because they don't know what and where to put content, what the structure is. Thus it was requested to get a framework up, a site structure consisting of placeholder pages that would lay out the structure of the site, so that people can come up with content for that area without having to think about "what is missing, what should be on the site". This request was posted to various lists, unfortunately with not much feedback, but still a few volunteers did work on creating those placeholder pages defining the structure. So the placeholder pages on the site *are* reflecting the IA that was laid out for the site. Now as to calling it a testing site - I'm not sure whether it is just poorly chosen wording, or a real misunderstanding on your part. Again I'm puzzled where that impression comes from. I think I always stressed that the test.libreoffice.org website will be what the user sees when the switch is done, when the "test" is removed from the URL. Obviously I suck at communicating the important parts :-( So again: test.libreoffice.org is the real site under construction. No other content is available, the content will not be moved to another site. The only change that will be done is changing the DNS name from test.libreoffice.org to libreoffice.org. Nothing else will change. > +1 for getting the site online by the end of the week! ;-) I'd love to have it ready by then. So let's focus on one page at a time. I propose the following, i.e. focus the work on individual pages this week: * Home/Welcome page: Start now, continue till sunday (I'd like to have some nice graphics there, some updated buttons) * Wednesday is Contribute page time. * Thursday is for Support * Friday for the FAQ Of course no hard limits, but the goal is to have the corresponding page "ready for the end-user" at the end of the day. 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] deb installer - have to manually modify link
Hi Stefan, *, On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 8:03 AM, Stefan Weigel wrote: > Am 07.12.2010 01:54, schrieb Christian Lohmaier: > [...] > And generally, is caching really so important? Aren´t there > trillions of pure php-server-based solutions out in the web? Well, I cannot tell yet, as the test.lo site did didn't have noticable hits yet. But better to be able to serve it cached/statically than to have a crawling site that cannot handle the load. And as also mentioned in the other mail: I guess it is fine to just use the first level of caching (partial caching of the generated pages), thus it would be possible to do some php-based detection (for the case where JS is not available) > [...] > Hm? I am talking about my idea of temporarily integrating my script > on http://www.documentfoundation.org, not the CMS. Ah, sorry, I misunderstood. > And I am thinking > of possible reasons, why this might be a bad idea. And this makes > you disappointed? > > :-/ :-) ;-) No - it made me disappointed because I interpreted your comments as "my proposal is ignored by the website folks, esp. the silverstripe guy (me) who insists on caching". But the opposite is true, I very welcome the automatic creation of the script, that's why I did not only "consider integration", but actually did implement it. And posted to the site for feedback (where you also provided feedback), so it surprised me (and made me sad) to read that "it is not considered for integration". But I was missing context, so I'm not sad/disappointed anymore :-) 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 ***
[tdf-discuss] It is possible to use Mac's service in Libreoffice
I need to use Mac's service in Libreoffice to communicate with other applications in Mac. But, now these service seems to be dead. -- 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 ***
