[tdf-discuss] Google Summer of Code
Google has just announced the accepted projects for the Google Summer of Code 2011, and LibreOffice is on the list. Congratulations! I think this will be great for TDF and LibreOffice! Jon -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [tdf-announce] LibreOffice 3.3.2 is now available
Le 22/03/2011 14:17, Charles Marcus a écrit : > Questions... > > 1. Why is the help pack separate? > > It isn't that big, and separating it from the main install - which is > something OOo NEVER did - just complicates the installation process. > > Also - when an update to LibO is posted, is an updated help file also > automatically posted? Please read the long discussions about this decision in the ml archives. It is not only an issue related to the size of install files. Doing help available on the wiki, is a mean to easily update the help and better keep it synchronized with the code. > 2. When will individual language builds be made available? > > I am getting VERY tired of having to do a custom install on and > disabling DOZENS of foreign language dictionaries that I do not want or > need. You have only to disable globally the installation of dictionaries and then enable only the dictionaries that you need. Two clicks if you want only one dictionary. > I know that disk space was a problem/concern initially, but it has been > long enough... please provide smaller individual language builds. Disk space is a problem for servers and the most the total size of install set is big the most the time to synchronize mirrors is long. Have a nice day JBF -- Seuls des formats ouverts peuvent assurer la pérennité de vos documents. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [tdf-announce] LibreOffice 3.3.2 is now available
I suggest still to keep the help pack seperated with the main setup package to make its size as smaller as possible. And seperate the language package as many languages are unneccessary for someone. To avoid installing un-desired dictionaries, you can directly modify the libreoffice33.msi with ORCA, but it will be take you much of time to modify. Thanks! On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 4:21 AM, elcico2001 एल्चिको wrote: > Il 22/03/2011 14:17, Charles Marcus ha scritto: > > Questions... >> >> 1. Why is the help pack separate? >> >> It isn't that big, and separating it from the main install - which is >> something OOo NEVER did - just complicates the installation process. >> >> Also - when an update to LibO is posted, is an updated help file also >> automatically posted? >> >> 2. When will individual language builds be made available? >> >> I am getting VERY tired of having to do a custom install on and >> disabling DOZENS of foreign language dictionaries that I do not want or >> need. >> >> I know that disk space was a problem/concern initially, but it has been >> long enough... please provide smaller individual language builds. >> >> 3. Until question #2 is resolved, is there maybe an install flag that I >> can use to tell the installer to only install the desired dictionary? >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> > +1 > > -- > cico > > Icq/Licq/Gaim #175451007 > Debian Powered Linux Registered User #310800 at http://counter.li.org > No retreat baby no surrender > http://www.retenergie.it - coop di produttori e utilizzatori di energia da > fonti rinnovabili > tad evaarthamaatra-nirbhaasaM svaruupa-shuunyam iva samaadhiH > Sanskrit - Realize it's the common language ;-) > > > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org > Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ > *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] What was fixed in 3.3.2?
Again, I'm eager of waiting for Calc to be able to save .xlsx with over 65536 rows fully soon. On 3/22/11, Volker Merschmann wrote: > Hi, > > 2011/3/22 Leif Lodahl : >> What was in fact fixed in this version? >> The wiki doesn't give much help >> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Weekly_Summary nor does the >> release notes http://www.libreoffice.org/download/release-notes/ >> > It has been written in the announcement of rc2 > http://www.mail-archive.com/announce@documentfoundation.org/msg00037.html > Should be added to the release notes > > Bye > > Volker > > -- > ++ Volker Merschmann - ODF-Software Contributor > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org > Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ > *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** > > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: RE : [tdf-discuss] Re: Feature request - embed font
Italo Vignoli wrote: > > I was working as a consultant for Adobe at that time, and I have been > the PDF spokeperson for Europe for several years. > > It is true that many years have gone by, but fonts are handled by > operating systems in the same way. If they are not installed in their > specific folder at boot time, they cannot be used for editing documents. > > Straight from the horse's mouth... Leaving aside the question of the font embedding that Microsoft Word offers, exactly, it appears that font embedding in OOo isn't going to happen. Still, how should people proceed who want to be sure their document appears exactly the same across platforms and regardless of what fonts are installed on the recipient's system? It appears they have four options: - Save to PDF (but this won't be editable except with Adobe Acrobat) - Save to .odt and use only the most widely used fonts - Save to .odt and use a relatively less common font, then send this font together with document file (only legal if the font's license permits, which some do), or - Save to .odt and point recipient to websites where font can be legally and freely downloaded. If it isn't going to be a feature in OOo, then perhaps the Help could be expanded to explain these options? (If no expert is available for this task, I would volunteer to do a first draft... but I'm strictly a novice at this.) Many websites and pages tackle the topic of typography. I have about two dozen bookmarks in my Firefox of type websites including repositories with free fonts (I think the most liberal license is called SIL) and typography education. Recently, for example, http://mashable.com/2011/03/04/typography-resources/ mashable.com published an article listing eight such websites. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/RE-tdf-discuss-Re-Feature-request-embed-font-tp2706681p2715893.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [tdf-announce] LibreOffice 3.3.2 is now available
Il 22/03/2011 14:17, Charles Marcus ha scritto: Questions... 1. Why is the help pack separate? It isn't that big, and separating it from the main install - which is something OOo NEVER did - just complicates the installation process. Also - when an update to LibO is posted, is an updated help file also automatically posted? 2. When will individual language builds be made available? I am getting VERY tired of having to do a custom install on and disabling DOZENS of foreign language dictionaries that I do not want or need. I know that disk space was a problem/concern initially, but it has been long enough... please provide smaller individual language builds. 3. Until question #2 is resolved, is there maybe an install flag that I can use to tell the installer to only install the desired dictionary? Thanks, +1 -- cico Icq/Licq/Gaim #175451007 Debian Powered Linux Registered User #310800 at http://counter.li.org No retreat baby no surrender http://www.retenergie.it - coop di produttori e utilizzatori di energia da fonti rinnovabili tad evaarthamaatra-nirbhaasaM svaruupa-shuunyam iva samaadhiH Sanskrit - Realize it's the common language ;-) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: [tdf-announce] LibreOffice 3.3.2 is now available
Questions... 1. Why is the help pack separate? It isn't that big, and separating it from the main install - which is something OOo NEVER did - just complicates the installation process. Also - when an update to LibO is posted, is an updated help file also automatically posted? 2. When will individual language builds be made available? I am getting VERY tired of having to do a custom install on and disabling DOZENS of foreign language dictionaries that I do not want or need. I know that disk space was a problem/concern initially, but it has been long enough... please provide smaller individual language builds. 3. Until question #2 is resolved, is there maybe an install flag that I can use to tell the installer to only install the desired dictionary? Thanks, -- Best regards, Charles -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] What was fixed in 3.3.2?
Hi, 2011/3/22 Leif Lodahl : > What was in fact fixed in this version? > The wiki doesn't give much help > http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Weekly_Summary nor does the > release notes http://www.libreoffice.org/download/release-notes/ > It has been written in the announcement of rc2 http://www.mail-archive.com/announce@documentfoundation.org/msg00037.html Should be added to the release notes Bye Volker -- ++ Volker Merschmann - ODF-Software Contributor -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] What was fixed in 3.3.2?
Hi, What was in fact fixed in this version? The wiki doesn't give much help http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Weekly_Summary nor does the release notes http://www.libreoffice.org/download/release-notes/ Cheers, Leif -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: RE : [tdf-discuss] Re: Feature request - embed font
I had understood Mirek's proposal to mean that there would be one "official" online font repository, or perhaps several. Embedding a non-embeddable font in a document file is simply not possible, according to what I've read so far. Installing an installable font embedded in a file as a system font was once possible (in Windows) but not anymore. So of the four levels of embedding/licensing, "Installable" is irrelevant because inoperative (in Windows). "Embeddable" is not a worry because it is governed by the font itself, likewise "Print/Preview". Even if I wanted to breach the license by embedding when I am not allowed to I could not. The same for "No embedding allowed" -- again, the font controls and a user has no say in the matter. I guess there would still be the matter of distribution/copying rights to worry about, which is distinct from the four levels of embedding licensing. And, good point about some people not being online all the time. Steve Edmonds-2 wrote: > > Without the font being packaged in the document the only solution would > then be to post them on line, encouraging breaking the license terms, > unless I had a personal online font repository. > -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/RE-tdf-discuss-Re-Feature-request-embed-font-tp2706681p2712540.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
