Re: [tdf-discuss] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 15:51 +, Phil Hibbs wrote: > Kohei: > > That's the wrong assumption I was trying to point out. It's not always > > applied as-is, and in fact it's rare that patches be accepted as is. > > Even we don't do that too often. > > Nonetheless, saying "it's better for us if you don't submit your > patches to OOo" is kind of like saying "Lets hope OOo don't spot this > bug/issue". It's ethically dubious. If this is the official approach, > then why not just make a clean break with OOo and not even try to > merge in any future OOo code changes with the LO code? *sigh* I'll keep it short. * The decision should be up to the patch submitter. We are not in a position to tell him or her what to do. * Since we are being asked, I took my liberty to state my prerence, and my preference is to have the patch submitted to 1) LibreOffice only 2) OOo only 3) both in this order, because 3) increases our workload. I'm making a statement of fact. If stating the fact is somehow unethical, I'll just shut up and go back to handling the workload. * I never said "Let's hope OOo don't spot this" or "OOo will stagnate and die". I hope people will stop putting words into my mouth. This is all from me on this thread. And I really hope you will join us and help us reduce this workload of managing code, Phil. We could use lots of help there. No talk or circular discussion (like this one) will. Have a nice day. Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- 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] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
Plus, On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 09:26 -0500, Kohei Yoshida wrote: > > more work", given that this is going to happen anyway, and submitting > > the bug fix to both projects will simplify things where OOo accept the > > patch more or less as-is. That's the wrong assumption I was trying to point out. It's not always applied as-is, and in fact it's rare that patches be accepted as is. Even we don't do that too often. The only time a patch is accepted as-is is when the patch is *very* simple (like a one-liner change), or perfect in that it covers all corner cases, fits the taste of the maintainer of that code it patches, and creates no new bugs. Statistically speaking that's a very rare occurrence and my own experience backs it up. Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- 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] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 13:48 +, Phil Hibbs wrote: > Kohei Yoshida: > > So, as Michael says, I'm not a big fan of people submitting patches to > > both projects. And yes, it will create extra work for us but not > > necessarily for them since we pull their changes but they don't pull > > ours. > > That's kind of like saying, "lets keep working on our project, but > hope that OOo stagnates and doesn't change". Any time OOo changes in > an area that LO has patched, you will encounter this kind of problem. > If ODF fixes a bug, it's likely that the OOo people will also fix that > bug, possibly in a very different way. So, it isn't really "making > more work", given that this is going to happen anyway, and submitting > the bug fix to both projects will simplify things where OOo accept the > patch more or less as-is. Which would you prefer, "OOo and LO both > apply Patch X", or "LO applies Patch X and OOo applies Patch Y"? Eh, you are saying that, we already have a workload of 100, so having a workload of 101 is not necessarily more work. Is that statement really correct? -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- 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] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 23:44 +0100, Cor Nouws wrote: > Hi Michael, *, > > Michael Meeks wrote (16-02-11 18:36) > > This question prolly belongs best on the dev list. > > > > On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 15:28 +0100, Christophe Strobbe wrote: > >> 1. Now imagine that I contribute code to LibreOffice and the > >> contribution is accepted. Is it then still acceptable (from a > >> copyright point of view) to sign the Oracle Contributor Agreement and > >> submit the same code to OpenOffice.org? > > > > Yes - on the other hand, this creates more work for LibreOffice, and > > (of course) lots of work for you submitting code to OO.o - signing and > > faxing a form, CWS creation, etc. etc. That's fine of course by me, but > > when it comes to merging (the inevitably different) changes from OO.o it > > just makes even more work when we merge that stuff in. So this practise > > is essentially not recommended. > > :-) I know that you are very careful preventing that precious > developer time is spoiled, which of course is very just. > > Reading Christophes question though, I see the route that people > contribute code both to LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org. > It is right that this (which indeed is perfect possible) will give extra > work for the people contributing, but I do not see why that should > create extra work for LibreOffice, since the code already has been > contributed here. It does create extra work for us. Case in point, there was a fix for the filter performance issue that the reporter reported both to us and to OOo http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=116164 They decided to fix it for 3.3, and I was already working on the same fix right after the reporter reported here. Naturally we ended up solving this differently, merging theirs into ours causes all sorts of conflicts, and resolving that was not trivial. I ended up removing my changes, pull their changes in, removing their changes again (since it caused regression), and re-worked it from scratch. Now, that was slightly different case since it didn't involve a patch. And you might think that, if someone submitted a patch both to our project and OOo project, it shouldn't cause any merging conflict. That's in fact how I interpreted your above statement. But in reality when a patch is being integrated, in most cases the patch does not get integrated as-is; they may do some follow-up changes to cover more cases, and we may do the same. They may make a small follow-up change, or they may entirely re-work the patch and do completely different. Worse, they may make changes in areas that are far removed from the areas where we make changes, in which case merging their changes into ours will not cause conflict, but it will cause issues in run-time behaviors. Discovering that may take months, or sometimes years. So, as Michael says, I'm not a big fan of people submitting patches to both projects. And yes, it will create extra work for us but not necessarily for them since we pull their changes but they don't pull ours. Having said all this, we can't stop people contributing to both projects. It's their choice and it's their basic freedom. But it does create extra work for us, that much is for sure, speaking from experience. Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- 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: [Libreoffice] Fwd: [tdf-discuss] feature request, calc cell content copy behaviour
On Mon, 2011-02-14 at 09:44 -0500, Kohei Yoshida wrote: > On Sun, 2011-02-13 at 17:35 +1100, Simon Cropper wrote: > > The behaviour that I am talking about is... > > 1. Insert value into A1, select the cell with the mouse so it is > > highlighted then copy with Ctrl-C > > 2. Select 3 or more other cells -- NOT in a continuous block (e.g. B2 > > and C3). > > 3. Try and paste with Ctrl-V and you will get the error "Insert into > > multiple selection not possible" I've re-added this. http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Easy_Hacks#Support_copying_of_a_single_range_and_pasting_it_to_multiple_ranges This may actually be a pretty simple task, as we probably need to modify the pasting side of things. Still, we need to make sure that undo/redo works with this operation. Cheers, Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- 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: [Libreoffice] Fwd: [tdf-discuss] feature request, calc cell content copy behaviour
On Sun, 2011-02-13 at 17:35 +1100, Simon Cropper wrote: > Kohei, > > The behaviour that I am talking about is... > 1. Insert value into A1, select the cell with the mouse so it is > highlighted then copy with Ctrl-C > 2. Select 3 or more other cells -- NOT in a continuous block (e.g. B2 > and C3). > 3. Try and paste with Ctrl-V and you will get the error "Insert into > multiple selection not possible" > > I checked and this functionality has been available since Excel 2000. Thanks a lot for the clarification. Kohei -- 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] xlsx files over 65536 rows not fully saved in Calc
On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 06:52 -0500, Charles Marcus wrote: > On 2011-01-19 12:43 AM, Kohei Yoshida wrote: > > Fixing it the right way will be very invasive, and risks breaking the > > xls (not xlsx, xls the binary) import and export filters into utterly > > useless state (I mean, really useless). This is because so much code is > > shared between the xls import/export filters and the xlsx export filter, > > and the offending code is in the common part of the filters code, and > > its effect is broad. > > ??? I guess I'm totally missing something. > > Why not just duplicate the filters and separate them? Then you can > manipulate the xlsx filter to your hearts content without affecting the > xls filter at all. Because that's a maintenance nightmare. We'd tried that before. Anyway, if you want to discuss technical details about this issue, let's take this to the dev list. I'm sure there are more qualified people willing to participate in the discussion, which is better than just me answering all the questions. Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- 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] xlsx files over 65536 rows not fully saved in Calc
On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 14:15 +0900, Nguyen Vu Hung wrote: > On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 2:22 AM, Kohei Yoshida wrote: > > Yes, it's a known issue which unfortunately didn't get fixed in time for > > 3.3. The fix will be very x10 invasive, so we've decided to postpone it > > until next minor release. > > As far as I understand, supporting that feature will make LibO less compatible > when saving as other format other that .odt. Is that correct? No, that's not correct at all. Fixing it the right way will be very invasive, and risks breaking the xls (not xlsx, xls the binary) import and export filters into utterly useless state (I mean, really useless). This is because so much code is shared between the xls import/export filters and the xlsx export filter, and the offending code is in the common part of the filters code, and its effect is broad. So, the fix has to be followed by intensive and comprehensive testing of the xls import/export filters to make sure they work just as correctly as they did before the fix. Unfortunately it was much more time-consuming than we had hoped & we didn't have enough time and resources to pull that off for 3.3. But we need to fix that sooner rather than later, and I'm hoping that we will finally nail it in 3.4. Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- 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] xlsx files over 65536 rows not fully saved in Calc
On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 02:07 +0900, Nguyen Vu Hung wrote: > On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Do Hong Phuc wrote: > > Dear All, > > > > Does anybody know why spreadsheets (.xlsx) over 65536 rows are not saved > > fully in LibreOffice 3.3RC3 Calc? Only 65536 rows are saved and the rest > > from 65537 is thrown away? > Dear Miss, > > Kohei-san will answer you. > > http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/build/plain/NEWS?id=libreoffice-3.3.0.2 > + support XLSX export for more that 65536 rows (bnc#504623) [Kohei] Yes, it's a known issue which unfortunately didn't get fixed in time for 3.3. The fix will be very x10 invasive, so we've decided to postpone it until next minor release. It's probably already filed in our bugzilla somewhere, though I can't remember the bug number at the moment Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- 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: [QA] Fuzzy (OpenSuSE build) LibreOffice 3.3rc2 and rc3 writer table formula (works fine in OOo 3.3rc9!!!)
Hello Petr, On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 21:51 +0100, Petr Mladek wrote: > I have reproduced the bug with the LO-3.3-rc3 build for SLED11-SP1. I do > not see it with the plain LO-3.3-rc3 build => it is SUSE-specific. Yup, I did reproduce the problem in the build from SUSE's repository. Indeed this looks bad. > Cedric, Kohei, I am not sure if it is a bug in Writer or Calc. This is a Writer table, so it has no relation to Calc's code. > I guess > that it is caused by the an extra patch from the build/patches > directory. Does it trigger any bell? First thing that comes to mind is the extra formula support in Writer table which was still a patch in the build repo & not integrated into LibreOffice proper. That's probably the only thing that I can think of. But I think Cedric would be the better person to figure this out. Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- 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] Formula-text alignment (patch for issue 972)
On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 21:23 +0100, RGB ES wrote: > OOo DEV300m95 include the long awaited fix for issue 972 > http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=972 > automated vertical alignment for Math objects on Writer documents. The > quick tests I did show that the patch works quite well! > I know it is too late for including this patch on LibO, but is it > necessary to fill a bug report asking for this or issuezilla is still > considered as a "valid info source" for LibO development? There is no set rule for this, but people usually drop a note on the libreoff...@lists.freedesktop.org list, and when a relevant developer reviews and okays it, it goes into the LibO repository. 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] 64bit now works in OO
On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 11:52 -0500, Susan Cragin wrote: > LibO_3.3.0rc1_Linux_x86-64 is based on that earlier version that still had > bugs. So, may I ask what the bugs are? > So, thought you might want to know. Sure, but more details would be nice, or else it's impossible for us to fix. 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
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 ***
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] Re: Why is LO/OOo so slow loading a spreadsheet?
Hi there, On Sat, 2010-12-04 at 02:32 -0800, plino wrote: > The xlsx file is in the link above. Here is the ODS > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2347109/30_line_sample.ods Are this file and the .xlsx variant free of any confidential information? IOW, Can I put them in our test document repository which is *public*? I'd like to run some profiling later to find out why it's so slow. I have other priorities at the moment, but I'd like to find some time to look into this at a later time. Let me know. Thanks. BTW, the xlsx loading being slow (and to some extent ods loading) is unfortunately nothing new. If we are lucky we may be able to squeeze some performance here and there, but IMO we may need a more drastic surgery if we want to dramatically improve performance... 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] First LibO problem - OOo didn't do this...
Charles, On Tue, 2010-11-23 at 16:36 -0500, Charles Marcus wrote: > Redacted sample file attached. Which I don't see... Perhaps this list prohibits attachments? Can you send me the file directly? 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] Re: Java dependency
On Wed, 2010-11-03 at 12:50 +, Ian wrote: > On Wed, 2010-11-03 at 07:09 -0400, Michael Meeks wrote: > > > > At least then it would run on any platform with a JVM eg cell phone > > > > Sure any cell-phone with a vast amount of RAM, and a CPU twice as fast > > as those we have currently in desktops might give reasonable > > performance. > > Ok, perhaps a daft suggestion but the principle is that all cell phones > will have a vast amount of RAM and fast CPUs in the next 2 to 3 years. A > gig of RAM is normal now, it would have been unthinkable 10 years ago. Personally, a mindset such as "RAM is cheap these days, so let's waste it" troubles me as a developer. It's true that RAM is cheaper, but we are not yet to the point where we no longer have to worry about runtime RAM usage - far from it. Just like consumers have managed to find ways to fill ever-so-increasing hard disk space, developers will find ways to use up ever-so-increasing memory space (and I've seen enough evidence of it). So, we should always be encouraging ourselves to reduce memory footprint, instead of wasting it. BTW, I love C++, which is standardized enough, is not tied to any single vendor, and can generate native code, not byte code. Just my opinion. Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] the translation of Manifesto
On Thu, 2010-10-14 at 20:53 +0900, Yosuke Kato wrote: > Hmm. Khirano deleted all my translations. > http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/JA/Next_Decade_Manifesto :-( > I didn't know the "We Japanese Language Team" has been born in > LibreOffice. I haven't seen any official announcement yet. So I *believe* the current OOo Ja community is acting as an interim. > Does anybody know where they are and where they are working > on making the "official" translation?? You might want to check out the transl...@ja.openoffice.org list. That may be the place where they coordinate translation work. HTH, Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] OpenSuSE and Libò
Sorry for the top-posting, but I wanted to preserve the context for Petr (CC'ed). Petr is the man you want to talk to with this sort of question. I'm sure he'll provide more details on this. Kohei On Wed, 2010-10-13 at 17:44 +0200, Carlo Strata wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > this is my first TDF post! :-) > > I'm an active and long time OpenSuSE and Novell's OOo user and bug > poster, too! > > Now, in my OpenSuSE daily updated 11.2, x86-64, notebook I have > Novell/OpenSuSE OBS OOo 3.2.1.6 (x86-64) (still with the famous fixed > but not released pdf bug > https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=615812). > > Now I want to install both: > > - Libò 3.3 >= beta2 and > > - OBS (OpenSuSE Build Service, *ubuntu's Launch Pad analog) OOo > > 3.2.1.6 and/or becoming 3.3 > > This because: > > - on October the 23th I will participate as OOo/Libò/TDF speaker in > Padua's (Italy's NE) Linux Day (in the Padua's FSUG kind People group); > > - I want to start my soft migration from OOo to... Libò, obviously!!! ;-) > > My two questions are: > > 1. May OOo 3.2.1.x/3.3.x and Libò coexist (in the same operating system > instance, I mean)? At least in linux? May I go on with just downloaded > Libò x86-64 beta2? > > 2. When does Novell/OpenSuSE start to build Libò in his (our!) OBS? I > mean here: > http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/ > > or here > http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/Office:/ (in a new > "LibreOffice" directory) > > or here, too > http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/OpenOffice.org:/ (in a new > "LibreOffice" directory)? > > To search in the OBS you could go here (The Famous Webpin page) > http://packages.opensuse-community.org/ > > It's now time for Novell and OpenSuSE whole Community to start giving > solid/concrete Libò/TDF support signs! :-) > > Thank you very much for your great work, ideas and answers! Have a nice > evening, > > Carlo > -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] the translation of Manifesto
On Thu, 2010-10-14 at 00:35 +0900, Yosuke Kato wrote: > > I made a Japanese translation and announced to our mailing list. > http://oooug.jp/sns/?m=diary&a=page_detail&target_c_diary_id=623 Excellent work! We appreciate your effort (despite the late night and all that). :-) Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [MAILING LIST] Language specific list for non-English communication
On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 02:11 +0900, Yosuke Kato wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 12:16:17 -0400 > Kohei Yoshida wrote: > > for those who are not comfortable communicating in English. This would > > help especially for the native Japanese speakers who are not well versed > > in the English language, and I'm sure it would for other language > > natives. > > Yeah, reading throughout the lists in English is not a easy work. > If a local list will be created, I'll subscribe, but the problem is that I > don't know what to talk about for now... I think we have a pressing need for Japanese translation, as a starter. Not all strings have been translated yet. So, that's something we could talk about. Other than that, just answering questions.. stuff like that. I'm sure people have lots of questions and concerns. > Anyway, if you have some organized information about LO, please post it > to OpenOffice.org Users Group Japan mailing lists at any time. As you > may know, the information about tdf & LO are slightly misunderstood in > Japan. OK. Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] [MAILING LIST] Language specific list for non-English communication
On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 15:32 -0400, Kohei Yoshida wrote: > That *may* work between Latin-based languages, but those on-line > translation services are pretty horrible at translating between CJK > and Latin, especially when going from CJK to Latin. Hmm... Actually the Google one does a better job than Yahoo Babel Fish as it turns out (just tested it now). Still, I think we are 10 years too early to expect solid machine translation that we can rely on to have a single-language communication medium. Perhaps in 10 years... ;-) Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] [MAILING LIST] Language specific list for non-English communication
On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 15:08 -0400, Charles Marcus wrote: > On 2010-10-07 12:16 PM, Kohei Yoshida wrote: > > I believe we eventually need to have per language specific mailing lists > > for those who are not comfortable communicating in English. This would > > help especially for the native Japanese speakers who are not well versed > > in the English language, and I'm sure it would for other language > > natives. > > Something I've always thought would be cool - a plug-in to a a mail list > manager that utilized googles translation service, so that users of > different languages could all communicate using a single list... That *may* work between Latin-based languages, but those on-line translation services are pretty horrible at translating between CJK and Latin, especially when going from CJK to Latin. It's so bad that you could probably communicate better with body languages alone, than using one of those services. ;-) Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
[tdf-discuss] [MAILING LIST] Language specific list for non-English communication
Hi there, I believe we eventually need to have per language specific mailing lists for those who are not comfortable communicating in English. This would help especially for the native Japanese speakers who are not well versed in the English language, and I'm sure it would for other language natives. Best regards, Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] Compile problems
Hello Marco, On Sat, 2010-10-02 at 20:17 -0500, Marco ''AlpVonKri'' Flores wrote: > Has anyone successfully compiled LibreOffice in openSUSE 11.3 with KDE > 4, I'm stuck with a problem, I do the following: > > > ./configure --with-distro=SUSE-11.2*This is the mos recent > > version, there is not 11.3 in the source Try --with-distro=SUSE without the version number. You can use that distro name on any version of openSUSE. > checking for Qt headers... /usr/lib64/qt3/include > checking for Qt libraries... /usr/lib64/qt3/lib64 > checking for moc... /usr/bin/moc > checking for KDE headers... no > configure: error: KDE headers not found. Please specify the root of > your KDE installation by exporting KDEDIR before running "configure". > make: *** [stamp/build] Error 1 > > > I have the packages "libkde4-devel & libkdecore4-devel" installed, so > why is this happening and how do I solve it, any help would be great. See if yo have libkde3-devel also installed. If yes, try removing it. I had trouble building with the kde4 backend, which was solved by removing the kde3 devel packages. Building both kde3 and kde4 support is pretty tricky. Also, try --disable-kde --enable-kde4, which disables kde3 and enables kde4 backend. As Alexandro said, for any future build issues & questions related to development of LibreOffice, I advise you to come and subscribe to libreoff...@lists.freedesktop.org, where friendly hackers hang out. Also, if you have some background with C++ development, I encourage you to come and experience the fun of hacking LibreOffice. You won't be disappointed. :-) Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc -- To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
