Re: Symphony contribution

[Marcus (OOo)]

Am 07/14/2011 07:46 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:

On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 1:48 AM, Marcus (OOo)  wrote:

Am 07/14/2011 12:00 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:


I'm sending this with my IBM "hat".

I'm going to be speaking at the ODF Plugfest in Berlin Friday
afternoon, and will be making some announcements.  I wanted you to
hear this first, before anyone else knows.


Great, thanks for this.


[...]

We will be doing the following:

First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
license.   We'll also work with project members to prioritize which
pieces make sense to integrate into OpenOffice.  For example, we've
already done a lot of work with replacing GPL/LPGL dependencies.
Using the Symphony code could help accelerate that work and get us to
an AOOo release faster.  We've already converted the help files to
DITA, which could help accelerate that work, if we chose to go in that
direction.


This looks like a very big step as you giveup your separat development - at
least I understand it this way.

Maybe you could tell us a bit more about when you plan to integrate the
selected code pieces? The reason for asking is the following:

I hope that we first can stabilize the original OOo code to get the first
release done - the OOo 3.4 is (OK, was) already in Beta mode, so just a few
more fixes and then we would have our release. Now at Apache we may have to
work on some dependencies to eleminate which otherwise would prevent an
official release. But I think also this is doable within this year.



I agree with that priority.  We don't want to disrupt progress toward
the initial AOOo release.


Great, then both software to combine sounds like a very interesting 
future. :-)


Marcus




After the release is done we can make the big step to integrate the Symphony
code and move towards a new release.

An alternative would be to stabilize the 3.4 code and then branching, so
that we have a release branch (.../repos/asf/incubator/ooo/branches/ooo34)
and the normal dev branch (.../repos/asf/incubator/ooo/trunk/). Then it's
possible to work on both - if we have enough man power to do both in
parallel. ;-)

I hope you have the same process in mind. Otherwise if you thought about to
integrate the Symphony stuff and then doing our first release at Apache, I
fear it will need much more time then just a few months.


For example, the IAccessible2 work which helps
Symphony work better with assistive technology.I know an older
version of this work sits in an OOo CWS someplace, but it will be
easier to integrate that work if we start with our latest code.


Malte is knowing this part best and I hope he can help to integrate this
well.


Also, as the PC Magazine review notes, we've done some really good UI
work.  I invite you to download Symphony [2] and take a closer look at
this.  Yes, it is different from what OOo has today.  And a move of
that magnitude has an impact on documentation and translations as
well.   But the feedback we've received from customers and reviewers
is very positive.  Do we integrate parts of the Symphony UI?  That is
something for the project to discuss and decide on.


Shame on me as I don't know much about Symphony yet but looking at the
screenshots the tabbed documents looks like a great feature.


So that's essentially what I'll be announcing on Friday.  The above
contributions will occur over the next couple of months, starting with
the ODF Toolkit.  I hope you see the exciting possibilities as much as
I do.


Sure, I really do.

Finally, I wish you much fun at Berlin, enjoy the beers and have save trips.
:-)

Marcus

Re: Symphony contribution

[Rob Weir]

On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 1:48 AM, Marcus (OOo)  wrote:
> Am 07/14/2011 12:00 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>
>> I'm sending this with my IBM "hat".
>>
>> I'm going to be speaking at the ODF Plugfest in Berlin Friday
>> afternoon, and will be making some announcements.  I wanted you to
>> hear this first, before anyone else knows.
>
> Great, thanks for this.
>
>> [...]
>>
>> We will be doing the following:
>>
>> First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
>> Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
>> license.   We'll also work with project members to prioritize which
>> pieces make sense to integrate into OpenOffice.  For example, we've
>> already done a lot of work with replacing GPL/LPGL dependencies.
>> Using the Symphony code could help accelerate that work and get us to
>> an AOOo release faster.  We've already converted the help files to
>> DITA, which could help accelerate that work, if we chose to go in that
>> direction.
>
> This looks like a very big step as you giveup your separat development - at
> least I understand it this way.
>
> Maybe you could tell us a bit more about when you plan to integrate the
> selected code pieces? The reason for asking is the following:
>
> I hope that we first can stabilize the original OOo code to get the first
> release done - the OOo 3.4 is (OK, was) already in Beta mode, so just a few
> more fixes and then we would have our release. Now at Apache we may have to
> work on some dependencies to eleminate which otherwise would prevent an
> official release. But I think also this is doable within this year.
>

I agree with that priority.  We don't want to disrupt progress toward
the initial AOOo release.

> After the release is done we can make the big step to integrate the Symphony
> code and move towards a new release.
>
> An alternative would be to stabilize the 3.4 code and then branching, so
> that we have a release branch (.../repos/asf/incubator/ooo/branches/ooo34)
> and the normal dev branch (.../repos/asf/incubator/ooo/trunk/). Then it's
> possible to work on both - if we have enough man power to do both in
> parallel. ;-)
>
> I hope you have the same process in mind. Otherwise if you thought about to
> integrate the Symphony stuff and then doing our first release at Apache, I
> fear it will need much more time then just a few months.
>
>> For example, the IAccessible2 work which helps
>> Symphony work better with assistive technology.    I know an older
>> version of this work sits in an OOo CWS someplace, but it will be
>> easier to integrate that work if we start with our latest code.
>
> Malte is knowing this part best and I hope he can help to integrate this
> well.
>
>> Also, as the PC Magazine review notes, we've done some really good UI
>> work.  I invite you to download Symphony [2] and take a closer look at
>> this.  Yes, it is different from what OOo has today.  And a move of
>> that magnitude has an impact on documentation and translations as
>> well.   But the feedback we've received from customers and reviewers
>> is very positive.  Do we integrate parts of the Symphony UI?  That is
>> something for the project to discuss and decide on.
>
> Shame on me as I don't know much about Symphony yet but looking at the
> screenshots the tabbed documents looks like a great feature.
>
>> So that's essentially what I'll be announcing on Friday.  The above
>> contributions will occur over the next couple of months, starting with
>> the ODF Toolkit.  I hope you see the exciting possibilities as much as
>> I do.
>
> Sure, I really do.
>
> Finally, I wish you much fun at Berlin, enjoy the beers and have save trips.
> :-)
>
> Marcus
>
>

Re: Symphony contribution

[Arthur Buijs]

On 07/14/2011 12:00 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

I'm sending this with my IBM "hat".


I'm answering with my OOo "t-shirt" on:

Great news to start a new day in Berlin.

It will be cool to see deveplopers from IBM working together with the 
community to integrate 'their own part of the Symphony code' into AOOo.


--
Arthur

Re: Apache CMS Workflow and a Key Question

[Arthur Buijs]

On 07/14/2011 01:25 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:

On 07/08/2011 01:39 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:


(5) When the contributor has updated content ready then they can
proceed by according to (a) Non-committer - submit an svn diff as a
patch. (b) Committer - perform an svn commit which triggers an actual
staging build.


OK, I, personally am still not thrilled about this approach. I think
before deciding anything, maybe someone can give us a count of actual
"content developers/admins/software developers" on the existing kenai
site -- this would be folks with direct "update/committer" rights in the
existing environment to see if we can get a breakdown of what there is
now at the openoffice.org and some idea of how it's being maintained.

I'll be happy to contact the kenai admins and see what I can find out.

If there was some way to use an alternate "something" to maintain the
"user facing" site, this would be MUCH better. Right now, I'm looking at
the "es" project on openoffice.org. There are 13 (out of 347 "es"
members) users with development access to this (web) site. These folks
have basically been working in this and only this realm. It would be
optimal to have some facility where these same folks, should they choose
to join say via an Apache wiki account or other mechanism, would be
given the SAME access as they have on the new production environment
without a lot of complication.


Please explain what you mean by new production environment in the last 
sentence and how much more complicated it would be.


--
Arthur

Re: Symphony contribution

[Yong Lin Ma]

A few things I like to clarify.

We are not announcing giving up Symphony development. IBM has business 
commitment with Symphony and its users.

We are willing to contribute the whole Symphony to community. The code 
would be available to the community. (The C++ part of Symphony, also 
the counterpart of OO.o in Symphony). Features/Fixes which can be accepted 
by community will be integrated into Apache OpenOffice. Since we 
are managing Symphony development with ClearCase/Clearquest, it would be 
more easier for us to do the integration. But other committers definitely 
can help and speed up the work.

By far, we should focus on getting the first Apache OpenOffice release 
done.

A little technical background about Symphony
1, Symphony is based on both OpenOffice.org and Eclipse technologies. It 
can be seen as an OpenOffice.org instance (C++) embedded in a Java window.
The menu/toolbars and the tab windows are all implemented with the help of 
IBM Expeditor(Eclipse based technology). All the C++ libraries are 
packaged 
and managed by Eclipse plugins.

2, Symphony provide Java interface and lotus script interface for 
application developer in development toolkit. OpenOffice.org extension 
won't work in Symphony.

3, A key performance improvement in Symphony is Async document loading for 
Writer and Presentation documents. User can see document content get 
displayed before the whole document content get loaded. It would be more 
difficult to integrate this into Apache OpenOffice than other features 
Symphony has




Regards.


Erik Ma

Yong Lin Ma
Architect of IBM Lotus Symphony 



Am 07/14/2011 12:00 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> I'm sending this with my IBM "hat".
>
> I'm going to be speaking at the ODF Plugfest in Berlin Friday
> afternoon, and will be making some announcements.  I wanted you to
> hear this first, before anyone else knows.

Great, thanks for this.

> [...]
>
> We will be doing the following:
>
> First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
> Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
> license.   We'll also work with project members to prioritize which
> pieces make sense to integrate into OpenOffice.  For example, we've
> already done a lot of work with replacing GPL/LPGL dependencies.
> Using the Symphony code could help accelerate that work and get us to
> an AOOo release faster.  We've already converted the help files to
> DITA, which could help accelerate that work, if we chose to go in that
> direction.

This looks like a very big step as you giveup your separat development - 
at least I understand it this way.

Maybe you could tell us a bit more about when you plan to integrate the 
selected code pieces? The reason for asking is the following:

I hope that we first can stabilize the original OOo code to get the 
first release done - the OOo 3.4 is (OK, was) already in Beta mode, so 
just a few more fixes and then we would have our release. Now at Apache 
we may have to work on some dependencies to eleminate which otherwise 
would prevent an official release. But I think also this is doable 
within this year.

After the release is done we can make the big step to integrate the 
Symphony code and move towards a new release.

An alternative would be to stabilize the 3.4 code and then branching, so 
that we have a release branch 
(.../repos/asf/incubator/ooo/branches/ooo34) and the normal dev branch 
(.../repos/asf/incubator/ooo/trunk/). Then it's possible to work on both 
- if we have enough man power to do both in parallel. ;-)

I hope you have the same process in mind. Otherwise if you thought about 
to integrate the Symphony stuff and then doing our first release at 
Apache, I fear it will need much more time then just a few months.

> For example, the IAccessible2 work which helps
> Symphony work better with assistive technology.I know an older
> version of this work sits in an OOo CWS someplace, but it will be
> easier to integrate that work if we start with our latest code.

Malte is knowing this part best and I hope he can help to integrate this 
well.

> Also, as the PC Magazine review notes, we've done some really good UI
> work.  I invite you to download Symphony [2] and take a closer look at
> this.  Yes, it is different from what OOo has today.  And a move of
> that magnitude has an impact on documentation and translations as
> well.   But the feedback we've received from customers and reviewers
> is very positive.  Do we integrate parts of the Symphony UI?  That is
> something for the project to discuss and decide on.

Shame on me as I don't know much about Symphony yet but looking at the 
screenshots the tabbed documents looks like a great feature.

> So that's essentially what I'll be announcing on Friday.  The above
> contributions will occur over the next couple of months, starting with
> the ODF Toolkit.  I hope you see the exciting possibilities as much as
> I do.

Sure, I really do.

Finally, I wish you much fun at B

Re: Symphony contribution

[Dave Fisher]

Exciting all around.

Enjoy!
Dave

On Jul 13, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Donald Harbison wrote:

> (With my IBM hat)
> 
> The intent here is to shift the primary development focus to Apache
> OpenOffice over time. Just as LibreOffice has business commitments to SuSE
> Linux Enterprise Desktop, and the other Linux distributions, so does IBM
> with Symphony and its user community. It would appear that both LibreOffice
> and Symphony share this challenge, as both packages have much in common with
> the future success of Apache OpenOffice.
> 
> We are all undergoing a fairly radical re-planning excercise. The IBM intent
> is to 'get off the Symphony fork' within the frame of what's possible, by
> focusing our energies and resources on Apache OpenOffice working
> collaboratively and openly in the community. We invite LibreOffice to
> undergo a similar transformation.
> 
> Transparency is key here, as we all agree.
> 
> /don
> 
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 8:07 PM, Simon Phipps  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On 13 Jul 2011, at 23:00, Rob Weir wrote:
>> 
>>> However, we at IBM have not been exemplary community members when it
>>> came to OpenOffice.org.  This wasn't necessarily by design, but for
>>> various reasons, that was the effect.  Yes, we participated in various
>>> community councils, and sponsored conferences and worked together on
>>> standards.  But when it came down to the code, we maintained Symphony
>>> essentially as a fork, and although we occasionally contributed code
>>> back, we did not do this well, or often.
>> 
>> Thanks for saying this, Rob. I for one appreciate the openness of this
>> statement.
>> 
>>> First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
>>> Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
>>> license.
>> 
>> While I'd not expect you to disclose secrets, can you say something about
>> IBM's future intent with this code? Do you intend to develop Symphony as an
>> open source project in the future, or is this a one-time code drop? It will
>> make a difference to our collective planning.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> S.
>> 
>> 

Re: Symphony contribution

[Carl Marcum]

Rob,

That's great. A good deed indeed.

Good luck in Berlin.

Carl

Re: Symphony contribution

[Donald Harbison]

(With my IBM hat)

The intent here is to shift the primary development focus to Apache
OpenOffice over time. Just as LibreOffice has business commitments to SuSE
Linux Enterprise Desktop, and the other Linux distributions, so does IBM
with Symphony and its user community. It would appear that both LibreOffice
and Symphony share this challenge, as both packages have much in common with
the future success of Apache OpenOffice.

We are all undergoing a fairly radical re-planning excercise. The IBM intent
is to 'get off the Symphony fork' within the frame of what's possible, by
focusing our energies and resources on Apache OpenOffice working
collaboratively and openly in the community. We invite LibreOffice to
undergo a similar transformation.

Transparency is key here, as we all agree.

/don

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 8:07 PM, Simon Phipps  wrote:

>
> On 13 Jul 2011, at 23:00, Rob Weir wrote:
>
> > However, we at IBM have not been exemplary community members when it
> > came to OpenOffice.org.  This wasn't necessarily by design, but for
> > various reasons, that was the effect.  Yes, we participated in various
> > community councils, and sponsored conferences and worked together on
> > standards.  But when it came down to the code, we maintained Symphony
> > essentially as a fork, and although we occasionally contributed code
> > back, we did not do this well, or often.
>
> Thanks for saying this, Rob. I for one appreciate the openness of this
> statement.
>
> > First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
> > Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
> > license.
>
> While I'd not expect you to disclose secrets, can you say something about
> IBM's future intent with this code? Do you intend to develop Symphony as an
> open source project in the future, or is this a one-time code drop? It will
> make a difference to our collective planning.
>
> Thanks,
>
> S.
>
>

Re: Symphony contribution

[Simon Phipps]

On 13 Jul 2011, at 23:00, Rob Weir wrote:

> However, we at IBM have not been exemplary community members when it
> came to OpenOffice.org.  This wasn't necessarily by design, but for
> various reasons, that was the effect.  Yes, we participated in various
> community councils, and sponsored conferences and worked together on
> standards.  But when it came down to the code, we maintained Symphony
> essentially as a fork, and although we occasionally contributed code
> back, we did not do this well, or often.

Thanks for saying this, Rob. I for one appreciate the openness of this 
statement.

> First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
> Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
> license.  

While I'd not expect you to disclose secrets, can you say something about IBM's 
future intent with this code? Do you intend to develop Symphony as an open 
source project in the future, or is this a one-time code drop? It will make a 
difference to our collective planning.

Thanks,

S.

Re: Symphony contribution

[Marcus (OOo)]

Am 07/14/2011 12:00 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:

I'm sending this with my IBM "hat".

I'm going to be speaking at the ODF Plugfest in Berlin Friday
afternoon, and will be making some announcements.  I wanted you to
hear this first, before anyone else knows.


Great, thanks for this.


[...]

We will be doing the following:

First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
license.   We'll also work with project members to prioritize which
pieces make sense to integrate into OpenOffice.  For example, we've
already done a lot of work with replacing GPL/LPGL dependencies.
Using the Symphony code could help accelerate that work and get us to
an AOOo release faster.  We've already converted the help files to
DITA, which could help accelerate that work, if we chose to go in that
direction.


This looks like a very big step as you giveup your separat development - 
at least I understand it this way.


Maybe you could tell us a bit more about when you plan to integrate the 
selected code pieces? The reason for asking is the following:


I hope that we first can stabilize the original OOo code to get the 
first release done - the OOo 3.4 is (OK, was) already in Beta mode, so 
just a few more fixes and then we would have our release. Now at Apache 
we may have to work on some dependencies to eleminate which otherwise 
would prevent an official release. But I think also this is doable 
within this year.


After the release is done we can make the big step to integrate the 
Symphony code and move towards a new release.


An alternative would be to stabilize the 3.4 code and then branching, so 
that we have a release branch 
(.../repos/asf/incubator/ooo/branches/ooo34) and the normal dev branch 
(.../repos/asf/incubator/ooo/trunk/). Then it's possible to work on both 
- if we have enough man power to do both in parallel. ;-)


I hope you have the same process in mind. Otherwise if you thought about 
to integrate the Symphony stuff and then doing our first release at 
Apache, I fear it will need much more time then just a few months.



For example, the IAccessible2 work which helps
Symphony work better with assistive technology.I know an older
version of this work sits in an OOo CWS someplace, but it will be
easier to integrate that work if we start with our latest code.


Malte is knowing this part best and I hope he can help to integrate this 
well.



Also, as the PC Magazine review notes, we've done some really good UI
work.  I invite you to download Symphony [2] and take a closer look at
this.  Yes, it is different from what OOo has today.  And a move of
that magnitude has an impact on documentation and translations as
well.   But the feedback we've received from customers and reviewers
is very positive.  Do we integrate parts of the Symphony UI?  That is
something for the project to discuss and decide on.


Shame on me as I don't know much about Symphony yet but looking at the 
screenshots the tabbed documents looks like a great feature.



So that's essentially what I'll be announcing on Friday.  The above
contributions will occur over the next couple of months, starting with
the ODF Toolkit.  I hope you see the exciting possibilities as much as
I do.


Sure, I really do.

Finally, I wish you much fun at Berlin, enjoy the beers and have save 
trips. :-)


Marcus

Re: Apache CMS Workflow and a Key Question

[Kay Schenk]

Hi Dave--

see below

On 07/08/2011 01:39 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:

Kay's questions on
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/OOo-to-ASF-site-recommendation
have helped me focus on how to enable website contributions.

I really like the Apache CMS. Here is possible a workflow that would
allow non-committers to be able to contribute patches to both AOOo
content and the site build we implement over the Apache CMS.

Workflow would be something like this:

(1) Setup prerequisite software - Python-Markdown, DITA ...

(2) svn checkout of the AOOo documentation / website repository
including scripts.

(3) Contributor edits documentation files - mdtext, html, javascript,
css, dita(?), 

(4) Contributor performs test staging builds on their local machine
in order to test the results in complete isolation. This is a
critical requirement. We should want to allow non-committers to
easily test ideas without needing a committer to hold their hand with
every little design tweak they would like to try.


AMEN to this!



(5) When the contributor has updated content ready then they can
proceed by according to (a) Non-committer - submit an svn diff as a
patch. (b) Committer - perform an svn commit which triggers an actual
staging build.


OK, I, personally am still not thrilled about this approach. I think 
before deciding anything, maybe someone can give us a count of actual 
"content developers/admins/software developers" on the existing kenai 
site -- this would be folks with direct "update/committer" rights in the 
existing environment to see if we can get a breakdown of what there is 
now at the openoffice.org and some idea of how it's being maintained.


I'll be happy to contact the kenai admins and see what I can find out.

If there was some way to use an alternate "something" to maintain the 
"user facing" site, this would be MUCH better. Right now, I'm looking at 
the "es" project on openoffice.org. There are 13 (out of 347 "es" 
members) users with development access to this (web) site. These folks 
have basically been working in this and only this realm. It would be 
optimal to have some facility where these same folks, should they choose 
to join say via an Apache wiki account or other mechanism, would be 
given the SAME access as they have on the new production environment 
without a lot of complication.


I'll look around and respond back to this thread and/or update what I've 
already got on the wiki.





Here is the question. What is the script that performs the staging?
In the Apache CMS it is triggered by a commit, but for local use, the
contributor has to run a version of that script. I know that it will
somehow invoke one of these:

./site/trunk/lib/path.pm ./site/trunk/lib/view.pm

Looking for the answer and also comments on this workflow.

Best Regards, Dave




--

MzK

"An old horse for a long hard road, a young pony for a quick ride".
  -- Unknown

Re: Symphony contribution

[Ross Gardler]

On 13 July 2011 23:00, Rob Weir  wrote:
> However, we at IBM have not been exemplary community members when it
> came to OpenOffice.org.

HehHeh, careful that might appear as a quote in my Apache Way talk at
the plugfest ;-) *

Seriously though, this news sounds really exciting. I'll let the
committers here decide what it means to the OOo project. But as a
mentor I welcome the community focussed aspects of your plan. In
particular I appreciate that this mail does not assume the community
will adopt all the Symphony code without question. It is great that
you are leaving space for the community to decide on its own
priorities and offering support in implementing those priorities.

... snip lots of cool stuff about the proposed donations ...

> For example, the IAccessible2 work which helps
> Symphony work better with assistive technology.

Speaking personally I find this news really exciting. I'm now even
more grateful that some of the a11y folk we contacted in proposal
stage have signed up. I'm sure they will be keen to help evaluate
these aspects of the Symphony contributions.

Ross

* don't worry - I won't use that quote. I'll leave it to you to
communicate that message however you like.

Re: Symphony contribution

[Roberto Salomon]

Rob,

That is definitely a great piece of news. Best of luck on your presentation
in Berlin.

-- 
Roberto Salomon
http://notaslivres.webhop.net

Symphony contribution

[Rob Weir]

I'm sending this with my IBM "hat".

I'm going to be speaking at the ODF Plugfest in Berlin Friday
afternoon, and will be making some announcements.  I wanted you to
hear this first, before anyone else knows.

You know about IBM Lotus Symphony, our free (as in beer) product which
is based on OOo.  We're doing well with it, I think.  Along with
various numerous interop, performance enhancements and functional/bug
fixes, we've done some significant work in the accessibility and user
interface in general.  If you saw recently, PC Magazine gave Symphony
3.0 its "Editors' Choice Award" [1].  In the review they praised the
"interface that's been tweaked by IBM to make it by far the
user-friendliest no-cost productivity suite, and one's that's friendly
enough to rival the spacious and informative interface that Microsoft
created for Office 2010 and that Apple created for iWork '09."  So the
UI enhancements are getting some notice.

However, we at IBM have not been exemplary community members when it
came to OpenOffice.org.  This wasn't necessarily by design, but for
various reasons, that was the effect.  Yes, we participated in various
community councils, and sponsored conferences and worked together on
standards.  But when it came down to the code, we maintained Symphony
essentially as a fork, and although we occasionally contributed code
back, we did not do this well, or often.

We'd like to make some changes in how we do things, and the fresh
start at Apache is a good opportunity for this.

We will be doing the following:

First, we're going to contribute the standalone version of Lotus
Symphony to the Apache OpenOffice.org project, under the Apache 2.0
license.   We'll also work with project members to prioritize which
pieces make sense to integrate into OpenOffice.  For example, we've
already done a lot of work with replacing GPL/LPGL dependencies.
Using the Symphony code could help accelerate that work and get us to
an AOOo release faster.  We've already converted the help files to
DITA, which could help accelerate that work, if we chose to go in that
direction.

Aside from the work that would help accelerate getting AOOo to our
first release, we've also added other features that I think we should
consider merging in.  For example, the IAccessible2 work which helps
Symphony work better with assistive technology.I know an older
version of this work sits in an OOo CWS someplace, but it will be
easier to integrate that work if we start with our latest code.  We've
also added VBA macro support, which is great for MS Office interop.

Also, as the PC Magazine review notes, we've done some really good UI
work.  I invite you to download Symphony [2] and take a closer look at
this.  Yes, it is different from what OOo has today.  And a move of
that magnitude has an impact on documentation and translations as
well.   But the feedback we've received from customers and reviewers
is very positive.  Do we integrate parts of the Symphony UI?  That is
something for the project to discuss and decide on.

Finally, we will be proposing [3] a new incubation project at Apache,
for the ODF Toolkit.  These Java libraries enable new kinds of
lightweight document processing applications.  We think this would
work well as an Apache project, and we look forward to moving that
into incubation and developing that complementary project forward.

So that's essentially what I'll be announcing on Friday.  The above
contributions will occur over the next couple of months, starting with
the ODF Toolkit.  I hope you see the exciting possibilities as much as
I do.

Regards,

-Rob



[1]  http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2387439,00.asp

[2] http://symphony.lotus.com/

[3] http://odftoolkit.org/projects/odftoolkit/pages/ApacheProposal

RE: Extensions and templates site down

[Gavin McDonald]

> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, 13 July 2011 12:32 AM
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Extensions and templates site down



> We did get a zone file yesterday, but it was missing these two domains.

Who is 'we' please ?

Can you forward a copy to me and to joes please (or just to r...@apache.org
if
you're not happy with doing the former.)

Thanks

Gav...


> I
> think that the track is to transfer the domain and zone dns to the ASF
first
> and then we will be able to do what we want.
> 
> Regards,
> Dave
> 
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 2:01 AM, Reizinger Zoltán 
> wrote:
> >> 2011.07.11. 15:41 keltezéssel, TJ Frazier írta:
> >>>
> >>> On 7/11/2011 07:28, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> 
>  Reizinger Zoltán wrote:
> >
> > The two sites works sporadically, needs four five web page refresh
> > to
> > load:
> > http://templates.services.openoffice.org/
> > http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/
> > To help OOo present users, needs to stabilize sites work.
> > Somebody knows what the cause of this problem.
> 
>  Yes, I posted some more details in this message a few weeks ago:
> 
>  http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-
> dev/201106.m
>  box/browser and I don't have further updates available.
> 
>  Note that those sites are not part of the Oracle infrastructure.
> 
>  Regards,
>    Andrea.
> 
> >>> Hi, all,
> >>>
> >>> Andrea Pescetti's helpful message is easier to find here:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-
> dev/201106.mb
> >>> ox/%3c1308391724.2986.34.camel@localhost.localdomain%3e
> >>>
> >>> since it is titled, "Re: Bugzilla or JIRA? ..." etc.
> >>>
> >>> Oregon State University Open Source Lab hosts the extensions site,
> >>> and some Apache-related things as well. Just for fun, I tried
> >>> looking up OSUOSL's service ticket #18367, but their website was
> >>> impenetrable to my relatively feeble search attempts.
> >>>
> >>> As a systems programmer (retired), I used to read a lot of tickets,
> >>> and it was my job to solve them. I find this protracted trouble
> >>> curious, to say the least. :-/
> >>
> >> It seems to me it is an abandoned site, nobody care for it, it hurt
> >> all OOo effort if we not find a solution to restart, the users ask
> >> every day on forum which way they could find specific extensions, and
> >> we can not help them. It is sad thing.
> >> Zoltan
> >>

Re: Online Help Planning

[Frank Peters]

good that this topic comes up...

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 8:49 PM, Frank Peters  wrote:

I have created a page on the user wiki for online help planning
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Application+Help


helpcontent2/helpers/REAME reads:
##
2006-05-15

New location for helpers that are not used by the
build process is documentation/www/online_help/helpers
##

But those tools (I.e. the Macros, etc used in help-authoring, as
described in the Help-Authoring.pdf) are nowhere to be found.



Are those also covered by the Oracle grant?


Oracle might know.


Where are they hosted now?


Mmmh. Interesting. It seems that they fell through the cracks on
migrating to Kenai. Very strange. If all fails I have a local copy
of those files.

However, I would very much favor to switch format and process
in the mid-term. Help authoring worked but had its peculiarities.

Frank

Re: Online Help Planning

[Christian Lohmaier]

Hi Frank,

good that this topic comes up...

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 8:49 PM, Frank Peters  wrote:
> I have created a page on the user wiki for online help planning
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Application+Help

helpcontent2/helpers/REAME reads:
##
2006-05-15

New location for helpers that are not used by the
build process is documentation/www/online_help/helpers
##

But those tools (I.e. the Macros, etc used in help-authoring, as
described in the Help-Authoring.pdf) are nowhere to be found.

Are those also covered by the Oracle grant? Where are they hosted now?

ciao
Christian

Re: Online Help Planning

[TJ Frazier]

Hi, Frank,

On 7/13/2011 14:49, Frank Peters wrote:

I have created a page on the user wiki for online help planning
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Application+Help


Many thanks for that. I have posted some radical ideas, which you should 
feel free to incorporate, reply to, or ignore.


I also edited the main user documentation planning page
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/User+Documentation+Plan

since I think it was missing some points.

There is a lot of work to be done on the app help if
we want to take this migration opportunity to also
modernize it and fix some of the more nastier issues,
which I think we should.


+1


Comments welcome
Frank



--
/tj/

Online Help Planning

[Frank Peters]

I have created a page on the user wiki for online help planning
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Application+Help

I also edited the main user documentation planning page
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/User+Documentation+Plan
since I think it was missing some points.

There is a lot of work to be done on the app help if
we want to take this migration opportunity to also
modernize it and fix some of the more nastier issues,
which I think we should.

Comments welcome
Frank

Re: Open Office Help Wanted

[Rob Weir]

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Harold Fennell
 wrote:
>
> I would like to know more about:
>
> external diff and merge tools for Subversion that can process ODF documents
>
> Do you have other teams working on this problem, what is the expected 
> timeframe, any helpful hints on completion, and is the a tool that integrates 
> into Subversion or into open office.
>

No one currently working on it.  The general problem is tools like
SVN, that work admirably with text files, have limitations with what
it considers to be opaque binary files:

1) Cannot do an effective diff, meaning the commit notifications are
not as useful to reviewers of the commits.

2) No effective way of doing branching and merging

One possible solution is to note that SVN has the capability to invoke
external diff and merge (diff3) tools [1].  In theory something like
this could be written for ODF documents.

At one end of the scale, one could do a diff of the embedded XML's
directly, e.g., diff the content.xml, the styles,xml, etc. and present
that as a normal text diff.  But some editors, for performance
reasons, write the XML files out all in one line.  A diff app would
probably want to do a canonical "pretty print" of the XML before
diff'ing in order to give something presentable to the user.

At the other end, you could imagine a WYSIWYG diff, akin to what OOo
shows when change tracking is invoked.  You could imagine, for
example, a diff3 mode for OpenOffice itself, where three files are
passed on the command line and a change tracked version of the doc is
created.   But that does not work so well for our commit
notifications, where we would typically want plain text diffs.


-Rob

[1] http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.5/svn.advanced.externaldifftools.html



> Thank you for your time.
>
> Harold
>
>
> Harold Fennell
> PO Box 3046
> North Fort Myers, FL 33918
>
>

Re: OpenOffice.org (was Re: Ooo blog)

[Sam Ruby]

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Simon Phipps  wrote:
>
> On 13 Jul 2011, at 15:10, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Simon Phipps  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 13 Jul 2011, at 14:29, Sam Ruby wrote:
>>>
 On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Simon Phipps  wrote:
>
> On 13 Jul 2011, at 12:55, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> If a project decides to create a canonical place to find things like
>> extensions and templates then we will expect the (P)PMC to demonstrate
>> active oversight of that repository.
>
> To clarify this, Sam:  Do you mean that any external repository would 
> need to be under the sole oversight of the (P)PMC, or are you simply 
> indicating that involvement in an external shared repository would need 
> to be with the consent of the (P)PMC?

 You might have snipped a wee bit too much there.  But the short answer
 is: got a concrete proposal?
>>>
>>> Yes, I proposed that the project redirect to the LibreOffice repository for 
>>> as long as necessary to bridge the construction phase of the Apache project.
>>
>> (1) Is that what the PPMC wants?
>>
>> (2) Is this consistent with the Apache Branding Policy?
>
> I believe those questions were implied, and I'm sure the PPMC will consider 
> them. However, my question was asking you for clarification of your assertion 
> that "we will expect the (P)PMC to demonstrate active oversight of that 
> repository".

It is getting hard for my to follow what questions are explicit and
what questions are implicit then.

Going back to the actual question you asked above: clearly the TDF has
an external repository without the sole oversight by this PPMC, and
that does not pose a problem.

You've suggested multiple times that this project makes redirects of
various kinds to LibreOffice sites.  Until I see some evidence that
this is what the PPMC wants, I will not comment further on that
suggestion.

> S.

- Sam Ruby

Open Office Help Wanted

[Harold Fennell]

I would like to know more about:

external diff and merge tools for Subversion that can process ODF documents 
 
Do you have other teams working on this problem, what is the expected 
timeframe, any helpful hints on completion, and is the a tool that integrates 
into Subversion or into open office.
 
Thank you for your time.
 
Harold


Harold Fennell
PO Box 3046
North Fort Myers, FL 33918

  

Re: OpenOffice.org (was Re: Ooo blog)

[Simon Phipps]

On 13 Jul 2011, at 15:10, Sam Ruby wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Simon Phipps  wrote:
>> 
>> On 13 Jul 2011, at 14:29, Sam Ruby wrote:
>> 
>>> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Simon Phipps  wrote:
 
 On 13 Jul 2011, at 12:55, Sam Ruby wrote:
 
> If a project decides to create a canonical place to find things like
> extensions and templates then we will expect the (P)PMC to demonstrate
> active oversight of that repository.
 
 To clarify this, Sam:  Do you mean that any external repository would need 
 to be under the sole oversight of the (P)PMC, or are you simply indicating 
 that involvement in an external shared repository would need to be with 
 the consent of the (P)PMC?
>>> 
>>> You might have snipped a wee bit too much there.  But the short answer
>>> is: got a concrete proposal?
>> 
>> Yes, I proposed that the project redirect to the LibreOffice repository for 
>> as long as necessary to bridge the construction phase of the Apache project.
> 
> (1) Is that what the PPMC wants?
> 
> (2) Is this consistent with the Apache Branding Policy?

I believe those questions were implied, and I'm sure the PPMC will consider 
them. However, my question was asking you for clarification of your assertion 
that "we will expect the (P)PMC to demonstrate active oversight of that 
repository".

S.

Re: OpenOffice.org (was Re: Ooo blog)

[Sam Ruby]

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Simon Phipps  wrote:
>
> On 13 Jul 2011, at 14:29, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Simon Phipps  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 13 Jul 2011, at 12:55, Sam Ruby wrote:
>>>
 If a project decides to create a canonical place to find things like
 extensions and templates then we will expect the (P)PMC to demonstrate
 active oversight of that repository.
>>>
>>> To clarify this, Sam:  Do you mean that any external repository would need 
>>> to be under the sole oversight of the (P)PMC, or are you simply indicating 
>>> that involvement in an external shared repository would need to be with the 
>>> consent of the (P)PMC?
>>
>> You might have snipped a wee bit too much there.  But the short answer
>> is: got a concrete proposal?
>
> Yes, I proposed that the project redirect to the LibreOffice repository for 
> as long as necessary to bridge the construction phase of the Apache project.

(1) Is that what the PPMC wants?

(2) Is this consistent with the Apache Branding Policy?

- Sam Ruby

Re: OpenOffice.org (was Re: Ooo blog)

[Malte Timmermann]

When just considering my own preference, w/o trademark implications:

+1 for "Apache OpenOffice", or for keeping "OpenOffice.org" to stick 
with the well known brand.


As "OpenOffice.org" can't be used w/o the Apache prefix, this only 
leaves us with "Apache OpenOffice".


+1 because I like it, and because I agree that most people never used 
the ".org". Actually, some day I even wrote an email to our former Sun 
CEO, to ask him to please write the OOo name correctly in his blogs ;)


BUT

"OpenOffice" is probably still trademarked by other people or companies 
in some countries, and I doubt that it really is enough to simply prefix 
some others trademark with "Apache", to avoid trademark conflicts.


If there would be some new Apache project for a music library, called 
"Apache iTunes", or "Apache iPod", does anybody here believe this 
wouldn't be a trademark conflict?!


And if it is an issue, then it really doesn't make sense to further 
discuss whether or not to drop the ".org".


The only trademark we have is "OpenOffice.org", and Apache requires us 
to use the prefix "Apache", so what could the name be...


Malte.



On 10.07.2011 23:21, Kai Ahrens wrote:

Am 10.07.2011 20:19, schrieb Donald Harbison:

No need to drag the .org into the future, if Apache is prefixed. If no
prefix, yes, we lead with the trademark of record: OpenOffice.org. IMHO.
Let's simply use Apache OpenOffice.


+1

Regards
Kai

Re: [DISCUSS] Project + PPMC Growing Pains

[Ross Gardler]

Responding as a mentor - not as an OO.o committer...

On 12 July 2011 23:39, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
> Good point, Rob.  I am not floating a proposal, more an opportunity for 
> discussion.  Here are some questions:
>
>  1. When should we conclude that the Initial Committers that have arrived are 
> all that are coming and we should close the door, with all further committers 
> being by invitation of the PPMC?

I'd suggest sending a notification to all who self-identified that
they have 10 days to either submit an ICLA or indicate that they are
taking advice before signing. The PPMC has been active in chasing
people. It's legitimate to close the door on those who do not respond
to such a request.

For those who are "taking advice" I would give an additional 30 days.

>  2. A person is considered eligible to become a committer when there is an 
> established pattern of contribution on the project: 
> .
>
>  2.1 To what degree should contributions elsewhere -- a prior reputation -- 
> be taken into consideration?
>  2.2 For how long should we do this, if at all?

Contributions elsewhere do not count. It is contributions here that
matter. There was plenty of time during proposal time for past
contributors to step up. They did not. Now this is an ASF project
everyone needs to earn merit in the ASF project not in what went
before.

>  3. What do you expect to see as demonstration that the PPMC is being 
> even-handed in the invitation of new committers?

Consistency in the application of committer selection guidelines.
That, of course, begs the question "what are our selection
guidelines". Personally I don't see any need to define these in
advance.

Anyone on the PPMC can propose anyone for committership. A discussion
will take place and, in most cases a vote will be called. If I, as a
mentor, see someone being inconsistent in their support or obstruction
of any individual I will ask them to justify their position. If their
position is consistent across each case then their opinion is entirely
valid.

Trying to define "rules" for these things does not make any sense, the
types of contribution are just too variable. It is best to just let
these things evolve and deal with them on a case by case basis, openly
and transparently.

>  4. Is it understood why the ooo-secur...@incubator.apache.org list is being 
> created and the safeguards that are intended with regard to the security 
> under which matters of security are raised?

As a mentor I have some concerns about this. The private@ list is for
private project communications. We've already seen far too much
happening on the private@ list (although I am pleased to report to the
ooo-dev list that this practice seems to have stopped now - well done
PPMC members).

That being said, I can see the logic in the argument. as long as this
list is used *only* for security issues it should be fine.

>  5. Most important: This is a learning experience for all of us.  What do you 
> want cleared up around these growing-pain considerations?

I'll echo Shane's comments here. There is no need to rush things. Let
them evolve naturally. Trying to anticipate issues before they arrive
is likely to result in too much "red tape" around the project.

That being said, again echoing Shane, I think mails like this that are
purposefully designed to increase engagement and transparency will
ensure that most issues are addressed in an appropriate and timely
fashion. Keep up the great work.

Ross


>
>  - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:rabas...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 14:34
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Project + PPMC Growing Pains
>
> Is this intended as a blog post?  It reads like one. In particular I
> don't see any proposals to discuss.
>
> -Rob
>
> On Jul 12, 2011, at 4:30 PM, "Dennis E. Hamilton"  wrote:
>
>> We are just one month into being the Apache OpenOffice.org Podling.  It is 
>> useful to interesting to take stock of all that is happening and where we 
>> are.
>>
>> The main activity that we are all holding our breath over is the 
>> reconstitution of the code base under Apache.  There is also concern for the 
>> documentation and web sites and how they fit under an Apache umbrella.
>>
>> Depending on their interests and specialties, not everyone here is 
>> immediately able to contribute much.  We are in the process of organizing 
>> and bringing over and IP-scrubbing the initial artifacts for the project 
>> that will be the foundation for further work.  There is not much to get our 
>> teeth into in terms of actual development until that is sorted out.  (E.g., 
>> we don't have a bug tracker yet and the documentation, localization, and 
>> user-facing folk, including marketing, are still wondering how our project 
>> will accommodate them.)
>>
>> Meanwhile, there is also how we organize ourselves to operate as an Apache 
>> project.
>>
>> - Denn

Re: OpenOffice.org (was Re: Ooo blog)

[Simon Phipps]

On 13 Jul 2011, at 14:29, Sam Ruby wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Simon Phipps  wrote:
>> 
>> On 13 Jul 2011, at 12:55, Sam Ruby wrote:
>> 
>>> If a project decides to create a canonical place to find things like
>>> extensions and templates then we will expect the (P)PMC to demonstrate
>>> active oversight of that repository.
>> 
>> To clarify this, Sam:  Do you mean that any external repository would need 
>> to be under the sole oversight of the (P)PMC, or are you simply indicating 
>> that involvement in an external shared repository would need to be with the 
>> consent of the (P)PMC?
> 
> You might have snipped a wee bit too much there.  But the short answer
> is: got a concrete proposal?

Yes, I proposed that the project redirect to the LibreOffice repository for as 
long as necessary to bridge the construction phase of the Apache project.

> 
> A longer answer: a concrete example that exists today is Apache
> Extras, which has minimal oversight.  The reason that this particular
> question has come up in this context is that the request was coupled
> with a request to make use of *.openoffice.org.  It is that use of the
> brand that will require compliance with the branding policy, and as a
> necessary consequence, considerable oversight.
> 
> If somebody wishes to propose one or more external repositories
> without that additional requirement, there likely is nothing here that
> needs discussion outside of this mailing list.  If somebody wishes to
> propose something concrete with that additional requirement, it is
> incumbent on them to address all of the issues that such a proposal
> creates.
> 
>> S.
> 
> - Sam Ruby

Re: OpenOffice.org (was Re: Ooo blog)

[Sam Ruby]

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Simon Phipps  wrote:
>
> On 13 Jul 2011, at 12:55, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> If a project decides to create a canonical place to find things like
>> extensions and templates then we will expect the (P)PMC to demonstrate
>> active oversight of that repository.
>
> To clarify this, Sam:  Do you mean that any external repository would need to 
> be under the sole oversight of the (P)PMC, or are you simply indicating that 
> involvement in an external shared repository would need to be with the 
> consent of the (P)PMC?

You might have snipped a wee bit too much there.  But the short answer
is: got a concrete proposal?

A longer answer: a concrete example that exists today is Apache
Extras, which has minimal oversight.  The reason that this particular
question has come up in this context is that the request was coupled
with a request to make use of *.openoffice.org.  It is that use of the
brand that will require compliance with the branding policy, and as a
necessary consequence, considerable oversight.

If somebody wishes to propose one or more external repositories
without that additional requirement, there likely is nothing here that
needs discussion outside of this mailing list.  If somebody wishes to
propose something concrete with that additional requirement, it is
incumbent on them to address all of the issues that such a proposal
creates.

> S.

- Sam Ruby

Re: [DISCUSS] Project + PPMC Growing Pains

[Shane Curcuru]

Indeed, I would urge PPMC members to push regular posts to the OOo blog. 
 While we do our work here on dev@ in public, it's often easier for the 
greater world to follow a blog posting than it is to follow mailing lists.


From my perspective (as a mentor, not on the PPMC), here are some 
suggestions:


On 7/12/2011 6:39 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

Good point, Rob.  I am not floating a proposal, more an opportunity
for discussion.  Here are some questions:

1. When should we conclude that the Initial Committers that have
arrived are all that are coming and we should close the door, with
all further committers being by invitation of the PPMC?


PPMC volunteers should double-check that each Initial Committer has 
definitely been contacted personally, and perhaps send out another email 
to each individual separately reminding them of the invitation and 
setting a deadline (say in a week or so) for accepting the invitation to 
become an initial committer.


If they don't respond positively (or with an obvious "yes I need more 
time!", then take them off the list).  It's been long enough.


2. A person is considered eligible to become a committer when there
is an established pattern of contribution on the
project:.

2.1 To what degree should contributions elsewhere -- a prior
reputation -- be taken into consideration? 2.2 For how long should we
do this, if at all?


This is a tough one.  I wouldn't go too much further at "auto" inviting 
past OOo contributors, because this is a new project community, and it's 
important to see how well potential committers fit into this community. 
 In any case, if you do evaluate past contributions, be sure to include 
an assessment of individuals ability to work with peers in a community.


If you read the newcommitter.html list, you'll notice that the item 
about coding ability comes last on the list.



3. What do you expect to see as demonstration that the PPMC is being
even-handed in the invitation of new committers?


A process just like this one, where the community actively and 
productively discusses the issue here on the dev@ list. 8-)



4. Is it understood why the ooo-secur...@incubator.apache.org list is
being created and the safeguards that are intended with regard to the
security under which matters of security are raised?


I would hope so.  The PPMC is responsible for the project as a whole and 
the product (we will be) shipping.  However I would take recommendations 
from the Apache Security team very seriously - they have a lot of 
experience with security and privacy.



5. Most important: This is a learning experience for all of us.  What
do you want cleared up around these growing-pain considerations?


Patience and thoughtful participation are key.  Seriously: this is great 
stuff, and while it seems a little chaotic, it's great to see so many 
people participating and being constructive at figuring out both the 
technical and community issues.


- Shane



- Dennis

-Original Message- From: Rob Weir
[mailto:rabas...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 14:34 To:
ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Project + PPMC
Growing Pains

Is this intended as a blog post?  It reads like one. In particular I
don't see any proposals to discuss.

-Rob

On Jul 12, 2011, at 4:30 PM, "Dennis E. Hamilton"
wrote:


We are just one month into being the Apache OpenOffice.org Podling.
It is useful to interesting to take stock of all that is happening
and where we are.

The main activity that we are all holding our breath over is the
reconstitution of the code base under Apache.  There is also
concern for the documentation and web sites and how they fit under
an Apache umbrella.

Depending on their interests and specialties, not everyone here is
immediately able to contribute much.  We are in the process of
organizing and bringing over and IP-scrubbing the initial artifacts
for the project that will be the foundation for further work.
There is not much to get our teeth into in terms of actual
development until that is sorted out.  (E.g., we don't have a bug
tracker yet and the documentation, localization, and user-facing
folk, including marketing, are still wondering how our project will
accommodate them.)

Meanwhile, there is also how we organize ourselves to operate as an
Apache project.

- Dennis

1. BOOTSTRAPPING COMMITTERS AND THE PPMC 2. HOW LONG IS THE OPEN
DOOR OPEN? 3. WHAT WILL IT TAKE TO BE A COMMITTER AS TIME GOES ON?
4. WHEN BEING MORE PRIVATE THAN PRIVATE IS IMPORTANT


1. BOOTSTRAPPING COMMITTERS AND THE PPMC

The set of Initial Committers is a self-selected group who added
their names to the Initial Committers list on the original
incubator proposal.  That's how the podling is bootstrapped.
Likewise, ooo-dev participation is fully self-selected, and it will
stay that way.

This means that we are a group of people who have not worked
together as a single Apache project community before,

Re: Script to generate mail archive URL from message

[Shane Curcuru]

Note that in general for any official Apache project work we prefer to 
use links to apache.org resources where possible.  I.e. for board 
reports and for the bulk of public websites about Apache projects, we 
expect projects to use the Apache mail-archives.a.o server.


This is because our own Apache infrastructure team is responsible for 
maintaining them, so we can be assured that these links will remain 
present as long as the ASF is around.


This is nothing against other mail archive providers, just a general 
note to ponder.  I certainly like the UI at http://apache.markmail.org/ 
better than mail-archive.a.o for searching out messages and threads.


- Shane

On 7/12/2011 5:39 PM, Christian Lohmaier wrote:

Hi Eike, *,

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 10:44 PM, Eike Rathke  wrote:


Seen that every message to the mailing list can be retrieved from the
archive using an URL of the form
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-dev/MM.mbox/%3CMessage-ID%3E
I hacked a script that parses a message from stdin to generate the
corresponding URL, [...]

Best of course would be if the mailing list software would insert
a header X-Archive-URL before distributing the message that could be
copied to the clipboard.


Link to the mail-archive.com archives can be created in a similar
manner - hash the id&  the list-post address (the libreoffice org
lists (the ones managed by TDF, so not the dev-list that is run by
freedesktop.org make use of that)
sample code to compute the link:
http://www.mail-archive.com/faq.html#listserver

example from your post
msg-id 20110712204457.gc25...@ulungele.erack.de
list-address ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
resulting hash-link:
http://go.mail-archive.com/-hoB_qRELeVC89tPxbrUdp5fd_U=

ciao
Christian

Re: OpenOffice.org (was Re: Ooo blog)

[Simon Phipps]

On 13 Jul 2011, at 12:55, Sam Ruby wrote:

> If a project decides to create a canonical place to find things like
> extensions and templates then we will expect the (P)PMC to demonstrate
> active oversight of that repository.

To clarify this, Sam:  Do you mean that any external repository would need to 
be under the sole oversight of the (P)PMC, or are you simply indicating that 
involvement in an external shared repository would need to be with the consent 
of the (P)PMC?

S.

Re: OpenOffice.org (was Re: Ooo blog)

[Sam Ruby]

Again, I want to drive home the difference between questions of law
(which we forward to attorneys) and questions of policy (which are
determined by the appropriate Officer of the ASF).

If you wish to advocate for a change to the Branding Policy, perhaps
the best way is to propose a patch to the following:

http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html

If you wish to either propose a change or get clarification of a legal
policy, try opening an issue or starting a discussion:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/

With that, on to your questions.

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 11:12 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>
> How are these for questions:
>
> Are there trademark or brand dilution issues with "Apache™OpenOffice" 
> (project) in conjunction with "OpenOffice.org™" (product)?

Question of law.  Ultimately will require consultation with counsel.

> The two would be tied together with the feather and the seagulls with 
> comparatively similar banners and footers.
>
> Are we allowed to call a product "OpenOffice.org™" or must it be "Apache 
> " whether or not there is a huge retraining of a huge market to the new 
> name?

Question of policy.  Where's your patch?  :-)

The latter (complete with the smiley) is a common way in the ASF to
suggest that you participate.  Read the Branding Policy linked to
above.  Identify what parts are problematic and what needs to be
changed.  While nothing is cast in stone, be prepared to defend your
arguments.  Huge retraining?  Care to quantify this?

Was there a huge retraining when Sun Open Office became Oracle Open Office?

Note: I am trying my best not to take a position here, but rather to
help you formulate your questions and proposals.

>>> Should the discussion also include the issue of whether it is permissible 
>>> to host extensions and templates with all kinds of licenses on an 
>>> http://*.openoffice.org domain? It happens now.
>>
>> There are two parts to this.  The first part is whether or not it is
>> legal to do so.  The second part is whether or not ASF policy would
>> allow such.  To date we have never approved such.  A concrete example
>> to illustrate the difference between the two: it would be 100% legal
>> for us to host and distribute code licensed under the GPL on ASF
>> infrastructure, but to date we have consistently declined to do so.
>>
>> The only thing I will note is that your question is subtly different
>> than the one I answered.  You asked a question about a domain that
>> ultimately will be owned by the ASF.  I answered a question as to what
>> could be hosted on ASF infrastructure.  The question as to whether
>> those two questions are equivalent fundamentally is a policy question.
>> Off the top of my head: solving this will ultimately require at least
>> two parts: (1) finding somebody willing to host the extensions and
>> templates, and (2) a clear way of distinguishing these portions of the
>> site from those portions hosted by the ASF.  Even with these parts
>> addressed, there may be liability questions that we need to resolve.
>> That portion will definitely require input from ASF Counsel.
>
> (1) An external host like OSUOSL.
>
> (2) A third set of banners and footers distinguishing this third type of 
> sight - "the extension site"
>
> Perhaps the TDF would be willing to share an extension and template database 
> and then only publish the FSF compatible licenses on their extension/template 
> site?
>
> Perhaps this database would have matrices that validate an extension or 
> template's compatibility with each of the codebases and versions including 
> other downstreams than OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice.

Not sure I see a question (yet) there.

If a project decides to list a set of places which are worth
exploring, and provide links to those places, that generally won't be
a problem.  Links to strongly CopyLeft (e.g. AGPL3) and proprietary
products are fine to the extent that they are consistent with our
status as a non-profit (the former is not a problem, the latter may or
may not be depending on the kind and extent of the links).

If a project decides to create a canonical place to find things like
extensions and templates then we will expect the (P)PMC to demonstrate
active oversight of that repository.

> Regards,
> Dave

- Sam Ruby

Re: SVN tutorial

[Carl Marcum]

Dave,

On 07/12/2011 09:55 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:

On Jul 12, 2011, at 6:49 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:


I'll sign up for the basic SVN tutorial from Help Wanted if no one has yet.


Great!

BTW - I have a TODO on 
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/website-local.html for how to create 
a patch.

Regards,
Dave


Thanks for the link.
Carl

Re: Any interest in meeting in Berlin July 13th?

[Ross Gardler]

Looking forward to meeting you Arthur. I'll be there from late
afternoon on the 14th.

Ross

On 11 July 2011 12:30, Arthur Buijs  wrote:
> On 07/08/2011 02:46 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 7:43 PM, Ross Gardler
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Sorry Rob, I missed this mail. As you know I will be there and I would
>>> love to touch base with you and any others who will be present. I
>>> haven't booked my flights and hotel yet, but will mail you offlist
>>> once I have my details settled. unfortunately I will probably not get
>>> there until the 14th.
>>>
>>> However, I note note nobody else has replied, does that mean no-one
>>> will be there?
>>>
>>
>> The ODF Plugfest will be the 14th and 15th.  I'm sure that several
>> members of this list will be attending that event.  The Thursday event
>> is the implementor interactive technical interop testing event. And
>> the Friday session, where you are speaking, is more of a conference
>> session, with presentations,
>>
>> I didn't get any interest on doing something during the day on the
>> 13th.  At this point I've booked my travel and will arrive in the
>> afternoon of the 13th.  But I'm happy to get together with anyone who
>> is already there on evening of the 13th.
>>
>
> I will arrive on the 13th around 15:00. I would like to discuss about
> community (native lang), qa and translation.
>
> --
> Arthur
>
>>> Ross
>>>
>>> On 28 June 2011 22:46, Rob Weir  wrote:

 There is an ODF interoperability even ("Plugfest" we call it) in
 Berlin on July 14th and 15th.  There will be representatives there
 from a range of applications that support ODF, both commercial and
 open source.  There will also be standards people, from OASIS and ISO.
 And some government officials, CIO department, IT strategy, etc.

 I'm planning on attending, and I believe several project members will
 be as well.  I'm wondering whether it would be worth getting together
 the day before, on Wed July 13th in Berlin, for an informal AOOo
 hackfest?  We could do things like help get build/dev environments set
 up, maybe review some 3rd party dependencies, maybe hear some
 architectural overview presentations, etc. If there are project
 members there who are not programmers we could have a session to
 introduce Subversion and the Apache CMS.  Would also be good for
 experts in other areas to give brief presentations on their areas as
 well.   So focus on skills transfer.

 I know this is very short notice for anyone who was not already
 planning to attend the ODF Plugfest.  But if this sounds interesting
 to you, and you would attend a hackfest in Berlin on July 13th, please
 respond with a +1 to this note.  If there is sufficient interest we
 might be able to arrange something.

 -Rob

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
>>> Programme Leader (Open Development)
>>> OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
>>>
>



-- 
Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
Programme Leader (Open Development)
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com

Re: OOo Conferences presentations

[Dave Fisher]

On Jul 13, 2011, at 12:49 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:

> At least the domain doesn't seem to belong to Oracle (see the WHOIS search 
> from here: http://www.pir.org). But maybe the machine that serves the 
> content. Does anybody knows more about the context of this website?

It is certainly on an Oracle network.

$ host www.ooocon.org
www.ooocon.org is an alias for conference.services.openoffice.org.
conference.services.openoffice.org has address 12.184.192.18
conference.services.openoffice.org mail is handled by 10 
conference.services.openoffice.org.

$ whois 12.184.192.18
#
# Query terms are ambiguous.  The query is assumed to be:
# "n 12.184.192.18"
#
# Use "?" to get help.
#

#
# The following results may also be obtained via:
# http://whois.arin.net/rest/nets;q=12.184.192.18?showDetails=true&showARIN=true
#

AT&T Services, Inc. ATT (NET-12-0-0-0-1) 12.0.0.0 - 12.255.255.255
Sun Microsystems SUN-MICR52-192 (NET-12-184-192-0-1) 12.184.192.0 - 
12.184.193.255


#
# ARIN WHOIS data and services are subject to the Terms of Use
# available at: https://www.arin.net/whois_tou.html
#

Regards,
Dave

> 
> Marcus
> 
> 
> 
> Am 07/13/2011 09:22 AM, schrieb Reizinger Zoltán:
>> I want to rise one question not raised in this list.
>> OOo community held 10th OOo Conference in Budapest last year.
>> The conference materials with 9th Italian conference materials stored in
>> http://www.ooocon.org/ site.
>> What is the status of this site, it is in transfer list if hosted by
>> Oracle.
>> 
>> The older OOo conference materials not reachable in the net, stored
>> somewhere inside Oracle?
>> It is worth looking around not to lost the useful content of it.
>> May be some presentation outdated, but can be useful one found.

Re: OOo Conferences presentations

[Andrea Pescetti]

Reizinger Zoltán wrote:
> The older OOo conference materials not reachable in the net, stored 
> somewhere inside Oracle?
> It is worth looking around not to lost the useful content of it.

Starting from 2003:
http://marketing.openoffice.org/ooocon2003/
http://marketing.openoffice.org/ooocon2004/
http://marketing.openoffice.org/ooocon2005/
http://marketing.openoffice.org/ooocon2006/
http://marketing.openoffice.org/ooocon2007/
http://marketing.openoffice.org/ooocon2008/

Then with Orvieto 2009 the OOo marketing project (mainly John McCreesh
and Florian Effenberger) moved to the OCS system.
http://www.ooocon.org/index.php/ooocon/2009
http://www.ooocon.org/index.php/ooocon/2010

Slides from OOoCon 2009 are not publicly displayed, but they are on the
site. I still have privileges on the OOoCon 2009 site and I see them.

So basically the first batch is part of the OOo site, don't know about
2009 and 2010; the domain is owned by a person I don't know.

Regards,
  Andrea.

Re: OOo Conferences presentations

[Marcus (OOo)]

At least the domain doesn't seem to belong to Oracle (see the WHOIS 
search from here: http://www.pir.org). But maybe the machine that serves 
the content. Does anybody knows more about the context of this website?


Marcus



Am 07/13/2011 09:22 AM, schrieb Reizinger Zoltán:

I want to rise one question not raised in this list.
OOo community held 10th OOo Conference in Budapest last year.
The conference materials with 9th Italian conference materials stored in
http://www.ooocon.org/ site.
What is the status of this site, it is in transfer list if hosted by
Oracle.

The older OOo conference materials not reachable in the net, stored
somewhere inside Oracle?
It is worth looking around not to lost the useful content of it.
May be some presentation outdated, but can be useful one found.

Re: Extensions and templates site down

[Jürgen Schmidt]

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 12:39 AM, Rob Weir  wrote:

> On Jul 12, 2011, at 5:43 PM, Simon Phipps  wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 10:37 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
> >
> >> On Jul 12, 2011, at 4:41 PM, Simon Phipps  wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
> >>>
>  Another option that comes to mind:
> 
>  3) Have OOo extensions hosted by a 3rd party website and we link to
>  that site.  It is done that way essentially now with OSL.  But I think
>  we'll want to be more explicit about such links to 3rd party sites
>  going forward, stating that this is not Apache code, etc.
> 
>  Also, if most of the extensions are applicable to LibreOffice and
>  other derived products, as well as OpenOffice, then this might be an
>  opportunity for collaboration with The Document Foundation on a common
>  extension repository.
> 
> >>>
> >>> As it happens I'd already started exploring this one with the Document
> >>> Foundation Steering Committee, and Jomar Silva raised it on the
> >> TDF-Discuss
> >>> list. TDF are just about to launch a full version of their extensions &
> >>> templates system and they would be perfectly happy for AOOo to redirect
> >> the
> >>> URL that OpenOffice.org is using to access the repository so that it
> uses
> >>> the system TDF are hosting for LibreOffice.
> >>
> >> Is the intent to host all of the extensions currently at the OOo site?
> >> Or a subset?  Or a different set?
> >>
> >
> > They host only extensions that have open source licenses, so the ones at
> the
> > OOo site that have proprietary licenses are not hosted.
>
> I'd like to have a central catalog of all extensions, commercial as
> well as open source.  Not necessarily hosting them, but having the
> basic metadata with links to whatever site hosts them. If we have
> something like this then we can escape the need for having a singe
> host site that gates user visibility of extensions based on eclectic
> things like license considerations.   You could even have multiple
> such catalogs. Maybe some which curate only GPL extensions for
> example.
>
> To do something like the above would require agreeing on a metadata
> description file for extension authors.
>

i think most of this is already available. We need to extend the code to
handle multiple repositories in the extension manager as known from for
example NetBeans. You can of course already define your own update URL for
your own extension and everything works out of the box to get the update
information via this URL. The current repository provides automatically an
update URL for extensions hosted in the repo. The whole mechanism is already
very flexible.

To add my personal opinion, i would still prefer a repo for all kind of
extensions. What we need is a working eco system around the office suite and
i think commercial extensions can be an important part  of such an eco
system. Specialized extensions for only a subset of (business) users for
example. It would allow ISV's to build their own business around the office
suite ...

Juergen


> I think this is complementary to TDF's interest in hosting open source
> extensions.
>
> > S.
>

OOo Conferences presentations

[Reizinger Zoltán]

Hi All,
I want to rise one question not raised in this list.
OOo community held 10th OOo Conference in Budapest last year.
The conference materials with 9th Italian conference materials stored in 
http://www.ooocon.org/ site.

What is the status of this site, it is in transfer list if hosted by Oracle.

The older OOo conference materials not reachable in the net, stored 
somewhere inside Oracle?

It is worth looking around not to lost the useful content of it.
May be some presentation outdated, but can be useful one found.
Regards,
Zoltan