date:20110804

I would expect that the support is going on as it was before: 
community-driven. So the version number doesn't (shouldn't) matter.


There won't be an active distribution of older releases. However, they 
are still on our mirrors. 3.3.0, 3.3.0 Beta and some Dev Builds are on 
the big mirror network and older release are in our archive. At the 
moment I don't see a reason to change this.


My 2 ct

Marcus



Am 08/04/2011 04:40 AM, schrieb Kazunari Hirano:

Hi all,

Who will support OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 and previous versions?

We have got many OpenOffice.org 3 users.
We have many local government users, SMB users and big company users.
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/JA/Marketing/OpenOffice.org_Deployments
Some use OpenOffice.org 3.2.  Many use OpenOffice.org 3.3.0.

Can we support OpeOffice.org 3.3.0?

Thanks,
khirano

Mac buildbot

2011-08-04 Thread Florian Effenberger


Hello,

maybe someone from this list can help.

Two or three years ago, I organized the loan of a Mac buildbot from an 
anonymous supporter, which has been kindly hosted at the Sun 
respectively Oracle office building in Hamburg. It's a Mac Pro machine, 
if needed I can look up the exact technical details.


The machine's name was buildbot-mac1.services.openoffice.org.

However, for quite a while it seems to be unreachable, and since the 
recent changes, there's no contact person anymore.


Does anyone know where this machine is at the moment? Since it's a loan 
where I'm in charge of, I hope someone can help.


Thanks,
Florian

--
Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org
Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation
Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108
Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff

Re: Japanese site, wiki, forum and mailing lists (was Refactoring the brand: Apache ooo + OpenOffice.org?)


Am 08/04/2011 04:19 AM, schrieb Kazunari Hirano:

Hi all,

All the contents of Japanese site[1], wiki[2], forum[3], mailing
lists[4] are essential assets to create a new Japanese OpenOffice.org
[1] http://ja.openoffice.org/
[2] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex/JA/


I would expect that the wiki is migrated as it is.


[3] http://user.services.openoffice.org/ja/forum/


Same for the forums.


[4] http://openoffice.org/projects/ja/lists


As you can see not every list is alive. 0, 17 and 102 messages are not 
a strong reason to keep them. ;-)


Let me try a mapping:

annou...@ja.openoffice.org  -- new dev and/or discuss list
comm...@ja.openoffice.org   -- new dev list
d...@ja.openoffice.org   -- new dev list
disc...@ja.openoffice.org   -- new discuss list
documentat...@ja.openoffice.org -- new dev and/or discuss list
iss...@ja.openoffice.org-- new dev and/or discuss list
market...@ja.openoffice.org -- new discuss list
q...@ja.openoffice.org-- new dev list
transl...@ja.openoffice.org -- new dev list
us...@ja.openoffice.org -- new discuss list

With this we would start with 2 mailing lists. dev and discuss seems 
to be good candidates. More can be seen if they are really necessary.



If Japanese users and contributors would like to keep them all as is,
to migrate them to Apache successfully, what would you like to know
about the Japanese site, the Japanese wiki, the Japanese forum and
Japanese mailing list?


When the OpenOffice support from the Japanese community is really as 
strong as it sounds here, we should support this with more effort.


My 2 ct

Marcus

Re: How to handle the downloads?


Am 08/04/2011 01:57 AM, schrieb Dave Fisher:


On Aug 3, 2011, at 4:31 PM, Gavin McDonald wrote:





-Original Message-
From: Marcus (OOo) [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
Sent: Thursday, 4 August 2011 8:54 AM
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: How to handle the downloads?

Am 08/04/2011 12:38 AM, schrieb Gavin McDonald:




-Original Message-
From: Marcus (OOo) [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
Sent: Wednesday, 3 August 2011 6:45 PM
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: How to handle the downloads?

Am 08/03/2011 02:17 AM, schrieb Gavin McDonald:

-Original Message-
From: Marcus (OOo) [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
Sent: Wednesday, 3 August 2011 9:40 AM
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: How to handle the downloads?

Am 08/02/2011 11:03 PM, schrieb Gavin McDonald:




-Original Message-
From: Marcus (OOo) [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
Sent: Wednesday, 3 August 2011 12:55 AM
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: How to handle the downloads?

Thanks for you note. Then we should implement adownload method
withthe fllowing order:

1. User clicks on the One-Click-Download URL and get the software
(like today on download.openoffice.org).

2. If not, he can use alternative download links (like today on
download.openoffice.org/pther.html).

3. If a special mirror has to be used, the list of all available
mirrors

will help

(like today on

http://distribution.openoffice.org/mirrors/#mirrors;).


Latest with step 3 all users should be able to download something.


Yep, all possible here at the ASF right now.

See www.apache.org/mirrors for our equiv of step 3.


I've already understood that you don't want the OOo mirrors but
that we should use the Apache ones. ;-)


Hi Marcus,

don't count me as 100% on that yet, I want to know more about the
OOo mirrors too.


OK, if you have already questions just ask and I will try to give

answers.


not yet, working on it,




I just didn't want to be maintaining 150+ projects on one mirror
system and
1 project
on another mirror system. maintaining one mirror system is easier,
so If that is possible and our mirroring system can cope, and we can
maybe coax a few more mirrors our way all the better. Some of our
existing mirrors may decide that bandwidth is too much and leave, so
we need replacements.


I don't know about bandwidth but to get an impression about size and
amount please have a look here. This mirror has rsync'ed everything
that

was

released by Sun and Oracle:

http://ftp5.gwdg.de/pub/openoffice/


thanks,




If it makes sense to try and merge these somehow, I want to pursue
that avenue.


A first step should be to look for doubles.


yep,




We may need both for some time, we can not put non ASF releases on
our mirroring system anyway so what we are trying to resolve is from
our first ASF release onwards.


Hm, when looking at this mirror it is already hosting non-Apache

software:


ftp://ftp.uni-erlangen.de/pub/mirrors/

Software from Apache and, e.g., OpenOffice.org is just a subset
within

many

other projects.


Sorry, that isn't what I meant. The mirrors get their content from us
right, we can not provide them with non-asf released software to put
on their mirror copy of our dist tree [1] . They are of course welcome
to provide non-asf mirrors as most of them already do.

[1] - http://apache.org/dist/

Gav...


OK, let me try again. The mirrors can distribute what ever they want but
within the Apache subdirs only ASF licensed software is allowed. Have a

got it

right now?


Spot on.

And the only way non ASF licenses software will get into the Apache subdirs
is
if we put it there in the first place.
A project makes a release and puts the files of that release into a specific
area of
svn. That then syncs up with our main dist area, mirrors then sync up from
there.


Do we have to commit our binary files into SVN? I hope not. ;-)


IOW, the pre-existing mirror system for OOo needs to continue and be
referred to
in documentation and 'older releases' page so that folks can get pre-asf
released
versions of OOo from there. Only new releases from now onwards developed
here
at ASF will be put into our release/dist areas.


Yes, sounds a reasonable separation.

However, when we don't migrate our Mirrorbrain load balancer, then we 
need a new method to choose an appropriate mirror as the current 
download.cgi works only for ASF mirrors.



Here is the big question.

As long as the Apache hosted version of download.openoffice.org points to 
mirrors with already existing OOo releases that were put on the mirrors by 
Oracle/Sun then we are A-OK? Correct?

If so, then I think we are good to go as long as it is clear what is AL2.0 and 
what is not.

Then the implication is that the magic on the download pages should clearly 
indicate AL2.0 or legacy - maybe with color, a title change and an Apache 
feather icon.

Is that enough for us to keep JFDI?

Regards,
Dave


Marcus




Am 08/02/2011 04:38 PM,

Re: Japanese site, wiki, forum and mailing lists (was Refactoring the brand: Apache ooo + OpenOffice.org?)

2011-08-04 Thread Terry Ellison


Hi Khirano,

+1 to Marcus comments.  I am working with the rest of the project to 
migrate the forums and the wiki as-is for now.


I don't know of any plans to change the forum operating model materially 
.  As far as the wiki goes in the medium to longer term, the project may 
decide to move some material to cwiki, but this is work in progress.


Regards Terry

Hi all,

All the contents of Japanese site[1], wiki[2], forum[3], mailing
lists[4] are essential assets to create a new Japanese OpenOffice.org
[1] http://ja.openoffice.org/
[2] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex/JA/
[3] http://user.services.openoffice.org/ja/forum/
[4] http://openoffice.org/projects/ja/lists

If Japanese users and contributors would like to keep them all as is,
to migrate them to Apache successfully, what would you like to know
about the Japanese site, the Japanese wiki, the Japanese forum and
Japanese mailing list?

Thanks,
khirano

Re: Access to wiki

2011-08-04 Thread Aleksey Harlamenkov

Hi all!
My name is Alex Harlamenkov.

I support the proposal Jean Hollis Weber.

The experience of creating a Russian zone of the wiki. Anonymous Members of
wiki:
* Used a wiki for personal goals,
* Creating low-quality content,
* Taken away users to their sites by a references.

To eliminate the abuses created strict rules:
* Prohibiting the diversion of users from the project site,
* Requiring disclosure of participants and confirmation of their
qualifications,
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/RU/rules/regulations_of_qualification_level
* Required explicit publications signing the actual name of the author.

Rules have been translated into English:
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/RU/rules

All the authors of the Russian zone revealed their data:
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/RU/statistics/authors

All the authors follow the rules. All the authors are qualified.

The results of applying the rules:
* High quality content;
* The absence of war among the authors of edits;
* 3rd place among the most visited national wiki pages for 1 year
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Wiki/statistics

Was detected one problem. Complaints of anonymous participants to managers
of project . The rules are very strict.

The OOo-wiki is a source of information, not a collection of external links.


About me.
My profile on the wiki: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:Sancho

* I own deep knowledge of technology, Wiki;
* I own deep knowledge of technical terminology and legal and regulatory
framework of the Russian language;
* I own a deep knowledge of OpenOffice.org and ODF.

I am developer of structure of Russian wiki, the designer of automated
publishing opinion articles wiki with one click.

I'm an editor of five books on OpenOffice.org in Russian issued in hard copy
and electronic form;
I am the author of training courses for OpenOffice.org and IBM Lotus
Symphony.

Aleksey E. Harlamenkov
the company Infra-Resource
www.i-rs.ru, Moscow, Russia.




2011/8/4 Jean Hollis Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com

 I've got completely lost in all the mutations of the Refactoring
 thread, and don't recall all that has been said, so please forgive me if
 what I'm about to suggest has been dealt with already.

 Two low-barrier methods I have seen work quite successfully on wikis,
 forums, and similar sites are:

 1) People must ask for an account; they can't self-subscribe. Nothing is
 required except a few words about who you are and why you want an
 account. Any one of several people authorised to approve or reject these
 requests can deal with them expeditiously. Very few spammers, in my
 experience, take the trouble to actually request accounts.

 2) Alternatively, or in addition, the first X edits/ contributions/
 whatever are moderated by a group of people, any one of whom can approve
 or reject the items. After X acceptable contributions, the person is
 then allowed to edit the wiki without further supervision -- until or
 unless they start posting inappropriate material such as spam. Again,
 very few spammers will take the trouble to post some useful info before
 going into spam mode.

 These methods deal with the vast majority, if not all, of the concerns I
 have seen Rob expressing about systems with no control at all, but at
 the same time they do not require more time or commitment on the
 contributors' part to be authorised to participate.

 AFAIK, most wikis  similar sites provide some way to limit the editing
 of specific pages to a smaller group of people (admins or whatever).

 --Jean

Re: Apache BarCamp - Oxford University Club, Sep 11

On 4 August 2011 04:32, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
 That's one of the greatest *camp event pages I've seen.

:-))

We have a great team here in Oxford. We kicked them off three years
ago. A local organisation underwrote all the initial costs which
allowed a team to come together without worrying about money (but we
still get sponsors and try not to spend the underwriters money, that
way it's there for another year).  We also had some great mentors on
our first Barcamp.

Each year since then team has grown and the amount of sponsorship has
increased. The ASF now underwrites the costs (you wouldn't believe how
difficult it was to get the ASF to do that - we're an extremely
conservative bunch).

The model we followed in Oxford is now being replicated wherever and
whenever we can. If someone wants to run a BarcampApache (or other
types of events) all you need to do is contact the Conference
Committee. For some details of how it works see
http://wiki.apache.org/concom-planning/ConComSupportedEvents

 The extensive directions and great maps have me seriously regret I
 won't be walking any of those streets in September.

If you need justification coming to Oxford we also have a great
conference the week before http://transfersummit.com - they are sister
events.

Ross

Re: Access to wiki

2011-08-04 Thread TerryE


On 04/08/11 03:32, Jean Hollis Weber wrote:

I've got completely lost in all the mutations of the Refactoring
thread, and don't recall all that has been said, so please forgive me if
what I'm about to suggest has been dealt with already.

Two low-barrier methods I have seen work quite successfully on wikis,
forums, and similar sites are:

1) People must ask for an account; they can't self-subscribe. Nothing is
required except a few words about who you are and why you want an
account. Any one of several people authorised to approve or reject these
requests can deal with them expeditiously. Very few spammers, in my
experience, take the trouble to actually request accounts.
We need to implement this in a way which sits within MediaWiki 
functionality and complies with the goals.


One way would be

   * to allow the normal self-registration and optional email address
 with email verification
   * and have a new wiki role, say contributor (or is this
 contributer in US-speak?).
   * guest have no write access
   * registered users can write to User and User_talk namespaces but to
 no others
   * registered users can request to become a Contributor, but the must
 have completed their User page, verified their email address and
 confirmed that all future edits to the Main or Talk namespaces are
 made under licence (CCA AL2 or whatever we decide.
   * the granting of Contributor is done by the bureaucrats.
   * The Main and Talk pages contain reference content.
   * There is a standard disclaimer that user/user talk is user content
 is user content
   * We would still need main and user namespace guidelines TOUs.

This might seem a little convolved, but this can be configured with std 
MW/extension functionality.

2) Alternatively, or in addition, the first X edits/ contributions/
whatever are moderated by a group of people, any one of whom can approve
or reject the items. After X acceptable contributions, the person is
then allowed to edit the wiki without further supervision -- until or
unless they start posting inappropriate material such as spam. Again,
very few spammers will take the trouble to post some useful info before
going into spam mode.

These methods deal with the vast majority, if not all, of the concerns I
have seen Rob expressing about systems with no control at all, but at
the same time they do not require more time or commitment on the
contributors' part to be authorised to participate.

AFAIK, most wikis  similar sites provide some way to limit the editing
of specific pages to a smaller group of people (admins or whatever).

--Jean

We could add another committer layer so that contributer (but not 
committer) edits are moderated


However, I suspect that a trust-but-verify attitude is easier for 
everyone.  When we catch contributers deliberately abusing the rules, 
then we can always back out their changes and remove contributer 
status.  This is similar to our forum model and works well there.


Regards
Terry

Re: Apache BarCamp - Oxford University Club, Sep 11

2011-08-04 Thread Ian Lynch

On 4 August 2011 10:00, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:

 On 4 August 2011 04:32, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org
 wrote:
  That's one of the greatest *camp event pages I've seen.


I just requested sign up. Great since its relatively local for me :-) Well
closer than Ecuador which is my next OOo related trip after that or even
Granada which is the one immediately before.

-- 
Ian

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ)

www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940

The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth,
Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and
Wales.

Re: Apache BarCamp - Oxford University Club, Sep 11

On 4 August 2011 10:09, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 4 August 2011 10:00, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:

 On 4 August 2011 04:32, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org
 wrote:
  That's one of the greatest *camp event pages I've seen.


 I just requested sign up. Great since its relatively local for me :-) Well
 closer than Ecuador which is my next OOo related trip after that or even
 Granada which is the one immediately before.

Well that saves me mailing you personally - it'll be great to see you again.

Ross


 --
 Ian

 Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ)

 www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940

 The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth,
 Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and
 Wales.




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

Re: Access to wiki

2011-08-04 Thread Jean Weber

On 04/08/2011, at 19:04, TerryE o...@ellisons.org.uk wrote:

 On 04/08/11 03:32, Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
 I've got completely lost in all the mutations of the Refactoring
 thread, and don't recall all that has been said, so please forgive me if
 what I'm about to suggest has been dealt with already.
 
 Two low-barrier methods I have seen work quite successfully on wikis,
 forums, and similar sites are:
 
 1) People must ask for an account; they can't self-subscribe. Nothing is
 required except a few words about who you are and why you want an
 account. Any one of several people authorised to approve or reject these
 requests can deal with them expeditiously. Very few spammers, in my
 experience, take the trouble to actually request accounts.
 We need to implement this in a way which sits within MediaWiki functionality 
 and complies with the goals.
 
 One way would be
 
   * to allow the normal self-registration and optional email address
 with email verification
   * and have a new wiki role, say contributor (or is this
 contributer in US-speak?).
   * guest have no write access
   * registered users can write to User and User_talk namespaces but to
 no others
   * registered users can request to become a Contributor, but the must
 have completed their User page, verified their email address and
 confirmed that all future edits to the Main or Talk namespaces are
 made under licence (CCA AL2 or whatever we decide.
   * the granting of Contributor is done by the bureaucrats.
   * The Main and Talk pages contain reference content.
   * There is a standard disclaimer that user/user talk is user content
 is user content
   * We would still need main and user namespace guidelines TOUs.
 
 This might seem a little convolved, but this can be configured with std 
 MW/extension functionality.
 2) Alternatively, or in addition, the first X edits/ contributions/
 whatever are moderated by a group of people, any one of whom can approve
 or reject the items. After X acceptable contributions, the person is
 then allowed to edit the wiki without further supervision -- until or
 unless they start posting inappropriate material such as spam. Again,
 very few spammers will take the trouble to post some useful info before
 going into spam mode.
 
 These methods deal with the vast majority, if not all, of the concerns I
 have seen Rob expressing about systems with no control at all, but at
 the same time they do not require more time or commitment on the
 contributors' part to be authorised to participate.
 
 AFAIK, most wikis  similar sites provide some way to limit the editing
 of specific pages to a smaller group of people (admins or whatever).
 
 --Jean
 
 We could add another committer layer so that contributer (but not committer) 
 edits are moderated
 
 However, I suspect that a trust-but-verify attitude is easier for everyone.  
 When we catch contributers deliberately abusing the rules, then we can always 
 back out their changes and remove contributer status.  This is similar to our 
 forum model and works well there.
 
 Regards
 Terry


You probably know more about this than I do, but my understanding is that the 
current OOo wiki has an extension installed that does what I was suggesting in 
option 2, but the extension has not been implemented.  See:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs and specifically:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs#Automatic_user_promotion

--Jean

RE: [odftk-dev] request help on ODF data signature issues

2011-08-04 Thread Hanssens Bart

Hi,

As far as I can tell, these are known implementation issues. 
OOo (and most of the other products based on that code base) do not follow the 
spec IMHO.

See also

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39657 (ds namespace in LibreOffice)
http://openoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107864 (ds namespace in OOo)
http://openoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66276 (multiple X509Certificate  
in OOo)
http://openoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108286 


Best regards

Bart



From: Biao Han [mailto:hanb...@cn.ibm.com] 
Sent: donderdag 4 augustus 2011 11:19
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: d...@odftoolkit.odftoolkit.org
Subject: [odftk-dev] request help on ODF data signature issues

Hi all,

I am the Apache ODF Toolkit developer and working on ODF data signature 
feature. Several issues need to help.

1. Different from other xml file, such as content.xml, why 
documentsignatures.xml is not namespace aware? For example, Signature 
element, only the local name Signature, not including ds namespace.
2. Why Open Office generates three same content X509Certificate elements for 
X509Data in documentsignatures.xml? 
3. How to generate XML ID datatype value? UDDI is too short...
OpenOffice ID_003a00a40036005c0099001b004900a400960062003000c500f900e300af00f7
UDDI ID_79200773-ec61-43d5-b079-a26a081bfb08

Thanks  Regards

Biao Han (Devin)
SOA Standards Growth, Emerging Technology Institute(ETI), IBM China Software 
Development Laboratory
Tel:(86-10)82450541
Email: hanb...@cn.ibm.com
Address: 3/F Ring Building, No.28 Building, Zhong Guan Cun Software Park, No. 8 
Dong Bei Wang West Road, ShangDi, Haidian District, Beijing, P.R.C.100193

request help on ODF data signature issues

2011-08-04 Thread Biao Han


Hi all,

I am the Apache ODF Toolkit developer and working on ODF data signature
feature. Several issues need to help.

1. Different from other xml file, such as content.xml, why
documentsignatures.xml is not namespace aware? For example, Signature
element, only the local name Signature, not including ds namespace.
2. Why Open Office generates three same content X509Certificate elements
for X509Data in documentsignatures.xml?
3. How to generate XML ID datatype value? UDDI is too short...
 OpenOffice
ID_003a00a40036005c0099001b004900a400960062003000c500f900e300af00f7
 UDDI ID_79200773-ec61-43d5-b079-a26a081bfb08

Thanks  Regards

Biao Han (Devin)
SOA Standards Growth, Emerging Technology Institute(ETI), IBM China
Software Development Laboratory
Tel:(86-10)82450541
Email: hanb...@cn.ibm.com
Address: 3/F Ring Building, No.28 Building, Zhong Guan Cun Software Park,
No. 8 Dong Bei Wang West Road, ShangDi, Haidian District, Beijing,
P.R.C.100193

Re: Who supports OpenOffice.org 3.3.0? (was Refactoring the brand: Apache ooo + OpenOffice.org?)

2011-08-04 Thread Kazunari Hirano

Hi Pedro san,

Thanks.

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Pedro Giffuni giffu...@tutopia.com wrote:
 Hello Katzunari-san;

 This is not an official response but we will continue receiving
 Bug reports and we will provide an upgrade path. This involves
 some limited support: we will likely want to End-Of-Line ASAP
 non-Apache releases, and we won't be distributing them anymore.

I see.  We will announce end-of-life for OpenOffice.org version 3.x.
Until then we will support OpenOffice.org 3.3.0.  Good.
:)

 Like in all opensource projects the code is available and this
 makes it much easier for developers and user communities to
 work together.

Yes, you are right.

Thanks,
khirano

Re: Access to wiki

2011-08-04 Thread TerryE


On 04/08/11 11:31, Jean Weber wrote:

snip

2) Alternatively, or in addition, the first X edits/ contributions/
whatever are moderated by a group of people, any one of whom can approve
or reject the items. After X acceptable contributions, the person is
then allowed to edit the wiki without further supervision -- until or
unless they start posting inappropriate material such as spam. Again,
very few spammers will take the trouble to post some useful info before
going into spam mode.

These methods deal with the vast majority, if not all, of the concerns I
have seen Rob expressing about systems with no control at all, but at
the same time they do not require more time or commitment on the
contributors' part to be authorised to participate.

AFAIK, most wikis   similar sites provide some way to limit the editing
of specific pages to a smaller group of people (admins or whatever).


snip

You probably know more about this than I do, but my understanding is that the 
current OOo wiki has an extension installed that does what I was suggesting in 
option 2, but the extension has not been implemented.  See:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs and specifically:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs#Automatic_user_promotion


Jean

Yes, you are correct.  This is extension can do this and more, but with 
a grey issue like this I feel that a DL based dialogue isn't the best 
way to work out what to do here.  Better we work up a position 
paper/page within the OOOUSERS cwiki laying down the options, their pros 
and cons and then agree a consensus or vote either on the paper itself.  
Use the DL to note the consensus and get wider feedback.


What concerns me is the moderation load involved with such an active 
intervention of review-before-publish.  Perhaps others with moderator 
experience might care to comment?


My worry is that review-before-publish also ignores the reality of how 
people edit wikis.  In general they don't prepare and proof draft 
offline then paste their best and final into the article.  Most do it 
section by section or end up correcting / rewording when they see the 
final version, so one logical edit can comprise half a dozen posts.  I 
am not sure how this would work if you've got to wait for approval 
before the next edit.


We also still need the quality checks: does the email exist, who is 
she/he, etc. and I am not sure how we could include these in an automaic 
bump.


Terry


--Jean

Re: Community outreach to openoffice.org visitors?

2011-08-04 Thread Graham Lauder

On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 09:58:44 Andrew Rist wrote:
 On 8/3/2011 2:27 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
  On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de  wrote:
  Do you mean this?
  
  http://www.openoffic.org
  http://www.openoffic.org/news
  
  Or which landing pages do you have in mind?
  
  An idea: is there any easy way to get it into the header, so it is on
  every page?  Something like News: Apache OpenOffice.org! with a
  link, perhaps to a new blog post.  We could first write a blog post,
  specifically reaching out to OOo community members and telling them
  how they can get involved.  Then, once that is posted, get that link
  out broadly, via the OOo website, wiki, mailing lists, forums,
  Facebook page, Twitter, etc.
 
 +1
 I will take care of updating OOo site when we are ready
 Andrew
 
  It might make sense to wait until we first do the source migration and
  have Bugzilla, the wikis and forums migrated.  But right around then
  would be a good time to put out the word.
  
  
  -Rob


We should probably be looking at a press release as well as part of that. 
We can use the announce@ list simultaneously, the majority of subscribers of 
which, are our target Audience.  If people are subscribed to that list 
anything sent via  that medium can't be considered spam.

Releases should go just to the tech press to remind them that the project is 
alive and kicking, wider than that is probably not necessary at this stage.

Next press release after that should be to announce the Non Apache release 
if there is going to be one (I've made my feelings on this release known but 
we'll see what the consensus is)  

In the past press releases were hacked about with on the private PR list or on 
occasion the also private MarCon list, for obvious reasons.  Is there a policy 
for creating such marketing materials here at Apache.

Cheers
GL



  
  Marcus
  
  Am 08/03/2011 09:29 PM, schrieb Shane Curcuru:
  (Taking the opportunity to Refactor a new thread on OpenOffice.org)
  
  Are there any short term plans to update the main landing pages of the
  existing OpenOffice.org website(s) to provide user awareness of the
  transition of the product and project to Apache?
  
  I don't know 1) how long it will take to actually get this
  transitioned, and 2) how hard it is to update the Oracle-hosted sites,
  but I think it would be really useful to have a few blurbs about the
  future plans of Apache OpenOffice get put on the existing
  OpenOffice.org site sooner rather than later.
  
  The blog feed on the homepage is nice, but not enough.
  
  Or is this too much for the moment?
  
  - Shane

Re: Who supports OpenOffice.org 3.3.0? (was Refactoring the brand: Apache ooo + OpenOffice.org?)


Am 08/04/2011 01:59 PM, schrieb Kazunari Hirano:

Hi Marcus,

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de  wrote:

I would expect that the support is going on as it was before:
community-driven. So the version number doesn't (shouldn't) matter.


It's good if we can continue supporting OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 with
community-driven site, wiki, forum and mailing lists.


There won't be an active distribution of older releases. However, they are
still on our mirrors. 3.3.0, 3.3.0 Beta and some Dev Builds are on the big
mirror network and older release are in our archive. At the moment I don't
see a reason to change this.


I see.  No change until a new OpenOffice.org, Apache OpenOffice.org
(OpenOffice.org 4? :)) becomes stable and we announce end-of-life
for OpenOffice.org 3.x, like:


Yes, no EOL of old versions before we haven't released new things. Which 
product name and number we ever will choose ...



http://openoffice.org/projects/www/lists/announce/archive/2009-12/message/1
http://development.openoffice.org/releases/eol.html


Ah, good found. We can add a message for the 3.x versions when time has 
come.


Marcus

Re: Who supports OpenOffice.org 3.3.0? (was Refactoring the brand: Apache ooo + OpenOffice.org?)


Am 08/04/2011 02:06 PM, schrieb Ian Lynch:

On 4 August 2011 12:59, Kazunari Hiranokhir...@gmail.com  wrote:


Hi Marcus,

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de  wrote:

I would expect that the support is going on as it was before:
community-driven. So the version number doesn't (shouldn't) matter.


It's good if we can continue supporting OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 with
community-driven site, wiki, forum and mailing lists.


There won't be an active distribution of older releases. However, they

are

still on our mirrors. 3.3.0, 3.3.0 Beta and some Dev Builds are on the

big

mirror network and older release are in our archive. At the moment I

don't

see a reason to change this.


I see.  No change until a new OpenOffice.org, Apache OpenOffice.org
(OpenOffice.org 4? :)) becomes stable and we announce end-of-life
for OpenOffice.org 3.x, like:
http://openoffice.org/projects/www/lists/announce/archive/2009-12/message/1
http://development.openoffice.org/releases/eol.html




The king is dead, long live the king :-)

http://bit.ly/pNH4Ph



Great, you've found the headline for the announcement of our first 
Apache release. :-D


Marcus

Re: Japanese site, wiki, forum and mailing lists (was Refactoring the brand: Apache ooo + OpenOffice.org?)

2011-08-04 Thread Kazunari Hirano

Hi Marcus,

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote:
 I would expect that the wiki is migrated as it is.

 [3] http://user.services.openoffice.org/ja/forum/

 Same for the forums.

If we get the wiki and the forum as it is, then we are powerful, we
can do a lot to help users and contributors.
:)

 As you can see not every list is alive. 0, 17 and 102 messages are not a
 strong reason to keep them. ;-)

Yes, you are right.

 Let me try a mapping:

 annou...@ja.openoffice.org      -- new dev and/or discuss list
 comm...@ja.openoffice.org       -- new dev list
 d...@ja.openoffice.org           -- new dev list
 disc...@ja.openoffice.org       -- new discuss list
 documentat...@ja.openoffice.org -- new dev and/or discuss list
 iss...@ja.openoffice.org        -- new dev and/or discuss list
 market...@ja.openoffice.org     -- new discuss list
 q...@ja.openoffice.org            -- new dev list
 transl...@ja.openoffice.org     -- new dev list
 us...@ja.openoffice.org         -- new discuss list

Thanks for your mapping.
:)

 With this we would start with 2 mailing lists. dev and discuss seems to
 be good candidates. More can be seen if they are really necessary.

Sounds good.

 When the OpenOffice support from the Japanese community is really as strong
 as it sounds here, we should support this with more effort.

OK.

Thanks,
khirano

Re: Japanese site, wiki, forum and mailing lists (was Refactoring the brand: Apache ooo + OpenOffice.org?)

2011-08-04 Thread Kazunari Hirano

Hi Terry,

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Terry Ellison te...@ellisons.org.uk wrote:
 +1 to Marcus comments.  I am working with the rest of the project to migrate
 the forums and the wiki as-is for now.

I am happy to know that YOU are working on the wiki and the forum.
:)

 I don't know of any plans to change the forum operating model materially .

I think no change is needed as the model has been working well as far
as I know within Japanese forum.
:)

 As far as the wiki goes in the medium to longer term, the project may
 decide to move some material to cwiki, but this is work in progress.

OK.

Thanks,
khirano





 Regards Terry

 Hi all,

 All the contents of Japanese site[1], wiki[2], forum[3], mailing
 lists[4] are essential assets to create a new Japanese OpenOffice.org
 [1] http://ja.openoffice.org/
 [2] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex/JA/
 [3] http://user.services.openoffice.org/ja/forum/
 [4] http://openoffice.org/projects/ja/lists

 If Japanese users and contributors would like to keep them all as is,
 to migrate them to Apache successfully, what would you like to know
 about the Japanese site, the Japanese wiki, the Japanese forum and
 Japanese mailing list?

 Thanks,
 khirano






-- 
Kazunari Hirano
http://openoffice.exblog.jp/
Tohoku Japan needs your help.

Re: Community outreach to openoffice.org visitors?


On 3 Aug 2011, at 20:29, Shane Curcuru wrote:

 (Taking the opportunity to Refactor a new thread on OpenOffice.org)
 
 Are there any short term plans to update the main landing pages of the 
 existing OpenOffice.org website(s) to provide user awareness of the 
 transition of the product and project to Apache?
 
 I don't know 1) how long it will take to actually get this transitioned, and 
 2) how hard it is to update the Oracle-hosted sites, but I think it would be 
 really useful to have a few blurbs about the future plans of Apache 
 OpenOffice get put on the existing OpenOffice.org site sooner rather than 
 later.
 
 The blog feed on the homepage is nice, but not enough.
 
 Or is this too much for the moment?


It would also be helpful to explain to visitors realistically when they are 
likely to see a new release for their platform and what alternatives to waiting 
exist.

S.

Re: Apache BarCamp - Oxford University Club, Sep 11


On 3 Aug 2011, at 21:02, Donald Harbison wrote:

 I am keen to help facilitate an Apache OpenOffice theme within the upcoming
 Apache BarCamp scheduled for Oxford on September 11[1].
 In particular, it would be great if developers from both OpenOffice and
 LibreOffice could meetup. We can organically shape the event depending on
 who opts in.
 If you choose to do so, join up on the wiki as footnoted. I will definitely
 be there. FWIW. :)

You should go over the the Document Foundation list and invite people if you 
want them to attend, the vast majority do not follow this list. Sadly I doubt I 
can stay over for the weekend (I'll be at the Transfer Summit) so it's not 
really appropriate for me to issue the invite.

S.

Donated hardware (was: Mac buildbot)


On 4 Aug 2011, at 08:47, Florian Effenberger wrote:

 Hello,
 
 maybe someone from this list can help.
 
 Two or three years ago, I organized the loan of a Mac buildbot from an 
 anonymous supporter, which has been kindly hosted at the Sun respectively 
 Oracle office building in Hamburg. It's a Mac Pro machine, if needed I can 
 look up the exact technical details.
 
 The machine's name was buildbot-mac1.services.openoffice.org.
 
 However, for quite a while it seems to be unreachable, and since the recent 
 changes, there's no contact person anymore.
 
 Does anyone know where this machine is at the moment? Since it's a loan where 
 I'm in charge of, I hope someone can help.

This raises an interesting question. I'm aware of other hardware that was 
donated to the project (such as the Pootle server) which presumably should be 
transferred to Apache since it was not Oracle's property. Do we know where this 
equipment is? Where would Apache host such systems?

S.

Re: Donated hardware (was: Mac buildbot)


On 4 Aug 2011, at 14:49, Sam Ruby wrote:

 On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
 
 This raises an interesting question. I'm aware of other hardware that was 
 donated to the project (such as the Pootle server) which presumably should 
 be transferred to Apache since it was not Oracle's property. Do we know 
 where this equipment is? Where would Apache host such systems?
 
 At the moment, all we have is a Software Grant.  While we could chose
 to go back and ask for me (and likely will when it comes to other
 source files that we determine we might need), I see nothing that
 indicates that we have a need to request the transfer of hardware.

While that is true of the hardware Oracle has used for the project (which is 
the vast majority of the hardware in use), you should consider these messages 
from Florian and I as a clear indication that we need to request information on 
the disposition of specific hardware loaned or donated to the project.

S.

Re: Access to wiki

2011-08-04 Thread Rob Weir

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 7:29 AM, TerryE o...@ellisons.org.uk wrote:
 On 04/08/11 11:31, Jean Weber wrote:

 snip

 2) Alternatively, or in addition, the first X edits/ contributions/
 whatever are moderated by a group of people, any one of whom can approve
 or reject the items. After X acceptable contributions, the person is
 then allowed to edit the wiki without further supervision -- until or
 unless they start posting inappropriate material such as spam. Again,
 very few spammers will take the trouble to post some useful info before
 going into spam mode.

 These methods deal with the vast majority, if not all, of the concerns I
 have seen Rob expressing about systems with no control at all, but at
 the same time they do not require more time or commitment on the
 contributors' part to be authorised to participate.

 AFAIK, most wikis   similar sites provide some way to limit the editing
 of specific pages to a smaller group of people (admins or whatever).

 snip

 You probably know more about this than I do, but my understanding is that
 the current OOo wiki has an extension installed that does what I was
 suggesting in option 2, but the extension has not been implemented.  See:
 http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs and specifically:

 http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs#Automatic_user_promotion

 Jean

 Yes, you are correct.  This is extension can do this and more, but with a
 grey issue like this I feel that a DL based dialogue isn't the best way to
 work out what to do here.  Better we work up a position paper/page within
 the OOOUSERS cwiki laying down the options, their pros and cons and then
 agree a consensus or vote either on the paper itself.  Use the DL to note
 the consensus and get wider feedback.

 What concerns me is the moderation load involved with such an active
 intervention of review-before-publish.  Perhaps others with moderator
 experience might care to comment?


The general approach at Apache is to grant trust once merit has been
shown.  So we should be liberal in granting additional rights to
contributors who make consistent, high quality contributions.  If
moderation is a bottleneck then it shows that we're not distributing
power efficiently.

 My worry is that review-before-publish also ignores the reality of how
 people edit wikis.  In general they don't prepare and proof draft offline
 then paste their best and final into the article.  Most do it section by
 section or end up correcting / rewording when they see the final version, so
 one logical edit can comprise half a dozen posts.  I am not sure how this
 would work if you've got to wait for approval before the next edit.

 We also still need the quality checks: does the email exist, who is she/he,
 etc. and I am not sure how we could include these in an automaic bump.

 Terry

 --Jean

Re: Access to wiki


On 4 Aug 2011, at 14:56, Rob Weir wrote:

 On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 7:29 AM, TerryE o...@ellisons.org.uk wrote:
 On 04/08/11 11:31, Jean Weber wrote:
 
 snip
 
 2) Alternatively, or in addition, the first X edits/ contributions/
 whatever are moderated by a group of people, any one of whom can approve
 or reject the items. After X acceptable contributions, the person is
 then allowed to edit the wiki without further supervision -- until or
 unless they start posting inappropriate material such as spam. Again,
 very few spammers will take the trouble to post some useful info before
 going into spam mode.
 
 These methods deal with the vast majority, if not all, of the concerns I
 have seen Rob expressing about systems with no control at all, but at
 the same time they do not require more time or commitment on the
 contributors' part to be authorised to participate.
 
 AFAIK, most wikis   similar sites provide some way to limit the editing
 of specific pages to a smaller group of people (admins or whatever).
 
 snip
 
 You probably know more about this than I do, but my understanding is that
 the current OOo wiki has an extension installed that does what I was
 suggesting in option 2, but the extension has not been implemented.  See:
 http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs and specifically:
 
 http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs#Automatic_user_promotion
 
 Jean
 
 Yes, you are correct.  This is extension can do this and more, but with a
 grey issue like this I feel that a DL based dialogue isn't the best way to
 work out what to do here.  Better we work up a position paper/page within
 the OOOUSERS cwiki laying down the options, their pros and cons and then
 agree a consensus or vote either on the paper itself.  Use the DL to note
 the consensus and get wider feedback.
 
 What concerns me is the moderation load involved with such an active
 intervention of review-before-publish.  Perhaps others with moderator
 experience might care to comment?
 
 
 The general approach at Apache is to grant trust once merit has been
 shown.  So we should be liberal in granting additional rights to
 contributors who make consistent, high quality contributions.  If
 moderation is a bottleneck then it shows that we're not distributing
 power efficiently.

Given Jean's next paragraph, how would a potential contributor be able to 
establish that reputation? 

 
 My worry is that review-before-publish also ignores the reality of how
 people edit wikis.  In general they don't prepare and proof draft offline
 then paste their best and final into the article.  Most do it section by
 section or end up correcting / rewording when they see the final version, so
 one logical edit can comprise half a dozen posts.  I am not sure how this
 would work if you've got to wait for approval before the next edit.
 
 We also still need the quality checks: does the email exist, who is she/he,
 etc. and I am not sure how we could include these in an automaic bump.
 
 Terry
 
 --Jean

Re: Apache BarCamp - Oxford University Club, Sep 11

2011-08-04 Thread Ian Lynch

On 4 August 2011 14:33, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:


 On 3 Aug 2011, at 21:02, Donald Harbison wrote:

  I am keen to help facilitate an Apache OpenOffice theme within the
 upcoming
  Apache BarCamp scheduled for Oxford on September 11[1].
  In particular, it would be great if developers from both OpenOffice and
  LibreOffice could meetup. We can organically shape the event depending on
  who opts in.
  If you choose to do so, join up on the wiki as footnoted. I will
 definitely
  be there. FWIW. :)

 You should go over the the Document Foundation list and invite people if
 you want them to attend, the vast majority do not follow this list. Sadly I
 doubt I can stay over for the weekend (I'll be at the Transfer Summit) so
 it's not really appropriate for me to issue the invite.


I can post the details there if it helps.

-- 
Ian

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ)

www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940

The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth,
Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and
Wales.

Re: Donated hardware (was: Mac buildbot)

2011-08-04 Thread Andre Schnabel

Hi Sam,

 Von: Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net

 On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
 
 
  This raises an interesting question. I'm aware of other hardware that
 was donated to the project (such as the Pootle server) which presumably
 should be transferred to Apache since it was not Oracle's property. Do we know
 where this equipment is? Where would Apache host such systems?
 
 At the moment, all we have is a Software Grant.  While we could chose
 to go back and ask for me (and likely will when it comes to other
 source files that we determine we might need), I see nothing that
 indicates that we have a need to request the transfer of hardware.


I think, people who know about such hardware are  here on the list 
already, so it should be quite easy to get answers. I'm not speaking
about Oracle hardware but of donations to the OOo project (like the
mac build bot mentioned by Florian) or servers payed from donated money
like the pootle server:

http://openoffice.org/projects/council/lists/budget/archive/2010-06/message/10

Although there might be no urgent need of those servers, it might be
worth to ask if these resources can be used (or how they are currently
used).


regards,

André

Re: Access to wiki

2011-08-04 Thread Rob Weir

On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Jean Hollis Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote:
 I've got completely lost in all the mutations of the Refactoring
 thread, and don't recall all that has been said, so please forgive me if
 what I'm about to suggest has been dealt with already.


Thanks for starting a new thread.

 Two low-barrier methods I have seen work quite successfully on wikis,
 forums, and similar sites are:

 1) People must ask for an account; they can't self-subscribe. Nothing is
 required except a few words about who you are and why you want an
 account. Any one of several people authorised to approve or reject these
 requests can deal with them expeditiously. Very few spammers, in my
 experience, take the trouble to actually request accounts.


I think it depends more on permissions than accounts.  So if the basic
user account allows you to write to a comment page, or watch a page
to be notified of changes, etc., I think these are actions we can
safely permit to anyone.  These are analogous to what a user can do on
any Apache list.  They can join the list, post to the list, ask
questions, submit (via the list) corrections to the website and
patches to the code, for review.  What they cannot do is change the
website and code directly.  Those rights are reserved to committers,
those who are trusted to do those tasks and elected by the PPMC.

So the wiki is a different tool.  It makes some things easier.  The
affordances of a wiki (as the design people would say) is the easy
ability to do collaborative editing of hypertext.  But the qualities
of the tool should not (IMHO) change our fundamental orientation to
the different roles of contributors and committers. Of course, these
roles will map differently to different tools, based on the
capabilities of those tools.  But the roles are part of how Apache
works.

So I think you are asking the right questions.  One useful way of
thinking of it (to me at least) is asking how the capabilities of the
tool map to Apache Project roles:

1) User
2) Developer (also called Contributor)
2) Committer
3) PMC member

See: http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles


 2) Alternatively, or in addition, the first X edits/ contributions/
 whatever are moderated by a group of people, any one of whom can approve
 or reject the items. After X acceptable contributions, the person is
 then allowed to edit the wiki without further supervision -- until or
 unless they start posting inappropriate material such as spam. Again,
 very few spammers will take the trouble to post some useful info before
 going into spam mode.

 These methods deal with the vast majority, if not all, of the concerns I
 have seen Rob expressing about systems with no control at all, but at
 the same time they do not require more time or commitment on the
 contributors' part to be authorised to participate.


The other set of concerns I had was with respect to content license.
Today we seem to have a mix of 4 different licenses for contributed
content, as well as content that does not have any evident license
attached to it.  I realize cleaning up the past is nearly impossible,
But is there anything we can do better going forward?

In particular, please note that I'd like to encourage IBM
contributions of documentation to the project, along with our Symphony
work.  For example, we have doc related to enterprise deployment and
this is applicable to OpenOffice as well as Symphony.  But if we
contribute this under Apache 2.0 and then it is edited by anonymous
(or pseudonymous) users who have not signed the iCLA, then our
contributions can be immediately contaminated by unlicensed (or
incompatibly licensed) changes, making it impossible for us to use
future revisions of own doc.  As you can imagine, that would make it
very difficult for us, or any other corporation, to collaborate on
documentation.

So that's the essential trade-off.  If we require iCLA for substantial
content contributors, then you will cause some contributors to stop
participating  But if you don't require an iCLA, then you will inhibit
participation from corporations.  And note that this is true for all
reusable content in the project.  So code, help, documentation and
translations.  If we want participation from corporations then we need
to have the means to establish and maintain the pedigree of the
contributions under a consistent license (or set of compatible
licenses).


 AFAIK, most wikis  similar sites provide some way to limit the editing
 of specific pages to a smaller group of people (admins or whatever).

 --Jean

Re: Apache BarCamp - Oxford University Club, Sep 11

On 4 August 2011 15:14, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 4 August 2011 14:33, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:


 On 3 Aug 2011, at 21:02, Donald Harbison wrote:

  I am keen to help facilitate an Apache OpenOffice theme within the
 upcoming
  Apache BarCamp scheduled for Oxford on September 11[1].
  In particular, it would be great if developers from both OpenOffice and
  LibreOffice could meetup. We can organically shape the event depending on
  who opts in.
  If you choose to do so, join up on the wiki as footnoted. I will
 definitely
  be there. FWIW. :)

 You should go over the the Document Foundation list and invite people if
 you want them to attend, the vast majority do not follow this list. Sadly I
 doubt I can stay over for the weekend (I'll be at the Transfer Summit) so
 it's not really appropriate for me to issue the invite.


 I can post the details there if it helps.

Yes please.

This is a BarCamp. What happens there is defined by the people who
attend. The schedule is not defined until the day itself, so this is a
great opportunity for a neutral space to explore whatever comes to
mind.

The only reason Apache is in the title is because the ASF underwrite
the fixed costs. Please encourage the LibreOffice people to attend, I
am sure there are people there that know what a barcamp is and how
they work.

Ross

Re: Donated hardware

2011-08-04 Thread Martin Hollmichel


Hi,

some of the old fellows of the OpenOffice.org project may remember the 
CC and TeamOpenOffice.org e.V. sponsoring the project. Team OOo is still 
committed to contribute to the OpenOffice code base is and is looking 
forward to help with the old resources like the Mac Buildbot or the 
pootle server or even donating more resources.


Martin

Am 04.08.2011 16:17, schrieb Andre Schnabel:

Hi Sam,


Von: Sam Rubyru...@intertwingly.net
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Simon Phippssi...@webmink.com  wrote:


This raises an interesting question. I'm aware of other hardware that

was donated to the project (such as the Pootle server) which presumably
should be transferred to Apache since it was not Oracle's property. Do we know
where this equipment is? Where would Apache host such systems?

At the moment, all we have is a Software Grant.  While we could chose
to go back and ask for me (and likely will when it comes to other
source files that we determine we might need), I see nothing that
indicates that we have a need to request the transfer of hardware.


I think, people who know about such hardware are  here on the list
already, so it should be quite easy to get answers. I'm not speaking
about Oracle hardware but of donations to the OOo project (like the
mac build bot mentioned by Florian) or servers payed from donated money
like the pootle server:

http://openoffice.org/projects/council/lists/budget/archive/2010-06/message/10

Although there might be no urgent need of those servers, it might be
worth to ask if these resources can be used (or how they are currently
used).


regards,

André

Re: [odftk-dev] Re: request help on ODF data signature issues

2011-08-04 Thread robert_weir

So, from the ODF Toolkit perspective, I think it would be best if we had a 
flag that the programmer could set, to make it operate in standards mode 
or hacks mode or something like that.  It is useful to have a reference 
implementation mode where it follows the standard strictly.  This could 
be used for interop testing with other products.  And it is also useful to 
have a mode that is compatible with current OOo/LO.

-Rob

Hanssens Bart bart.hanss...@fedict.be wrote on 08/04/2011 05:39:32 AM:

 From: Hanssens Bart bart.hanss...@fedict.be
 To: d...@odftoolkit.odftoolkit.org d...@odftoolkit.odftoolkit.org,
 ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
 Date: 08/04/2011 05:40 AM
 Subject: [odftk-dev] Re: request help on ODF data signature issues
 
 Hi,
 
 As far as I can tell, these are known implementation issues. 
 OOo (and most of the other products based on that code base) do not 
 follow the spec IMHO.
 
 See also
 
 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39657 (ds namespace in 
 LibreOffice)
 http://openoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107864 (ds namespace in 
OOo)
 http://openoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66276 (multiple 
 X509Certificate  in OOo)
 http://openoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108286 
 
 
 Best regards
 
 Bart
 
 
 
 From: Biao Han [mailto:hanb...@cn.ibm.com] 
 Sent: donderdag 4 augustus 2011 11:19
 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
 Cc: d...@odftoolkit.odftoolkit.org
 Subject: [odftk-dev] request help on ODF data signature issues
 
 Hi all,
 
 I am the Apache ODF Toolkit developer and working on ODF data 
 signature feature. Several issues need to help.
 
 1. Different from other xml file, such as content.xml, why 
 documentsignatures.xml is not namespace aware? For example, 
 Signature element, only the local name Signature, not including 
 ds namespace.
 2. Why Open Office generates three same content X509Certificate 
 elements for X509Data in documentsignatures.xml? 
 3. How to generate XML ID datatype value? UDDI is too short...
 OpenOffice 
ID_003a00a40036005c0099001b004900a400960062003000c500f900e300af00f7
 UDDI ID_79200773-ec61-43d5-b079-a26a081bfb08
 
 Thanks  Regards
 
 Biao Han (Devin)
 SOA Standards Growth, Emerging Technology Institute(ETI), IBM China 
 Software Development Laboratory
 Tel:(86-10)82450541
 Email: hanb...@cn.ibm.com
 Address: 3/F Ring Building, No.28 Building, Zhong Guan Cun Software 
 Park, No. 8 Dong Bei Wang West Road, ShangDi, Haidian District, 
 Beijing, P.R.C.100193

RE: [odftk-dev] Re: request help on ODF data signature issues

2011-08-04 Thread Hanssens Bart

Dare I mention quirks mode ? :-)

In that case, I'd strongly suggest to make the standards mode the default,
not the quirks mode (otherwise it's too easy to let this issue proliferate)

Bart


From: robert_w...@us.ibm.com [robert_w...@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 4:36 PM
To: d...@odftoolkit.odftoolkit.org; ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [odftk-dev] Re: request help on ODF data signature issues

So, from the ODF Toolkit perspective, I think it would be best if we had a
flag that the programmer could set, to make it operate in standards mode
or hacks mode or something like that.  It is useful to have a reference
implementation mode where it follows the standard strictly.  This could
be used for interop testing with other products.  And it is also useful to
have a mode that is compatible with current OOo/LO.

-Rob

Hanssens Bart bart.hanss...@fedict.be wrote on 08/04/2011 05:39:32 AM:

 From: Hanssens Bart bart.hanss...@fedict.be
 To: d...@odftoolkit.odftoolkit.org d...@odftoolkit.odftoolkit.org,
 ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
 Date: 08/04/2011 05:40 AM
 Subject: [odftk-dev] Re: request help on ODF data signature issues

 Hi,

 As far as I can tell, these are known implementation issues.
 OOo (and most of the other products based on that code base) do not
 follow the spec IMHO.

 See also

 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39657 (ds namespace in
 LibreOffice)
 http://openoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107864 (ds namespace in
OOo)
 http://openoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66276 (multiple
 X509Certificate  in OOo)
 http://openoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108286


 Best regards

 Bart

 

 From: Biao Han [mailto:hanb...@cn.ibm.com]
 Sent: donderdag 4 augustus 2011 11:19
 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
 Cc: d...@odftoolkit.odftoolkit.org
 Subject: [odftk-dev] request help on ODF data signature issues

 Hi all,

 I am the Apache ODF Toolkit developer and working on ODF data
 signature feature. Several issues need to help.

 1. Different from other xml file, such as content.xml, why
 documentsignatures.xml is not namespace aware? For example,
 Signature element, only the local name Signature, not including
 ds namespace.
 2. Why Open Office generates three same content X509Certificate
 elements for X509Data in documentsignatures.xml?
 3. How to generate XML ID datatype value? UDDI is too short...
 OpenOffice
ID_003a00a40036005c0099001b004900a400960062003000c500f900e300af00f7
 UDDI ID_79200773-ec61-43d5-b079-a26a081bfb08

 Thanks  Regards

 Biao Han (Devin)
 SOA Standards Growth, Emerging Technology Institute(ETI), IBM China
 Software Development Laboratory
 Tel:(86-10)82450541
 Email: hanb...@cn.ibm.com
 Address: 3/F Ring Building, No.28 Building, Zhong Guan Cun Software
 Park, No. 8 Dong Bei Wang West Road, ShangDi, Haidian District,
 Beijing, P.R.C.100193

Re: Donated hardware

2011-08-04 Thread Ian Lynch

On 4 August 2011 15:28, Martin Hollmichel
martin.hollmic...@googlemail.comwrote:

Hi,

some of the old fellows of the OpenOffice.org project may remember the CC
and TeamOpenOffice.org e.V. sponsoring the project. Team OOo is still
committed to contribute to the OpenOffice code base is and is looking
forward to help with the old resources like the Mac Buildbot or the pootle
server or even donating more resources.

Martin

The OpenOffice.org certification project is also intended to help with this
type of thing. Some promising possibilities now but it will probably take at
least a few months to get some surplus cash.

Am 04.08.2011 16:17, schrieb Andre Schnabel:

Hi Sam,

Von: Sam Rubyru...@intertwingly.net
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Simon Phippssi...@webmink.com wrote:

This raises an interesting question. I'm aware of other hardware that

was donated to the project (such as the Pootle server) which presumably
should be transferred to Apache since it was not Oracle's property. Do we
know
where this equipment is? Where would Apache host such systems?

At the moment, all we have is a Software Grant. While we could chose
to go back and ask for me (and likely will when it comes to other
source files that we determine we might need), I see nothing that
indicates that we have a need to request the transfer of hardware.

I think, people who know about such hardware are here on the list
already, so it should be quite easy to get answers. I'm not speaking
about Oracle hardware but of donations to the OOo project (like the
mac build bot mentioned by Florian) or servers payed from donated money
like the pootle server:

http://openoffice.org/**projects/council/lists/budget/**
archive/2010-06/message/10http://openoffice.org/projects/council/lists/budget/archive/2010-06/message/10

Although there might be no urgent need of those servers, it might be
worth to ask if these resources can be used (or how they are currently
used).

regards,

André

--
Ian

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ)

www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940

The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth,
Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and
Wales.

Re: RE: [odftk-dev] Re: request help on ODF data signature issues

2011-08-04 Thread Wolf Halton

+1 default_mode=standards_compliant

On Aug 4, 2011 10:50 AM, Hanssens Bart bart.hanss...@fedict.be wrote:
 Dare I mention quirks mode ? :-)

 In that case, I'd strongly suggest to make the standards mode the default,
 not the quirks mode (otherwise it's too easy to let this issue
proliferate)

 Bart

 
 From: robert_w...@us.ibm.com [robert_w...@us.ibm.com]
 Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 4:36 PM
 To: d...@odftoolkit.odftoolkit.org; ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
 Subject: [odftk-dev] Re: request help on ODF data signature issues

 So, from the ODF Toolkit perspective, I think it would be best if we had a
 flag that the programmer could set, to make it operate in standards mode
 or hacks mode or something like that. It is useful to have a reference
 implementation mode where it follows the standard strictly. This could
 be used for interop testing with other products. And it is also useful to
 have a mode that is compatible with current OOo/LO.

 -Rob

 Hanssens Bart bart.hanss...@fedict.be wrote on 08/04/2011 05:39:32 AM:

 From: Hanssens Bart bart.hanss...@fedict.be
 To: d...@odftoolkit.odftoolkit.org d...@odftoolkit.odftoolkit.org,
 ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
 Date: 08/04/2011 05:40 AM
 Subject: [odftk-dev] Re: request help on ODF data signature issues

 Hi,

 As far as I can tell, these are known implementation issues.
 OOo (and most of the other products based on that code base) do not
 follow the spec IMHO.

 See also

 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39657 (ds namespace in
 LibreOffice)
 http://openoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107864 (ds namespace in
 OOo)
 http://openoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66276 (multiple
 X509Certificate in OOo)
 http://openoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108286


 Best regards

 Bart

 

 From: Biao Han [mailto:hanb...@cn.ibm.com]
 Sent: donderdag 4 augustus 2011 11:19
 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
 Cc: d...@odftoolkit.odftoolkit.org
 Subject: [odftk-dev] request help on ODF data signature issues

 Hi all,

 I am the Apache ODF Toolkit developer and working on ODF data
 signature feature. Several issues need to help.

 1. Different from other xml file, such as content.xml, why
 documentsignatures.xml is not namespace aware? For example,
 Signature element, only the local name Signature, not including
 ds namespace.
 2. Why Open Office generates three same content X509Certificate
 elements for X509Data in documentsignatures.xml?
 3. How to generate XML ID datatype value? UDDI is too short...
 OpenOffice
 ID_003a00a40036005c0099001b004900a400960062003000c500f900e300af00f7
 UDDI ID_79200773-ec61-43d5-b079-a26a081bfb08

 Thanks  Regards

 Biao Han (Devin)
 SOA Standards Growth, Emerging Technology Institute(ETI), IBM China
 Software Development Laboratory
 Tel:(86-10)82450541
 Email: hanb...@cn.ibm.com
 Address: 3/F Ring Building, No.28 Building, Zhong Guan Cun Software
 Park, No. 8 Dong Bei Wang West Road, ShangDi, Haidian District,
 Beijing, P.R.C.100193

Re: Small question about Apache OpenOffice.org

2011-08-04 Thread Pedro F. Giffuni

Hello Fabien;

We are still currently doing the transition from Oracle (Hg)
to Apache (SVN), and that is taking a long time because the
process requires some care. For the time being you can only
get the OpenOffice.org sources from Oracle as always.

Entually the code will get here:

http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/ooo/trunk/

cheers,

Pedro.

--- On Thu, 8/4/11, Fabien DOBAT fabien.do...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello,
 
 My name is Fabian and I am currently in training with a
 combination of my school that deals with OpenOffice.org.
 I wanted to ask a simple question to you developers: When
 can we download
 the Apache source OpenOffice.org?
 I don't think that you got a specific date, but if you had
 a time scale, I
 will thank you.
 Hoping not to be mistaken for class, I wish you all a good
 day.
 
 Best regards, Fabien.
 
 -- 
 Cordialement,
 Fabien DOBAT*.*

Re: Donated hardware

2011-08-04 Thread Florian Effenberger


Hi Martin,

Martin Hollmichel wrote on 2011-08-04 16:28:

some of the old fellows of the OpenOffice.org project may remember the
CC and TeamOpenOffice.org e.V. sponsoring the project. Team OOo is still
committed to contribute to the OpenOffice code base is and is looking
forward to help with the old resources like the Mac Buildbot or the
pootle server or even donating more resources.


what would be of interest to me is where - in this particular case - the 
machine is currently located. Up to now, I could easily assume it is in 
the Sun/Oracle offices in Hamburg, but where is it now? My latest status 
is that the machine itself was a loan, and that the infrastructure 
budget holders (Stefan Taxhet, Christian Lohmaier and myself) decided to 
buy a few new disks in 2008/2009.


The buildbot has had issues for quite a while, and I guess it would be 
valueable for both projects to have it up and running again soon, that's 
why I am asking.


Florian

--
Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org
Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation
Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108
Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff

Re: Donated hardware

2011-08-04 Thread Christian Lohmaier

Hi *,

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Florian Effenberger
flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote:
 what would be of interest to me is where - in this particular case - the
 machine is currently located. Up to now, I could easily assume it is in the
 Sun/Oracle offices in Hamburg, but where is it now? My latest status is that
 the machine itself was a loan, and that the infrastructure budget holders
 (Stefan Taxhet, Christian Lohmaier and myself) decided to buy a few new
 disks in 2008/2009.
 [...]

To complete this: The machine has been restored into a working state
after the build failures, however it has not been added back to
buildbot/tinderbox as the buildbot master did not report the results
to tinderbox anymore (and I took that as a precondition for
maintaining buildbots/tinderbox slaves myself, and as TDF was also
beginning around that time my personal focus shifted as well..).

So it is functional, with one disk for OS, and two disk in a RAID0 for
building..
(but I cannot access it either, connection times out)
The Mac OSX Server OS (10.6) license that has been donated as well did
expire, thus the it was replaced by the the regular 10.5

ciao
Christian

RE: Access to wiki

2011-08-04 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

The appearance of this being a binary condition is becoming a point of ridicule 
and humor.  Also, I think we are missing how powerful the social dimension is 
(plus the need to maintain a sense of humor about it):
http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/msg07409.html
[The additional humor is about this comment being applied to an un-conference, 
something I'm sure the commenter understood, yet the Apache 
association/stigma/ooo-dev thrash inspires the remark.]

I agree with what goes in releases.  There is no issue there.  Trying to make 
everything that gets contributed be covered under the release requirement for 
the satisfaction of hypothetical downstream corporate use, which is how this is 
very easy to spin, is not going to win us any contributors.  

I much prefer us to deal with this on individual, specific, concrete cases.  As 
long as there is permissive use for big chunks, we need to avoid solving 
problems that we intend not to have, lest the law-of-unintended-consequences 
imposes an unaffordable tax.  With regard to existing materials, we will have 
to simply deal with what those are.

This gets concrete by bringing the user-edited/-contributed portions of 
openoffice.org over onto Apache infrastructure (to ensure its preservation and 
operation) and then looking at the reality of what's there and what the 
adjustments need to be.

 - Dennis

PS: There is the prospect that CC-by is not acceptable to be a Category A 
license because of some misguided provisions concerning modes of 
distribution/performance/use.
 
-Original Message-
From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgard...@opendirective.com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 09:19
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Access to wiki

On 4 August 2011 15:22, Rob Weir apa...@robweir.com wrote:
 The other set of concerns I had was with respect to content license.
 Today we seem to have a mix of 4 different licenses for contributed
 content, as well as content that does not have any evident license
 attached to it.  I realize cleaning up the past is nearly impossible,
 But is there anything we can do better going forward?

 In particular, please note that I'd like to encourage IBM
 contributions of documentation to the project, along with our Symphony
 work.  For example, we have doc related to enterprise deployment and
 this is applicable to OpenOffice as well as Symphony.  But if we
 contribute this under Apache 2.0 and then it is edited by anonymous
 (or pseudonymous) users who have not signed the iCLA, then our
 contributions can be immediately contaminated by unlicensed (or
 incompatibly licensed) changes, making it impossible for us to use
 future revisions of own doc.  As you can imagine, that would make it
 very difficult for us, or any other corporation, to collaborate on
 documentation.

It is for this reason that content that is intended to be part of an
official Apache release needs to be managed under an iCLA.

 So that's the essential trade-off.  If we require iCLA for substantial
 content contributors, then you will cause some contributors to stop
 participating  But if you don't require an iCLA, then you will inhibit
 participation from corporations.  And note that this is true for all
 reusable content in the project.  So code, help, documentation and
 translations.  If we want participation from corporations then we need
 to have the means to establish and maintain the pedigree of the
 contributions under a consistent license (or set of compatible
 licenses).

An approach that works well in some other projects is to use the CMS
for official documentation. This means that write access is limited to
those with an iCLA on file. A wiki is made available for user
generated content where anything goes.

Contributions to the wiki are still under the Apache License V2 and
thus the committers looking after the wiki can make a judgement call
with respect to including content from the wiki in the official
documentation.

This is no different to accepting and applying a patch to code. The
committer has to make ask herself does this patch contain significant
IP, because if it does I need to get an iCLA before applying it.
Furthermore when the committer finds themselves thinking hey, this is
the fifth significant patch from Joe that I've applied with no
changes they should propose them as a committer.

The difference between managing code patches and wiki documentation
tweaks is the fact that the content will diverge over time. So a
strategy would be needed for dealing with that.

Ross

[1] http://webodf.org/

Re: Community outreach to openoffice.org visitors?

2011-08-04 Thread Kay Schenk

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 5:06 AM, Graham Lauder yori...@openoffice.orgwrote:

 On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 09:58:44 Andrew Rist wrote:
  On 8/3/2011 2:27 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
   On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de
  wrote:
   Do you mean this?
  
   http://www.openoffic.org
   http://www.openoffic.org/news
  
   Or which landing pages do you have in mind?
  
   An idea: is there any easy way to get it into the header, so it is on
   every page?  Something like News: Apache OpenOffice.org! with a
   link, perhaps to a new blog post.  We could first write a blog post,
   specifically reaching out to OOo community members and telling them
   how they can get involved.  Then, once that is posted, get that link
   out broadly, via the OOo website, wiki, mailing lists, forums,
   Facebook page, Twitter, etc.
 
  +1
  I will take care of updating OOo site when we are ready
  Andrew
 
   It might make sense to wait until we first do the source migration and
   have Bugzilla, the wikis and forums migrated.  But right around then
   would be a good time to put out the word.
  
  
   -Rob


 We should probably be looking at a press release as well as part of that.
 We can use the announce@ list simultaneously, the majority of subscribers
 of
 which, are our target Audience.  If people are subscribed to that list
 anything sent via  that medium can't be considered spam.


Graham--

Are you talking about annouceme...@openoffice.org? We had a small discussion
about this list a few weeks ago and Marcus pointed out that that list is
moderated . So...yes, we should definitely use this and hope whoever IS
the moderator jsut pushes the announcement through. I don't think we got an
answer on this. I'll make some contacts and see what I can determine.


 Releases should go just to the tech press to remind them that the project
 is
 alive and kicking, wider than that is probably not necessary at this stage.

 Next press release after that should be to announce the Non Apache
 release
 if there is going to be one (I've made my feelings on this release known
 but
 we'll see what the consensus is)

 In the past press releases were hacked about with on the private PR list or
 on
 occasion the also private MarCon list, for obvious reasons.  Is there a
 policy
 for creating such marketing materials here at Apache.

 Cheers
 GL



  
   Marcus
  
   Am 08/03/2011 09:29 PM, schrieb Shane Curcuru:
   (Taking the opportunity to Refactor a new thread on OpenOffice.org)
  
   Are there any short term plans to update the main landing pages of
 the
   existing OpenOffice.org website(s) to provide user awareness of the
   transition of the product and project to Apache?
  
   I don't know 1) how long it will take to actually get this
   transitioned, and 2) how hard it is to update the Oracle-hosted
 sites,
   but I think it would be really useful to have a few blurbs about the
   future plans of Apache OpenOffice get put on the existing
   OpenOffice.org site sooner rather than later.
  
   The blog feed on the homepage is nice, but not enough.
  
   Or is this too much for the moment?
  
   - Shane




-- 
---
MzK

If you can keep your head when all others around you
 are losing theirs - maybe you don't fully understand
 the situation!
-- Unknown

Re: Community outreach to openoffice.org visitors?

2011-08-04 Thread Dave Fisher


On Aug 4, 2011, at 11:18 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:

 On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 5:06 AM, Graham Lauder yori...@openoffice.orgwrote:
 
 On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 09:58:44 Andrew Rist wrote:
 On 8/3/2011 2:27 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
 On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de
 wrote:
 Do you mean this?
 
 http://www.openoffic.org
 http://www.openoffic.org/news
 
 Or which landing pages do you have in mind?
 
 An idea: is there any easy way to get it into the header, so it is on
 every page?  Something like News: Apache OpenOffice.org! with a
 link, perhaps to a new blog post.  We could first write a blog post,
 specifically reaching out to OOo community members and telling them
 how they can get involved.  Then, once that is posted, get that link
 out broadly, via the OOo website, wiki, mailing lists, forums,
 Facebook page, Twitter, etc.
 
 +1
 I will take care of updating OOo site when we are ready
 Andrew
 
 It might make sense to wait until we first do the source migration and
 have Bugzilla, the wikis and forums migrated.  But right around then
 would be a good time to put out the word.
 
 
 -Rob
 
 
 We should probably be looking at a press release as well as part of that.
 We can use the announce@ list simultaneously, the majority of subscribers
 of
 which, are our target Audience.  If people are subscribed to that list
 anything sent via  that medium can't be considered spam.
 
 
 Graham--
 
 Are you talking about annouceme...@openoffice.org? We had a small discussion
 about this list a few weeks ago and Marcus pointed out that that list is
 moderated . So...yes, we should definitely use this and hope whoever IS
 the moderator jsut pushes the announcement through. I don't think we got an
 answer on this. I'll make some contacts and see what I can determine.

Kay,

Is us...@openoffice.org moderated? If so that could why nothing has come 
through in a week.

Regards,
Dave

 
 
 Releases should go just to the tech press to remind them that the project
 is
 alive and kicking, wider than that is probably not necessary at this stage.
 
 Next press release after that should be to announce the Non Apache
 release
 if there is going to be one (I've made my feelings on this release known
 but
 we'll see what the consensus is)
 
 In the past press releases were hacked about with on the private PR list or
 on
 occasion the also private MarCon list, for obvious reasons.  Is there a
 policy
 for creating such marketing materials here at Apache.
 
 Cheers
 GL
 
 
 
 
 Marcus
 
 Am 08/03/2011 09:29 PM, schrieb Shane Curcuru:
 (Taking the opportunity to Refactor a new thread on OpenOffice.org)
 
 Are there any short term plans to update the main landing pages of
 the
 existing OpenOffice.org website(s) to provide user awareness of the
 transition of the product and project to Apache?
 
 I don't know 1) how long it will take to actually get this
 transitioned, and 2) how hard it is to update the Oracle-hosted
 sites,
 but I think it would be really useful to have a few blurbs about the
 future plans of Apache OpenOffice get put on the existing
 OpenOffice.org site sooner rather than later.
 
 The blog feed on the homepage is nice, but not enough.
 
 Or is this too much for the moment?
 
 - Shane
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 ---
 MzK
 
 If you can keep your head when all others around you
 are losing theirs - maybe you don't fully understand
 the situation!
-- Unknown

Moving OOo web: results of fetch-all-web.sh

2011-08-04 Thread Kay Schenk

I just wanted to report that this script worked just fine as near as I can
tell.

The post about the script  has shown up in several places, but placing it as
its own subject seemed appropriate.

Now back to investigating headers/footers.

-- 
---
MzK

If you can keep your head when all others around you
 are losing theirs - maybe you don't fully understand
 the situation!
-- Unknown

Re: Community outreach to openoffice.org visitors?

2011-08-04 Thread Graham Lauder

On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 06:18:33 Kay Schenk wrote:
 On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 5:06 AM, Graham Lauder yori...@openoffice.orgwrote:
  On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 09:58:44 Andrew Rist wrote:
   On 8/3/2011 2:27 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de
   
   wrote:
Do you mean this?

http://www.openoffic.org
http://www.openoffic.org/news

Or which landing pages do you have in mind?

An idea: is there any easy way to get it into the header, so it is on
every page?  Something like News: Apache OpenOffice.org! with a
link, perhaps to a new blog post.  We could first write a blog post,
specifically reaching out to OOo community members and telling them
how they can get involved.  Then, once that is posted, get that link
out broadly, via the OOo website, wiki, mailing lists, forums,
Facebook page, Twitter, etc.
   
   +1
   I will take care of updating OOo site when we are ready
   Andrew
   
It might make sense to wait until we first do the source migration
and have Bugzilla, the wikis and forums migrated.  But right around
then would be a good time to put out the word.


-Rob
  
  We should probably be looking at a press release as well as part of that.
  We can use the announce@ list simultaneously, the majority of subscribers
  of
  which, are our target Audience.  If people are subscribed to that list
  anything sent via  that medium can't be considered spam.
 
 Graham--
 
 Are you talking about annouceme...@openoffice.org? We had a small
 discussion about this list a few weeks ago and Marcus pointed out that
 that list is moderated . So...yes, we should definitely use this and
 hope whoever IS the moderator jsut pushes the announcement through. I
 don't think we got an answer on this. I'll make some contacts and see what
 I can determine.

Hi Kay

Florian was one manager of the list IIRC and of course so was Louis.  Louis is 
on the PPMC now, so unless there has been a change in terms of their abilities 
on the OOo lists then we should be good.

Cheers
GL 


 
  Releases should go just to the tech press to remind them that the project
  is
  alive and kicking, wider than that is probably not necessary at this
  stage.
  
  Next press release after that should be to announce the Non Apache
  release
  if there is going to be one (I've made my feelings on this release known
  but
  we'll see what the consensus is)
  
  In the past press releases were hacked about with on the private PR list
  or on
  occasion the also private MarCon list, for obvious reasons.  Is there a
  policy
  for creating such marketing materials here at Apache.
  
  Cheers
  GL
  
Marcus

Am 08/03/2011 09:29 PM, schrieb Shane Curcuru:
(Taking the opportunity to Refactor a new thread on OpenOffice.org)

Are there any short term plans to update the main landing pages of
  
  the
  
existing OpenOffice.org website(s) to provide user awareness of the
transition of the product and project to Apache?

I don't know 1) how long it will take to actually get this
transitioned, and 2) how hard it is to update the Oracle-hosted
  
  sites,
  
but I think it would be really useful to have a few blurbs about
the future plans of Apache OpenOffice get put on the existing
OpenOffice.org site sooner rather than later.

The blog feed on the homepage is nice, but not enough.

Or is this too much for the moment?

- Shane

Re: Community outreach to openoffice.org visitors?

2011-08-04 Thread Graham Lauder

On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 01:39:23 Shane Curcuru wrote:
 On 8/4/2011 8:06 AM, Graham Lauder wrote:
  On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 09:58:44 Andrew Rist wrote:
  On 8/3/2011 2:27 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
  On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de   
wrote:
 ...snip...
 
  In the past press releases were hacked about with on the private PR list
  or on occasion the also private MarCon list, for obvious reasons.  Is
  there a policy for creating such marketing materials here at Apache.
  
  Cheers
  GL
 
 Apache has a Press team led by the wonderful Sally here:
 
http://www.apache.org/press/
 
 Who tweets regularly:
 
http://twitter.com/TheASF
 
 Any Apache press releases should be coordinated with them on
 pr...@apache.org - once the PPMC here has some specific questions about
 publicity here, you should ping press@ to get a conversation started
 there.
 
 Note that the Apache Incubator has specific policies about press
 releases for incubating projects:
 
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html
 
 In terms of *what* to say, it's up to the project to decide, and
 typically just get any final signoff from press@.  The ASF has a
 corporate press release account and will issue official releases for
 major news from any of our projects.
 
 Oh, and the official ASF boilerplate is available:
 
http://www.apache.org/press/boilerplate/
 
 - Shane


Excellent, thanks for that Shane.  I'll go over these before I work on a draft 
and subscribe to the press list.

Cheers
GL

Re: Access to wiki

On 4 August 2011 18:58, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:

 I much prefer us to deal with this on individual, specific, concrete cases.  
 As long as there is permissive use for big chunks, we need to avoid solving 
 problems that we intend not to have, lest the law-of-unintended-consequences 
 imposes an unaffordable tax.  With regard to existing materials, we will have 
 to simply deal with what those are.

+1

I said This is no different to accepting and applying a patch to code. The
committer has to make ask herself does this patch contain significant
IP, because if it does I need to get an iCLA before applying it.
Furthermore when the committer finds themselves thinking hey, this is
the fifth significant patch from Joe that I've applied with no
changes they should propose them as a committer.

I should have also pointed out that there is rarely value IP in
documentation contributions made via a wiki.

Ross

Re: Community outreach to openoffice.org visitors?

2011-08-04 Thread Jean Weber

On 05/08/2011, at 4:25, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:

 
 Is us...@openoffice.org moderated? If so that could why nothing has come 
 through in a week.
 

Yes, posts to users@ from non-subscribed people are moderated. If posts from 
subscribed people are not coming through, that is probably a different problem.

I note that the d...@documentation.ooo list hasn't been passing any messages 
through for several weeks (only discovered this yesterday). auth...@docs.ooo 
isn't archiving although messages are being distributed. Fortunately we had set 
up a new list on the ODFAuthors domain some time ago, just in case...

So something is definitely wrong with at least some of the lists.

Jean

Migrating the web forums at user.services.openoffice.org to Apache servers

Hi,


I'd like to try and move this particular item to completion.

Reading over the mailing list it is my opinion that their is a
reasonable consensus for the Apache OpenOffice podling to facilitate
continuity of service to the OpenOffice.org Community Fourms located at
http://user.services.openoffice.org by allowing the site:

1: Continue to use this URL

2: Host the phpBB web services on an Apache server.

That use of this URL, for this purpose, is at the sole discretion of the
Apache OpenOffice Podling Project Management Committee (PPMC).

The PPMC has sole discretion for authorizing individuals filling the
role of systems administrator for the site, where access to system level
services are required to perform such tasks. (a login account on the VM,
access to MySQL server, etc)

The PPMC has oversight responsibility and requires prior approval to any
Terms of Use and Privacy Policy statements referenced from and used at
the forums.

The forum web page footer shall maintain a link to the official
OpenOffice.org website, as designated by the PPMC, and to display a mark
(logo) agreed to by the PPMC, for such purpose.

Alright - Actions items here then IMO.

1 - Create a page on the wiki (which one?) with the following:

The names of potential system administrators - 
Terry Ellison
[A second admin TBD]

(The site has operated with 2 and 3 admins to date, it's a good idea IMO
to have at least two people that can handle issues)

2 - A contact point for the Apache Infrastructure team.

(not sure if this would be a person or a role name, but it is important
to document who needs to be contacted if some issue needs escalating)

3 - Review the current English Terms of Use statement and update as
needed and get consensus from PPMC on wording.

4 - Get the English version of the TOU translated for use on the the
other language forums.

5 - Currently the site references a Privacy Policy statement on the
Oracle web site - will need to lockdown exactly where this now needs to
point for Apache.

6 - Acquire new logo(s) for footer and proper link reference.

(currently the footer also has an Oracle logo and links to the Oracle
Open Office site - I'm thinking a generic Apache logo and link to
Apache.org. Any other ideas?)

- Prepare a ballot type email on the question of Apache offering hosting
and authorized sys admins and place it to the PPMC private list for a
vote.

Also, I would be more then happy to take the time to go over the
functioning of the forum with anyone here having questions. 

At the risk of sounding immodest I am proud to have helped with the
Forums in the past, there is a strong group of individuals that have
created a culture at the site which I believe the Apache folks would
find quite recognizable. That the folks their do a good job of offering
end user support to a large number of people in an efficient and cordial
fashion. Feel free to follow up with those questions either in this
mailing list or ping me direct if you prefer.

Does this sound appropriate to everyone here? 
Did I miss anything in anyones mind? 
General comments/thoughts?

Meanwhile, I will proceed to create the wiki page (any suggestions on
where you want to see this), then post back to the thread here with the
link and let's start working down the list of items and getting this
done.

Thanks much for your time,

Drew Jensen

Re: Community outreach to openoffice.org visitors?

2011-08-04 Thread Eike Rathke

Hi Dave,

On Thursday, 2011-08-04 11:25:19 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:

 Is us...@openoffice.org moderated?

Yes, but only for posts from non-subscribed users.

 If so that could why nothing has come through in a week.

Apparently there's no activity on any list. I'm one of the moderators
for the l10n and sc dev lists and there isn't even spam coming through.
I suspect incoming SMTP or some other mail accepting service being
disfunctional. A test mail sent an hour ago so far didn't deliver any
result, not even a bounce.

  Eike

-- 
 PGP/OpenPGP/GnuPG encrypted mail preferred in all private communication.
 Key ID: 0x293C05FD - 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3  9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD


pgpWlHZ6A27qp.pgp
Description: PGP signature

test message - please ignore

2011-08-04 Thread Carl Marcum


test message - please ignore

I need to check if my mail is getting to the list.

Re: test message - please ignore

2011-08-04 Thread Donald Whytock

There are many places where this is an open invitation to derision,
sarcasm and childishness.

Good thing we don't have any of that here.

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Carl Marcum cmar...@apache.org wrote:
 test message - please ignore

 I need to check if my mail is getting to the list.

RE: Migrating the web forums at user.services.openoffice.org to Apache servers

2011-08-04 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

+1 and nice work items.

One thing: Put simply, any voting on non-personnel matters is here on ooo-dev.  
Anyone can vote, the PPMC-member votes are the binding ones.  Better yet is if 
we find consensus and don't require a vote at all.  

Special karma (e.g., authorizing administrator rights) is a different matter 
and we'll have to find out how that works from mentors, etc.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: drew [mailto:d...@baseanswers.com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 14:25
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Migrating the web forums at user.services.openoffice.org to Apache 
servers

Hi,


I'd like to try and move this particular item to completion.

Reading over the mailing list it is my opinion that their is a
reasonable consensus for the Apache OpenOffice podling to facilitate
continuity of service to the OpenOffice.org Community Fourms located at
http://user.services.openoffice.org by allowing the site:

1: Continue to use this URL

2: Host the phpBB web services on an Apache server.

That use of this URL, for this purpose, is at the sole discretion of the
Apache OpenOffice Podling Project Management Committee (PPMC).

The PPMC has sole discretion for authorizing individuals filling the
role of systems administrator for the site, where access to system level
services are required to perform such tasks. (a login account on the VM,
access to MySQL server, etc)

The PPMC has oversight responsibility and requires prior approval to any
Terms of Use and Privacy Policy statements referenced from and used at
the forums.

The forum web page footer shall maintain a link to the official
OpenOffice.org website, as designated by the PPMC, and to display a mark
(logo) agreed to by the PPMC, for such purpose.

Alright - Actions items here then IMO.

1 - Create a page on the wiki (which one?) with the following:

The names of potential system administrators - 
Terry Ellison
[A second admin TBD]

(The site has operated with 2 and 3 admins to date, it's a good idea IMO
to have at least two people that can handle issues)

2 - A contact point for the Apache Infrastructure team.

(not sure if this would be a person or a role name, but it is important
to document who needs to be contacted if some issue needs escalating)

3 - Review the current English Terms of Use statement and update as
needed and get consensus from PPMC on wording.

4 - Get the English version of the TOU translated for use on the the
other language forums.

5 - Currently the site references a Privacy Policy statement on the
Oracle web site - will need to lockdown exactly where this now needs to
point for Apache.

6 - Acquire new logo(s) for footer and proper link reference.

(currently the footer also has an Oracle logo and links to the Oracle
Open Office site - I'm thinking a generic Apache logo and link to
Apache.org. Any other ideas?)

- Prepare a ballot type email on the question of Apache offering hosting
and authorized sys admins and place it to the PPMC private list for a
vote.

Also, I would be more then happy to take the time to go over the
functioning of the forum with anyone here having questions. 

At the risk of sounding immodest I am proud to have helped with the
Forums in the past, there is a strong group of individuals that have
created a culture at the site which I believe the Apache folks would
find quite recognizable. That the folks their do a good job of offering
end user support to a large number of people in an efficient and cordial
fashion. Feel free to follow up with those questions either in this
mailing list or ping me direct if you prefer.

Does this sound appropriate to everyone here? 
Did I miss anything in anyones mind? 
General comments/thoughts?

Meanwhile, I will proceed to create the wiki page (any suggestions on
where you want to see this), then post back to the thread here with the
link and let's start working down the list of items and getting this
done.

Thanks much for your time,

Drew Jensen

Re: test message - please ignore

2011-08-04 Thread Rob Weir

List moderators have been working with Carl to debug some list
subscription issues.   I had not considered using the  ooo-dev-sarcasm
command. Does it usually work for you?  I heard it is rarely
effective.

On Aug 4, 2011, at 6:16 PM, Donald Whytock dwhyt...@gmail.com wrote:

 There are many places where this is an open invitation to derision,
 sarcasm and childishness.

 Good thing we don't have any of that here.

 On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Carl Marcum cmar...@apache.org wrote:
 test message - please ignore

 I need to check if my mail is getting to the list.

Re: Migrating the web forums at user.services.openoffice.org to Apache servers

2011-08-04 Thread Christian Lohmaier

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 11:24 PM, drew d...@baseanswers.com wrote:
 Hi,


 I'd like to try and move this particular item to completion.

 Reading over the mailing list it is my opinion that their is a
 reasonable consensus for the Apache OpenOffice podling to facilitate
 continuity of service to the OpenOffice.org Community Fourms located at
 http://user.services.openoffice.org by allowing the site:

 1: Continue to use this URL

 2: Host the phpBB web services on an Apache server.

Will topics regarding LibreOffice be accepted on this forum like it is now?

Or will it be apache-OOo exclusive?

ciao
Christian

Re: Migrating the web forums at user.services.openoffice.org to Apache servers

On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 02:04 +0200, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
 On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 11:24 PM, drew d...@baseanswers.com wrote:
  Hi,
 
 
  I'd like to try and move this particular item to completion.
 
  Reading over the mailing list it is my opinion that their is a
  reasonable consensus for the Apache OpenOffice podling to facilitate
  continuity of service to the OpenOffice.org Community Fourms located at
  http://user.services.openoffice.org by allowing the site:
 
  1: Continue to use this URL
 
  2: Host the phpBB web services on an Apache server.
 
 Will topics regarding LibreOffice be accepted on this forum like it is now?
 
 Or will it be apache-OOo exclusive?

Hello Christian,

The people that answer questions on the forum are 100% volunteers, as
long as there are people that desire to answer such questions they will.

I have heard no one suggest that the current situation, of offering such
support, change.

Best wishes,

Drew

Re: Community outreach to openoffice.org visitors?

2011-08-04 Thread Shane Curcuru

Sorry, should have mentioned that press@ is a privately archived list. 
It's where the press team may discuss pre-release information, along 
with discussing ASF policy and the like, and thus is one of the few 
lists that is not publicly archived.


Just email press@ with questions and they will be sure to include you 
(or the list, as appropriate) with replies.


- Shane

P.S. Some foundation-level lists, including press@, trademarks@, and 
board@ - where the ASF may discusses either personnel or internal policy 
matters - are the rare exceptions to the general concept that everything 
that can be done on a publicly archived list should be done on a 
publicly archived list.  The private@ lists for all (P)PMCs are the 
other privately archived exception.


On 8/4/2011 4:45 PM, Graham Lauder wrote:

On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 08:08:10 Graham Lauder wrote:

On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 01:39:23 Shane Curcuru wrote:

On 8/4/2011 8:06 AM, Graham Lauder wrote:

On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 09:58:44 Andrew Rist wrote:

On 8/3/2011 2:27 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de


wrote:

...snip...


In the past press releases were hacked about with on the private PR
list or on occasion the also private MarCon list, for obvious reasons.
  Is there a policy for creating such marketing materials here at
Apache.

Cheers
GL


Apache has a Press team led by the wonderful Sally here:
http://www.apache.org/press/

Who tweets regularly:
http://twitter.com/TheASF

Any Apache press releases should be coordinated with them on
pr...@apache.org - once the PPMC here has some specific questions about
publicity here, you should ping press@ to get a conversation started
there.

Note that the Apache Incubator has specific policies about press

releases for incubating projects:
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html

In terms of *what* to say, it's up to the project to decide, and
typically just get any final signoff from press@.  The ASF has a
corporate press release account and will issue official releases for
major news from any of our projects.

Oh, and the official ASF boilerplate is available:
http://www.apache.org/press/boilerplate/

- Shane


Excellent, thanks for that Shane.  I'll go over these before I work on a
draft and subscribe to the press list.


Assuming of course that this is a possibility



Cheers
GL

Re: Migrating the web forums at user.services.openoffice.org to Apache servers

2011-08-04 Thread Pedro Giffuni


Yes, it will continue to be inclusive for all OpenOffice derivatives.

Cheers,

Pedro.

On Fri, 5 Aug 2011 02:04:49 +0200, Christian Lohmaier 
cl...@openoffice.org wrote:

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 11:24 PM, drew d...@baseanswers.com wrote:

Hi,


I'd like to try and move this particular item to completion.

Reading over the mailing list it is my opinion that their is a
reasonable consensus for the Apache OpenOffice podling to facilitate
continuity of service to the OpenOffice.org Community Fourms located 
at

http://user.services.openoffice.org by allowing the site:

1: Continue to use this URL

2: Host the phpBB web services on an Apache server.


Will topics regarding LibreOffice be accepted on this forum like it 
is now?


Or will it be apache-OOo exclusive?

ciao
Christian

Re: Access to wiki

2011-08-04 Thread Jean Hollis Weber

On Thu, 2011-08-04 at 15:01 +0100, Simon Phipps wrote:
 On 4 Aug 2011, at 14:56, Rob Weir wrote:
 
  On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 7:29 AM, TerryE o...@ellisons.org.uk wrote:
  On 04/08/11 11:31, Jean Weber wrote:
  
  snip
  
  2) Alternatively, or in addition, the first X edits/ contributions/
  whatever are moderated by a group of people, any one of whom can approve
  or reject the items. After X acceptable contributions, the person is
  then allowed to edit the wiki without further supervision -- until or
  unless they start posting inappropriate material such as spam. Again,
  very few spammers will take the trouble to post some useful info before
  going into spam mode.
  
  These methods deal with the vast majority, if not all, of the concerns I
  have seen Rob expressing about systems with no control at all, but at
  the same time they do not require more time or commitment on the
  contributors' part to be authorised to participate.
  
  AFAIK, most wikis   similar sites provide some way to limit the editing
  of specific pages to a smaller group of people (admins or whatever).
  
  snip
  
  You probably know more about this than I do, but my understanding is that
  the current OOo wiki has an extension installed that does what I was
  suggesting in option 2, but the extension has not been implemented.  See:
  http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs and specifically:
  
  http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs#Automatic_user_promotion
  
  Jean
  
  Yes, you are correct.  This is extension can do this and more, but with a
  grey issue like this I feel that a DL based dialogue isn't the best way to
  work out what to do here.  Better we work up a position paper/page within
  the OOOUSERS cwiki laying down the options, their pros and cons and then
  agree a consensus or vote either on the paper itself.  Use the DL to note
  the consensus and get wider feedback.
  
  What concerns me is the moderation load involved with such an active
  intervention of review-before-publish.  Perhaps others with moderator
  experience might care to comment?
  
  
  The general approach at Apache is to grant trust once merit has been
  shown.  So we should be liberal in granting additional rights to
  contributors who make consistent, high quality contributions.  If
  moderation is a bottleneck then it shows that we're not distributing
  power efficiently.
 
 Given Jean's next paragraph, how would a potential contributor be able to 
 establish that reputation? 
 
  
  My worry is that review-before-publish also ignores the reality of how
  people edit wikis.  In general they don't prepare and proof draft offline
  then paste their best and final into the article.  Most do it section by
  section or end up correcting / rewording when they see the final version, 
  so
  one logical edit can comprise half a dozen posts.  I am not sure how this
  would work if you've got to wait for approval before the next edit.
  
  We also still need the quality checks: does the email exist, who is she/he,
  etc. and I am not sure how we could include these in an automaic bump.

Just for the record, the next paragraph in the quoted material above
was not mine, but Terry's.

--Jean


  
  Terry
  
  --Jean

Re: Migrating the web forums at user.services.openoffice.org to Apache servers

On Thu, 2011-08-04 at 18:01 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:

snip

Howdy Dave,

  
  Alright - Actions items here then IMO.
  
  1 - Create a page on the wiki (which one?) with the following:
  
  The names of potential system administrators - 
  Terry Ellison
  [A second admin TBD]
  
  (The site has operated with 2 and 3 admins to date, it's a good idea IMO
  to have at least two people that can handle issues)
  
  2 - A contact point for the Apache Infrastructure team.
  
  (not sure if this would be a person or a role name, but it is important
  to document who needs to be contacted if some issue needs escalating)

 Gavin is already working with TerryE.

Right - wasn't sure if Gavin would be the permanent contact on this,
let's see if he or Terry pop in with a comment on that. Otherwise I'll
ping them on this over the weekend.

 
 Escalation is to the infrastruct...@apache.org mailing list.
 
 There is also an INFRA JIRA issue tracker.

Excellent, I'll see to it that this is also documented on the wiki and
the forum for the forum admin/moderators/users.

 
  
  3 - Review the current English Terms of Use statement and update as
  needed and get consensus from PPMC on wording.
  
  4 - Get the English version of the TOU translated for use on the the
  other language forums.
  
  5 - Currently the site references a Privacy Policy statement on the
  Oracle web site - will need to lockdown exactly where this now needs to
  point for Apache.
 
 a) Create the new Policy which should apply for all of the openoffice.org 
 content going forward.

OK - a quick search finds these:
http://maven.apache.org/privacy-policy.html

http://continuum.apache.org/privacy-policy.html

hmm - look rather similar don't they.

Do you know of a specific boiler plate for Apache projects anywhere
else?

 
 b) Put the page somewhere on the new www.openoffice.org site.
 
  
  6 - Acquire new logo(s) for footer and proper link reference.
  
  (currently the footer also has an Oracle logo and links to the Oracle
  Open Office site - I'm thinking a generic Apache logo and link to
  Apache.org. Any other ideas?)
 
 We're working on similar with the website. Certainly the Apache feather logo 
 should be used.

Sounds reasonable to me.

 
 We'll need to show that we an Incubating podling and also be clear somehow 
 about the content being variously licensed.

Remembering this is the forum not the wiki I think that is all done in
the Terms of Use here?

//drew

RE: Migrating the web forums at user.services.openoffice.org to Apache servers

2011-08-04 Thread Gavin McDonald

 -Original Message-
 From: drew [mailto:d...@baseanswers.com]
 Sent: Friday, 5 August 2011 11:44 AM
 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
 Subject: Re: Migrating the web forums at user.services.openoffice.org to
 Apache servers

 On Thu, 2011-08-04 at 18:01 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:

 snip

 Howdy Dave,

   Alright - Actions items here then IMO.

   1 - Create a page on the wiki (which one?) with the following:

   The names of potential system administrators - Terry Ellison [A
   second admin TBD]

   (The site has operated with 2 and 3 admins to date, it's a good idea
   IMO to have at least two people that can handle issues)

   2 - A contact point for the Apache Infrastructure team.

   (not sure if this would be a person or a role name, but it is
   important to document who needs to be contacted if some issue needs
   escalating)

  Gavin is already working with TerryE.

 Right - wasn't sure if Gavin would be the permanent contact on this, let's see
 if he or Terry pop in with a comment on that. Otherwise I'll ping them on this
 over the weekend.

For the time being yes, I'll be helping with the setup of the VMs through to the
switching of them live and for a while after that. However, the infrastructure 
team
is just that, and if there are any issues with any infra services then another 
infra
member may also be able to jump in and help.

The VMs are built for the wiki and forums to be moved across and we'll be 
setting up
a copy instance for testing of both over the next few days. as mentioned 
previously,
we can't switch over until I get word we are ok from the Oracle side.

Gav...

  Escalation is to the infrastruct...@apache.org mailing list.

  There is also an INFRA JIRA issue tracker.

 Excellent, I'll see to it that this is also documented on the wiki and the 
 forum
 for the forum admin/moderators/users.

   3 - Review the current English Terms of Use statement and update as
   needed and get consensus from PPMC on wording.

   4 - Get the English version of the TOU translated for use on the the
   other language forums.

   5 - Currently the site references a Privacy Policy statement on the
   Oracle web site - will need to lockdown exactly where this now needs
   to point for Apache.

  a) Create the new Policy which should apply for all of the openoffice.org
 content going forward.

 OK - a quick search finds these:
 http://maven.apache.org/privacy-policy.html

 http://continuum.apache.org/privacy-policy.html

 hmm - look rather similar don't they.

 Do you know of a specific boiler plate for Apache projects anywhere else?

  b) Put the page somewhere on the new www.openoffice.org site.

   6 - Acquire new logo(s) for footer and proper link reference.

   (currently the footer also has an Oracle logo and links to the
   Oracle Open Office site - I'm thinking a generic Apache logo and
   link to Apache.org. Any other ideas?)

  We're working on similar with the website. Certainly the Apache feather
 logo should be used.

 Sounds reasonable to me.

  We'll need to show that we an Incubating podling and also be clear
 somehow about the content being variously licensed.

 Remembering this is the forum not the wiki I think that is all done in the
 Terms of Use here?

 //drew

Re: test message - please ignore

2011-08-04 Thread Carl Marcum


On 08/04/2011 06:16 PM, Donald Whytock wrote:

There are many places where this is an open invitation to derision,
sarcasm and childishness.

Good thing we don't have any of that here.

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Carl Marcumcmar...@apache.org  wrote:

test message - please ignore

I need to check if my mail is getting to the list.


So true :)

Re: test message - please ignore

2011-08-04 Thread Carl Marcum


From the correct address this time.

Re: Migrating the web forums at user.services.openoffice.org to Apache servers

2011-08-04 Thread Dave Fisher


On Aug 4, 2011, at 7:35 PM, Andy Brown wrote:

 Dave Fisher wrote:
 
 There is also an INFRA JIRA issue tracker.
 
 
 Dave do you have a number for this issue?

No particular issue. Just that the tracker for Infrastructure is here: 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA

Whether a jira issue is required or not will depend on the situation. Gavin and 
Terry are building the VMs, it's up to them if a JIRA issue is required.

Regards,
Dave

Re: Migrating the web forums at user.services.openoffice.org to Apache servers

2011-08-04 Thread Dave Fisher

On Aug 4, 2011, at 7:21 PM, Gavin McDonald wrote:

 -Original Message-
 From: drew [mailto:d...@baseanswers.com]
 Sent: Friday, 5 August 2011 11:44 AM
 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
 Subject: Re: Migrating the web forums at user.services.openoffice.org to
 Apache servers

 On Thu, 2011-08-04 at 18:01 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:

 snip

 Howdy Dave,

 Alright - Actions items here then IMO.

 1 - Create a page on the wiki (which one?) with the following:

 The names of potential system administrators - Terry Ellison [A
 second admin TBD]

 (The site has operated with 2 and 3 admins to date, it's a good idea
 IMO to have at least two people that can handle issues)

 2 - A contact point for the Apache Infrastructure team.

 (not sure if this would be a person or a role name, but it is
 important to document who needs to be contacted if some issue needs
 escalating)

 Gavin is already working with TerryE.

 Right - wasn't sure if Gavin would be the permanent contact on this, let's 
 see
 if he or Terry pop in with a comment on that. Otherwise I'll ping them on 
 this
 over the weekend.

 For the time being yes, I'll be helping with the setup of the VMs through to 
 the
 switching of them live and for a while after that. However, the 
 infrastructure team
 is just that, and if there are any issues with any infra services then 
 another infra
 member may also be able to jump in and help.

 The VMs are built for the wiki and forums to be moved across and we'll be 
 setting up
 a copy instance for testing of both over the next few days. as mentioned 
 previously,
 we can't switch over until I get word we are ok from the Oracle side.

I know that Joe Schaefer and Andrew Rist have exchanged the openoffice.org DNS 
records and we have cwiki page with all the domains, as Kenai handles 
subdomains.

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/OpenOffice+Domains

I'm not sure where we are in the process of transferring the domain 
registration.

`whois openoffice.org` is still Oracle:

Domain ID:D7200454-LROR
Domain Name:OPENOFFICE.ORG
Created On:12-Jun-1999 05:21:53 UTC
Last Updated On:09-Dec-2010 07:28:26 UTC
Expiration Date:12-Jun-2012 05:22:31 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:Tucows Inc. (R11-LROR)
Status:CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITED
Status:CLIENT UPDATE PROHIBITED
Registrant ID:tuaORdElTqVVa7Qj
Registrant Name:Charles Hoynowski
Registrant Organization:Oracle Corporation

Regards,
Dave

 Gav...

 Escalation is to the infrastruct...@apache.org mailing list.

 There is also an INFRA JIRA issue tracker.

 Excellent, I'll see to it that this is also documented on the wiki and the 
 forum
 for the forum admin/moderators/users.

 3 - Review the current English Terms of Use statement and update as
 needed and get consensus from PPMC on wording.

 4 - Get the English version of the TOU translated for use on the the
 other language forums.

 5 - Currently the site references a Privacy Policy statement on the
 Oracle web site - will need to lockdown exactly where this now needs
 to point for Apache.

 a) Create the new Policy which should apply for all of the openoffice.org
 content going forward.

 OK - a quick search finds these:
 http://maven.apache.org/privacy-policy.html

 http://continuum.apache.org/privacy-policy.html

 hmm - look rather similar don't they.

 Do you know of a specific boiler plate for Apache projects anywhere else?

 b) Put the page somewhere on the new www.openoffice.org site.

 6 - Acquire new logo(s) for footer and proper link reference.

 (currently the footer also has an Oracle logo and links to the
 Oracle Open Office site - I'm thinking a generic Apache logo and
 link to Apache.org. Any other ideas?)

 We're working on similar with the website. Certainly the Apache feather
 logo should be used.

 Sounds reasonable to me.

 We'll need to show that we an Incubating podling and also be clear
 somehow about the content being variously licensed.

 Remembering this is the forum not the wiki I think that is all done in the
 Terms of Use here?

 //drew

RE: Migrating the web forums at user.services.openoffice.org to Apache servers