Re: Willing help on Test
Hi, On 02.11.2011 03:30, Raphael Bircher wrote: ... But anyway. The workflow by OOo has changed, and we need to reorganize the QA. And first we should reorganize the QA and then we should talk about the needed tools. Thats my option. I agree here with Raphael that things have changed. Former stuff worked, but there is no need to recover everything. Just a developer's point of view on this. Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [IMPORTANT][INFO]: wiki problems
On 11/1/11 9:20 PM, TJ Frazier wrote:
On 11/1/2011 07:42, Gavin McDonald wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Andre Fischer [mailto:a...@a-w-f.de]
Sent: Tuesday, 1 November 2011 9:07 PM
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [IMPORTANT][INFO]: wiki problems
On 01.11.2011 11:57, TJ Frazier wrote:
On 11/1/2011 06:16, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
Hi,
i have noticed a problem when changing my wiki profile.
When i try to change for example my email address in my wiki profile
i got a confirmation email containing a confirmation link. This link
starts with http://127.0.0.1/wiki/Special:ConfirmEmail/...; that
can't work. Changing the localhost ip address to
wiki.services.openoffice.org and everything works as expected.
Maybe one of the admins can have a look on it. It can confuse new
users.
Juergen
Hi, Jürgen,
Yes, this is a problem which shows up in several places. I believe it
is related to the front-ending of Apache Traffic Server, since that IP
is the address of ATS. I am certain that the magic word (technical
term,
honest) {{fullurl}} is returning this instead of the desired string.
Might I ask where you changed the localhost ip address? Maybe I can
fix that myself. Otherwise, it's a matter for installation parameters,
or PHP in the Parser Extension, and those are beyond my reach.
Hi,
I ran into the same problem.
Just replace http://127.0.0.1/wiki/Special:ConfirmEmail/...;
with http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Special:ConfirmEmail/...;
Yeah pretty sure this is ATS related, I'll take a look, might be a few
hours
though.
Gav...
Researched this at
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:LocalSettings.php
Pretty sure the problem is with $wgServer, which should read,
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org;
This is an address for external use. This change is necessary, but may
or may not be sufficient.
mmh, just a further idea. Would it be possible to change the URL in the
future to wiki.openoffice.org and redirect the
wiki.services.openoffice.org. The latter one was used only because it
was not possible to host the wiki on a HH server and use the short URL.
I can't remember the exact reasons but i think it was something with
CollabNet where all the stuff was hosted at this time
The same for users.services.openoffice.org - users.openoffice.org
Over time we will have migrated all this long URLs and references to it
and our users will probably adapt and us the short ones as well.
Just an idea to clean up this ugly long URLs
Juergen
/tj/
Regards,
Andre
Re: [proposal] development for the first AOO release
Hi, Thanks for all your feedback. It looks like that this proposal is more or less acceptable for our development for the first AOO release. As I can see the IP clearance wiki page is already used and updated. We should continue with it. This page provides the overview for the tasks which need to be fullfilled regarding the IP clearance stuff. For the intrinsic resulting code changes I encourage each contributor to file an issue in Bugzilla for the corresponding code change - in the issue some deeper and detailed information can be given, especially for the 3rd party components for which we will provide a replacement afterwards. I have file a parent issue for the removal of the 3rd party components - https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=118566. I am asking each contributor to add her/his issues as blocking issues to this one. May be somebody is volunteering to file these issues in advance for all already known tasks regarding the removal of 3rd party components. I will start working on the removal of all 3rd party components which are needed for the report builder extension. Best regards, Oliver. On 24.10.2011 15:18, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: Hi, I would like to propose the following development milestones on our way to the first AOO release: - IP cleared milestone For this milestone we should remove all 3rd party components which are not compliant to Apache's Third-Party Licensing Policy [1]. All license headers in the source code files should be updated according to Oracle's SGA. Additionally, we may update certain information in the product in order to reflect that the product is now coming from Apache (e.g. the splash screen, the about dialog, ...). Then the IP review required by Apache could be performed in order to meet the corresponding requirements for our first release. This milestone would result in an OpenOffice.org missing a lot of important features, but this milestone would be the basis regarding Apache's IP rules. This milestone could be released according to the Apache rules. - features back milestone For this milestone we should work on bringing back the features which are lost in the previous milestone. I do not think that we have to bring back every feature for a first release. Thus, we would have got the possibility to work on the features which are of most interest. At some point we could create a release candidate and start working on stabilizing it for a first release, if we think that the must have features are back. In order to coordinate efforts and to avoid duplicate work I propose to use the IP clearance wiki page [2]. The basis for its content is more or less the Apache Migration wiki page [3]. Some additional information has been collected on certain 3rd party components. Also priorities have been assigned. But its content is not nailed in stone. It currently reflects more or less the input and opionions of the editing contributors to these IP clearance issues. Thus, it would be a living document to reflect our knowlegde about these IP clearance issues. It would also document our efforts and our decisions regarding these efforts. Any remarks/comments/improvements/adjustments? Any objections to follow such plan for our first release? Best regards, Oliver. P.S.: I will be out-of-office for the rest of the week. Thus, I will probably not reply to your input regarding my proposal this week - please excuse. References: [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/IP_Clearance [3] http://ooo-wiki.apache.org/wiki/ApacheMigration
Re: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ openoffice.org e-mail addresses
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: snip Are the following two configurations accurate statements of what you would support. Configuration A - ezmlm/qmail on the usual ASF MTA 330 OOo MLs w/o subscribers forward to project MLs. 100 committers/PPMC members with OOo forwards to either an external email or their apache forwarder. Just the apache address? Configuration B - postfix on a jail maintained by the project 330 OOo MLs w/o subscribers forward to project MLs. 100 committers/PPMC members with OOo forwards to either an external email or their apache forwarder. 20,000 BZ OOo forwarders to external emails. Volunteers for postfix admin. I personally prefer Configuration A. Let's see if we get Consensus, or if we need a vote. -1 What the helll do you think you are doing, Dave? We had a discussion on the mailing lists already, for over a week. i made a detailed proposal. I invited counter-proposals. My proposal received lazy consensus. I, Kay and others have been busy working on the wiki and the mailing lists executing that proposal. We're far into it already. We've sent out dozens of notes, translated it into Finnish, German, Serbian, etc.And now you're going to make a counter-proposal and ask for a vote on it? Before you do this, please consider what this does for other project volunteers who follow the rules, make proposals, get consensus and invest their time into executing on their proposals. In any case, to put technical objections behind my veto, along with the willingness to implement a alternative solution (something I've already been doing for two weeks), note that many (even most) of the legacy lists are overrun by spam. The signal to noise ratio is very low. If we forward the traffic to those lists to Apache lists then we are also overrun with spam. But because we would be combining multiple legacy lists into a single Apache list, say ooo-dev, then we would be receiving all the spam from many lists concentrated into a single list. This is very bad, and was something we discussed previously and influenced my recommendation to do only an opt-in migration of legacy list members, to avoid bringing over the spammers. Note also that spammers that sign up for Apache lists can easily be controlled by moderators. But if we're automatically forwarding legacy list traffic we have a lot less control. One thing that might be useful is to forward all existing list addresses to a single bot that would respond with an email that states the lists have migrated to Apache and gives the new list addresses or a link to a web page containing the same. That would make it easy for any users to migrate while leaving the spammers behind. Regards, -Rob
Re: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ openoffice.org e-mail addresses
I'll butt in with my (non-binding) suggestions. On 11/2/2011 12:01 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: Hi Dave, where I am confused is the focus on Mailing-List forwarding rather than E-mail forwarding. I can't tell what the intended behaviors are. Let's get clear: 1. If someone posts to one of the old e-mail list addresses (e.g., us...@openoffice.org), what is intended to happen? What is the observed behavior? How does this extend to use of -subscribe, -unsubscribe, -help, -owner (or their OO.o counterparts), etc. ? After the final migration, they all bounce. By then we should have nice friendly pages - easily searchable for - that tell past OpenOffice.org product version users which relevant Apache list to use. And we'll have sent several hey, this list is going away notes to the old list. 2. (a) If someone sends an e-mail to an existing account/e-mail address (e.g., orc...@openoffice.org), what is intended to happen? What does the individual that it current forwards to get to know or do about it? The person sending the e-mail? If the forwarding bounces, what will happen? (b) If the account is closed/deleted, what are the 2(a) answers. After the final migration, if they're not a committer, they bounce. Period. We are not in the business of providing services to non-committers. If they're a committer, then it's up to the PPMC to decide if 1) you want to, and 2) you will support some software to make committer forwarders @openoffice.org work somehow. Apache projects use apache.org services to do their work. I certainly expect - as such a hugely accessed service - that web access to openoffice.org will remain, along with a number of it's key subdomains. But we really need to start thinking like the new Apache project that we're running, and not like some strange continuation of the past Oracle project that is now... unsupported. - Shane - Dennis -Original Message- From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 20:35 To: orc...@apache.org Cc: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org; 'Joe Schaefer' Subject: Re: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ openoffice.org e-mail addresses On Nov 1, 2011, at 8:07 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: Whoa, now I am really confused. This seems to have gone in the opposite direction than what I thought. First it narrowed down to privileging some small set of BZ users. And then protecting our committers that have @openoffice.org email addresses. Also, I don't think there had been any intention to preserve the @openffice.org mailing lists. Also, setting their addresses to forward to a different list that is not subscribed to is just weird. So I don't understand the list forwarding scenario. And I have seen no one talk about moving the subscriber lists and adding those subscribers to a list they did not opt into. Joe and I discussed doing it w/o subscriber lists. As a pure forwarder that's choice one and two. I hope I misunderstand the common understanding about that. You do. See my other reply. [ ... ]
Reminder: Please update migration status
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/OpenOffice.org+Migration+Status That is the page that we've publicized on the project home page and in notes to the legacy mailing lists. It would be great if we could keep that page up to date. There was a lot accomplished last week that does not appear to be reflected in that table. I don't know the details. But maybe you do? Thanks! -Rob
Re: [IMPORTANT][INFO]: wiki problems
Am 11/02/2011 09:35 AM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
On 11/1/11 9:20 PM, TJ Frazier wrote:
On 11/1/2011 07:42, Gavin McDonald wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Andre Fischer [mailto:a...@a-w-f.de]
Sent: Tuesday, 1 November 2011 9:07 PM
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [IMPORTANT][INFO]: wiki problems
On 01.11.2011 11:57, TJ Frazier wrote:
On 11/1/2011 06:16, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
Hi,
i have noticed a problem when changing my wiki profile.
When i try to change for example my email address in my wiki profile
i got a confirmation email containing a confirmation link. This link
starts with http://127.0.0.1/wiki/Special:ConfirmEmail/...; that
can't work. Changing the localhost ip address to
wiki.services.openoffice.org and everything works as expected.
Maybe one of the admins can have a look on it. It can confuse new
users.
Juergen
Hi, Jürgen,
Yes, this is a problem which shows up in several places. I believe it
is related to the front-ending of Apache Traffic Server, since that IP
is the address of ATS. I am certain that the magic word (technical
term,
honest) {{fullurl}} is returning this instead of the desired string.
Might I ask where you changed the localhost ip address? Maybe I can
fix that myself. Otherwise, it's a matter for installation parameters,
or PHP in the Parser Extension, and those are beyond my reach.
Hi,
I ran into the same problem.
Just replace http://127.0.0.1/wiki/Special:ConfirmEmail/...;
with
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Special:ConfirmEmail/...;
Yeah pretty sure this is ATS related, I'll take a look, might be a few
hours
though.
Gav...
Researched this at
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:LocalSettings.php
Pretty sure the problem is with $wgServer, which should read,
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org;
This is an address for external use. This change is necessary, but may
or may not be sufficient.
mmh, just a further idea. Would it be possible to change the URL in the
future to wiki.openoffice.org and redirect the
wiki.services.openoffice.org. The latter one was used only because it
was not possible to host the wiki on a HH server and use the short URL.
I can't remember the exact reasons but i think it was something with
CollabNet where all the stuff was hosted at this time
The same for users.services.openoffice.org - users.openoffice.org
Over time we will have migrated all this long URLs and references to it
and our users will probably adapt and us the short ones as well.
Just an idea to clean up this ugly long URLs
+1
It would be great to get all sevices back into a single subdomain.
Marcus
Report Builder extension (was Re: [proposal] development for the first AOO release)
Hi Oliver; What do you mean by removal of the 3rd party components? I think the report builder should be moved to Apache-extras with three suggestions: - Attempt to contact the authors of the pentaho stuff, maybe they would like to have a say in it's future or even relicense it. -Wait until the headers are changed to AL2, before moving it out. - Rob has a SVN dump: maybe we can use it to preserve most of the early history of the stuff we move to Apache-extras. cheers, Pedro. --- On Wed, 11/2/11, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: ... I will start working on the removal of all 3rd party components which are needed for the report builder extension. Best regards, Oliver. On 24.10.2011 15:18, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: Hi, I would like to propose the following development milestones on our way to the first AOO release: - IP cleared milestone For this milestone we should remove all 3rd party components which are not compliant to Apache's Third-Party Licensing Policy [1]. All license headers in the source code files should be updated according to Oracle's SGA. Additionally, we may update certain information in the product in order to reflect that the product is now coming from Apache (e.g. the splash screen, the about dialog, ...). Then the IP review required by Apache could be performed in order to meet the corresponding requirements for our first release. This milestone would result in an OpenOffice.org missing a lot of important features, but this milestone would be the basis regarding Apache's IP rules. This milestone could be released according to the Apache rules. - features back milestone For this milestone we should work on bringing back the features which are lost in the previous milestone. I do not think that we have to bring back every feature for a first release. Thus, we would have got the possibility to work on the features which are of most interest. At some point we could create a release candidate and start working on stabilizing it for a first release, if we think that the must have features are back. In order to coordinate efforts and to avoid duplicate work I propose to use the IP clearance wiki page [2]. The basis for its content is more or less the Apache Migration wiki page [3]. Some additional information has been collected on certain 3rd party components. Also priorities have been assigned. But its content is not nailed in stone. It currently reflects more or less the input and opionions of the editing contributors to these IP clearance issues. Thus, it would be a living document to reflect our knowlegde about these IP clearance issues. It would also document our efforts and our decisions regarding these efforts. Any remarks/comments/improvements/adjustments? Any objections to follow such plan for our first release? Best regards, Oliver. P.S.: I will be out-of-office for the rest of the week. Thus, I will probably not reply to your input regarding my proposal this week - please excuse. References: [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/IP_Clearance [3] http://ooo-wiki.apache.org/wiki/ApacheMigration
Re: [IMPORTANT][INFO]: wiki problems
mmh, just a further idea. Would it be possible to change the URL in the future to wiki.openoffice.org and redirect the wiki.services.openoffice.org. The latter one was used only because it was not possible to host the wiki on a HH server and use the short URL. I can't remember the exact reasons but i think it was something with CollabNet where all the stuff was hosted at this time The same for users.services.openoffice.org - users.openoffice.org And don't forget planet too
Re: Greetings from Betsy
On 01.11.2011 09:21, Jürgen Schmidt wrote: the help content is currently coming from xhp files that you can find in the helpcontent2 module in the source. xhp files are xml files that can be edited with the office (a special filter is required) and there exists an extensions that can help to edit these files. It's a collection of macros as far as i know that provides some useful tooling to manage help-ids etc. But i am not expert here and i can't say where to find this extension. but i will try to figure that out or hopefully somebody else can help us. I took the liberty to commit the help authoring extension into one of my last cws some months ago. It should be integrated into AOOo already (module helpauthoring). It was a quick hack just to save it, I didn't invest a lot of time to fix the build of it. But as this is only packaging, it should be easy to accomplish that. Regards, Mathias
Re: Report Builder extension (was Re: [proposal] development for the first AOO release)
Hi Pedro, On 02.11.2011 15:18, Pedro Giffuni wrote: Hi Oliver; What do you mean by removal of the 3rd party components? - Removing the components and its references out of the repository. - Adjusting the code which is using these components - e.g. switching off the corresponding functions. I think the report builder should be moved to Apache-extras with three suggestions: - Attempt to contact the authors of the pentaho stuff, maybe they would like to have a say in it's future or even relicense it. -Wait until the headers are changed to AL2, before moving it out. - Rob has a SVN dump: maybe we can use it to preserve most of the early history of the stuff we move to Apache-extras. I am not planning to remove the report builder extension. I am planning to remove the 3rd party components which are used by the report builder extension as they are licensed under LGPL. This will have the effect that the report builder will not work anymore. Thus, I have got in mind to disable its building without touching any code of it. Then our code base regarding the report builder extension will be clean due to Apache's Third-Party Licensing Policy. BTW, nothing is lost by this removal step - everything is still in the repository. This certain documentation in a Bugzilla issue the stuff can be recovered easily for future usage and adjustment. Best regards, Oliver.
Re: Report Builder extension (was Re: [proposal] development for the first AOO release)
--- On Wed, 11/2/11, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: BTW, nothing is lost by this removal step - everything is still in the repository. This certain documentation in a Bugzilla issue the stuff can be recovered easily for future usage and adjustment. Ahh.. OK. We are on the same page then. No removed functionality until we know what will replace it and the SGA is in. Cheers, Pedro.
Re: [proposal] development for the first AOO release
Hi Pedro, On 02.11.2011 16:03, Pedro Giffuni wrote: --- On Wed, 11/2/11, Oliver-Rainer Wittmannorwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: BTW, nothing is lost by this removal step - everything is still in the repository. This certain documentation in a Bugzilla issue the stuff can be recovered easily for future usage and adjustment. Ahh.. OK. We are on the same page then. No removed functionality until we know what will replace it and the SGA is in. I am not sure, if we are on the same page ;-) As 3rd party compoments which violate Apache's Third-Party Licensing Policy are not allowed they have to be removed. Thus one part of the tasks for the proposed IP cleared milestone are to remove these without having deeply thought about a replacement. Thus, we will lose certain features - like the report builder extension. It is the subject of the next proposed features back milestone to identify the features which should be brought back and for which corresponding interest and resources are available. BTW, I do not think that any used 3rd party component on which Oracle has no copyright on will be covered by Oracle's SGA. Best regards, Oliver.
Re: Willing help on Test
Hi Raphael, Am 02.11.2011 03:30, schrieb Raphael Bircher: Hi Ji Yan Am 02.11.11 01:58, schrieb Ji Yan: Hi all, This is Yan Ji from IBM Lotus Symphony test team. I've been working in Symphony for almost five years . It's my honour to join the community. As a QE of Symphony my major focus is FVT in both WordProcessor/Spreadsheet/Presentation and Install. Now I'm willing to contribute my effort on Apache OpenOffice. Please let me know if there is anything I can help on OO 3.4 release. Welcome! At the moment we have no public builds, but you can build a AOOo your self or maybe a other IBMer do it for you ;-) We have different work to do: 1) Bugzilla editing unconfirmed issues 2) Automation: Setup test boxes and make it ready to start eh...do you mean testmachines for automated testing ? In former times I can remember that ( I think it was) Maho who provided important files for the automated testers of the community outside from Oracle. Is he still doing so or did he left to LO? I do not know... 3) Querbeet tests hm. This might be a little bit hard to understand for people outside of the german-speaking countries. Querbeet means random, all over the place. Simply testing what you are interested in and what makes fun and sense. Sorry, Raphael, I did not mean to be a know-it-all ;-) Since most OO website are unreachable. Could someone help me to find OO TCM or TCS, it will help me to understand how the OO test way works. Looking forward to hear from you. Unfortionaly we have no TCM/TCS. Our old TCM was a proprietary tool, and we can't take over it. There was a plane to replace the TCM within QUASTe. But this one is still in Beta, and no one working on it since it was developed by Helge Delfs who was one of the Hamburg Oracle Team. But anyway. The workflow by OOo has changed, and we need to reorganize the QA. And first we should reorganize the QA and then we should talk about the needed tools. Thats my option. Greetings Raphael Regards, Wolfram
Re: [proposal] development for the first AOO release
--- On Wed, 11/2/11, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: ... I am not sure, if we are on the same page ;-) I expressed it badly indeed. I meant we are not yet removing any code that we have an SGA for. We do have an SGA for the reportbuilder but not the dependencies so the dependencies can go. We can disable them in configure.in for now but we will have to find somewhere to put them later on. BTW, most of the reportbuilder dependencies come from Pentaho right? We should contact them and let them know the situation. cheers, Pedro. BTW, I do not think that any used 3rd party component on which Oracle has no copyright on will be covered by Oracle's SGA. I won't say it works out this way every time but I have had luck getting some dependencies to relicense :).
Re: Reminder: Please update migration status
I think this page is probably one of the MOST important information mechanism we have going, so, it should definitely be kept up to date. +1 Maybe update this page with User support forums status: completed
RE: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ openoffice.org e-mail addresses
Yes, I'll take my badge off and put my pistol in the safe: Shane, 1 (below). Your response fits the consensus I am seeing develop. Nothing fancy, bounce them, but some kind of catcher is needed to send something intelligible back other than no-such-address. 2 (below). I think killing all myname@ openoffice.org apart with limited forwardings for committers it would be a horrible blunder of Klingon caliber: All but committers are unworthy worms. It should make great slashdot reading. Not to mention the glee on the faces of those in the Apache AOOo Waiting To Fail (WTF) fan club. Please do not collapse this system with the use of Apache IDs and myID@ apache.org addresses, even though there is a similarity in function. This is more like what happens when people register themselves to use the wiki or a forum or a mailing list, etc. The complication is that when folks registered on the OO.o site, they also got a forwardable e-mail address that went with that ID. And these ID/e-mail combinations are ubiquitous in the http:// *.openoffice.org ecosystem. It is a kind of a fledgling, limited-reach OpenID/single-sign-on system. - Dennis I also have an addition to my list of where there are breakages with these e-mail (not list) addresses: Some number of iCLAs have openoffice.org e-mail addresses as the e-mail of record. That won't interfere too badly with those who have already been established as committers (at AOOo at least) but it is another bullet item for my original list. -Original Message- From: Shane Curcuru [mailto:a...@shanecurcuru.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 05:05 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ openoffice.org e-mail addresses I'll butt in with my (non-binding) suggestions. On 11/2/2011 12:01 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: Hi Dave, where I am confused is the focus on Mailing-List forwarding rather than E-mail forwarding. I can't tell what the intended behaviors are. Let's get clear: 1. If someone posts to one of the old e-mail list addresses (e.g., us...@openoffice.org), what is intended to happen? What is the observed behavior? How does this extend to use of -subscribe, -unsubscribe, -help, -owner (or their OO.o counterparts), etc. ? After the final migration, they all bounce. By then we should have nice friendly pages - easily searchable for - that tell past OpenOffice.org product version users which relevant Apache list to use. And we'll have sent several hey, this list is going away notes to the old list. 2. (a) If someone sends an e-mail to an existing account/e-mail address (e.g., orc...@openoffice.org), what is intended to happen? What does the individual that it current forwards to get to know or do about it? The person sending the e-mail? If the forwarding bounces, what will happen? (b) If the account is closed/deleted, what are the 2(a) answers. After the final migration, if they're not a committer, they bounce. Period. We are not in the business of providing services to non-committers. If they're a committer, then it's up to the PPMC to decide if 1) you want to, and 2) you will support some software to make committer forwarders @openoffice.org work somehow. Apache projects use apache.org services to do their work. I certainly expect - as such a hugely accessed service - that web access to openoffice.org will remain, along with a number of it's key subdomains. But we really need to start thinking like the new Apache project that we're running, and not like some strange continuation of the past Oracle project that is now... unsupported. - Shane - Dennis -Original Message- From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 20:35 To: orc...@apache.org Cc: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org; 'Joe Schaefer' Subject: Re: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ openoffice.org e-mail addresses On Nov 1, 2011, at 8:07 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: Whoa, now I am really confused. This seems to have gone in the opposite direction than what I thought. First it narrowed down to privileging some small set of BZ users. And then protecting our committers that have @openoffice.org email addresses. Also, I don't think there had been any intention to preserve the @openffice.org mailing lists. Also, setting their addresses to forward to a different list that is not subscribed to is just weird. So I don't understand the list forwarding scenario. And I have seen no one talk about moving the subscriber lists and adding those subscribers to a list they did not opt into. Joe and I discussed doing it w/o subscriber lists. As a pure forwarder that's choice one and two. I hope I misunderstand the common understanding about that. You do. See my other reply. [ ... ]
Re: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ openoffice.org e-mail addresses
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: Yes, I'll take my badge off and put my pistol in the safe: Shane, 1 (below). Your response fits the consensus I am seeing develop. Nothing fancy, bounce them, but some kind of catcher is needed to send something intelligible back other than no-such-address. 2 (below). I think killing all myname@ openoffice.org apart with limited forwardings for committers it would be a horrible blunder of Klingon caliber: All but committers are unworthy worms. It should make great slashdot reading. Not to mention the glee on the faces of those in the Apache AOOo Waiting To Fail (WTF) fan club. Please do not collapse this system with the use of Apache IDs and myID@ apache.org addresses, even though there is a similarity in function. This is more like what happens when people register themselves to use the wiki or a forum or a mailing list, etc. The complication is that when folks registered on the OO.o site, they also got a forwardable e-mail address that went with that ID. And these ID/e-mail combinations are ubiquitous in the http:// *.openoffice.org ecosystem. It is a kind of a fledgling, limited-reach OpenID/single-sign-on system. I think the chances are near zero that Oracle will give us the forwarding email addresses for 500,000 legacy openoffice.org addresses. I also think it is clear that we are wasting time discussing this, time that could be spent making an unambiguous notification to those that have these addresses, allowing them to make an orderly transition to another address. I further think it would be an unmitigated disaster if the forwarding service got shut down with little or no advance notice, because we wasted time discussing a plan that we will never be able to execute on. You might have different priorities than I have, but I hope you see the logic in the above. If we're not getting the authoritative forwarding tables for the email forwarding, then we're wasting time right now and we should immediately start working on a notification for users currently using that service. If that is true -- and I think it is -- then the single most important thing we should be doing right now is establishing whether or not Oracle would provide such forwarding tables. I thought we asked before and the response was No. But obviously that did not penetrate to an equal degree in everyone's mind. Would you agree that establish that simple fact is the most important thing to do now? -Rob - Dennis I also have an addition to my list of where there are breakages with these e-mail (not list) addresses: Some number of iCLAs have openoffice.org e-mail addresses as the e-mail of record. That won't interfere too badly with those who have already been established as committers (at AOOo at least) but it is another bullet item for my original list. -Original Message- From: Shane Curcuru [mailto:a...@shanecurcuru.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 05:05 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [ISSUE] Shut-down of all name@ openoffice.org e-mail addresses I'll butt in with my (non-binding) suggestions. On 11/2/2011 12:01 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: Hi Dave, where I am confused is the focus on Mailing-List forwarding rather than E-mail forwarding. I can't tell what the intended behaviors are. Let's get clear: 1. If someone posts to one of the old e-mail list addresses (e.g., us...@openoffice.org), what is intended to happen? What is the observed behavior? How does this extend to use of -subscribe, -unsubscribe, -help, -owner (or their OO.o counterparts), etc. ? After the final migration, they all bounce. By then we should have nice friendly pages - easily searchable for - that tell past OpenOffice.org product version users which relevant Apache list to use. And we'll have sent several hey, this list is going away notes to the old list. 2. (a) If someone sends an e-mail to an existing account/e-mail address (e.g., orc...@openoffice.org), what is intended to happen? What does the individual that it current forwards to get to know or do about it? The person sending the e-mail? If the forwarding bounces, what will happen? (b) If the account is closed/deleted, what are the 2(a) answers. After the final migration, if they're not a committer, they bounce. Period. We are not in the business of providing services to non-committers. If they're a committer, then it's up to the PPMC to decide if 1) you want to, and 2) you will support some software to make committer forwarders @openoffice.org work somehow. Apache projects use apache.org services to do their work. I certainly expect - as such a hugely accessed service - that web access to openoffice.org will remain, along with a number of it's key subdomains. But we really need to start thinking like the new Apache project that we're running, and not like
Re: request
2011/11/2 Łukasz Janik ljani...@wp.pl: Please translate the page http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/, in various languages, including Polish, and the official site in apache openoffice after incubator Interesting point. Do any Apache pages have translations? Is the Apache infrastructure equipped to handle them? Don
Re: request
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Donald Whytock dwhyt...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/11/2 Łukasz Janik ljani...@wp.pl: Please translate the page http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/, in various languages, including Polish, and the official site in apache openoffice after incubator Interesting point. Do any Apache pages have translations? Is the Apache infrastructure equipped to handle them? We do have a Polish translation the the legacy OOo homepage: http://pl.openoffice.org/ Don
Re: [ISSUE] openoffice.org must have an MTA / MX
Request to be educated: On 2 Nov 2011, at 18:31, Dave Fisher wrote: (Choice one) If only a few addresses continue (like securityteam@oo.o) with the rest bouncing with whatever message and link then Apache Infra can support it on the normal qmail/ezmlm system. With or without preserving MLs as subscriber-less forwarders. How easy is it to ensure that all old n...@openoffice.org addresses fail with a polite and informative message specific to the situation rather than a generic fail? Thanks, S.
Re: [GENERAL] Mail list opt in sent to..
Notification sent to: dev@graphics On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: Notification sent to: dev@api, dev@ dba, dev@framework, dev@gsl, dev@lingucomponent, dev@native-lang, dev@porting, dev@qa this am... On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: notification sent to us...@openoffice.org this am I will be adding a status column to: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Mailing+lists so we can more easily see what's been done. On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: We need additional help as well. On 10/29/2011 03:17 PM, Rob Weir wrote: On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Kay Schenkkay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: dev@sc, dev@sw, dev@tools. tinderbox@tools, dev@ucb, accessibility@ui, disucss@ux all to ooo-dev Just left the original sign-in statement for the time being, as this was a large group and if there were problems, they could reply to me directly. ...more to come soonish. I will update this thread as I move along Thanks. We have 259 subscribers to ooo-dev right now. We can check again in another week or two and see how well the migration effort has gone. -Rob -- --**--** --- MzK This is no social crisis Just another tricky day for you. -- Tricky Day, the Who -- --**--** MzK This is no social crisis Just another tricky day for you. -- Tricky Day, the Who -- --- MzK This is no social crisis Just another tricky day for you. -- Tricky Day, the Who -- --- MzK This is no social crisis Just another tricky day for you. -- Tricky Day, the Who -- --- MzK This is no social crisis Just another tricky day for you. -- Tricky Day, the Who
Re: request
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.namewrote: Rob Weir wrote on Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 13:19:46 -0400: On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Donald Whytock dwhyt...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/11/2 Łukasz Janik ljani...@wp.pl: Please translate the page http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/, in various languages, including Polish, and the official site in apache openoffice after incubator Interesting point. Do any Apache pages have translations? Is the Apache infrastructure equipped to handle them? There was a large effort to handle the redirector to the different NL. NL are not translations of the homepage are different communities in itself. Something that was governance with the NLC and other structures. NL like ES, FR and JA are structurally different to the EN homepage. There was a whole body of work so that it was easy for people to locate their NLC. Might be a good idea to see how much this change from the ooo-site and the openofficeorg tree. % svn ls https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/site/publish/ | grep faq % curl -H Accept-Language: ja http://subversion.apache.org/faq -- *Alexandro Colorado* *OpenOffice.org* Español http://es.openoffice.org fingerprint: E62B CF77 1BEA 0749 C0B8 50B9 3DE6 A84A 68D0 72E6
