Re: [CODE] configure.in: yes/no messages swapped in --enable-copyleft

[Andre Fischer]

On 21.11.2011 19:59, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

Andre Fischer wrote:

good point but please keep in mind that this is a temporary workaround.
Much work is currently being done ... the --enable-copyleft switch
will not live for very long.


Thanks for the information, but since "configure" is writing a wrong
(and potentially confusing) message, and the fix I sent is trivial and
totally harmless, why not just fix it?

It takes less to fix it than to discuss it by e-mail, and people
experimenting with the --enable-copyleft switch will be reassured if
configure gives them the proper feedback. And since I think that the new
--enable-x-license (or whatever it is) section in configure.in will be
copied and pasted from --enable-copyleft, it is probably good to get it
right there even if it is going away soon.


You are absolutely right, and I would have applied the patch but I do 
not yet have commit rights.
I just did not want you to be disappointed when your fix is removed in 
(hopefully) a few days.


-Andre

Re: [DISCUSS]: content of the about dialog box

[Gianluca Turconi]

2011/11/21 Rob Weir :
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Andrea Pescetti
>  wrote:
>> Rob Weir wrote:
>>>
>>> So in total, maybe something like:
>>> =
>>> Copyright © 2011 Apache Software Foundation. All rights reserved.
>>
>> I'm not sure about this. Is there any code that is under the Apache
>> copyright? As far as I know, the copyright still belongs to Oracle and
>> third-party contributors.
>>
>
> See:  http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
>
> We (the PMC) create a work when we select collectively select what
> patches to apply, etc.  Apache claims a copyright on that collective
> work.  Remember, an OSS license is only enforceable by an entity that
> owns the copyright.  So it is good that we claim this.
>
> Oracle may have copyright on portions as well, as may others, but
> those are noted in the NOTICE file.

I think it would be better to use the same wording that there will be in
the NOTICE file (according to http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html):

"Apache [PRODUCT_NAME]
Copyright [] The Apache Software Foundation

*This product includes software developed at
The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/)*."

In this way Apache wouldn't claim* full rights* (including intellectual
ownership) in the about dialog box that instead is denying in a
hypothetical NOTICE file for specific files.

Regards,

Gianluca
-- 
Lettura gratuita o acquisto di libri e racconti di fantascienza,
fantasy, horror, noir, narrativa fantastica e tradizionale:
http://www.letturefantastiche.com/

Re: Rationalizing two OpenOffice websites

[Malte Timmermann]

+1, makes sense to me :)

On 22.11.2011 00:46, Rob Weir wrote:

We have with this project something that most other Apache projects
don't have and which the legacy OOo project never had.  We have two
independent websites.

We have the legacy www.openoffice.org website, which served as an
end-user portal for OpenOffice as well as a website for project
participants.

And we have the http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/, which on
graduation probably becomes something shorter,  like
http://openoffice.apache.org.  For most Apache projects their website
also serves both purposes:  a site for users as well as project
participants.

So, we have both of these websites, and a lot of redundancy caused by
it.  This obviously has a downside.  It makes it hard to update, since
a lot of information is in both places.  And it confuses users since
the websites are out of sync on some important topics.  It also
prevents us from really optimizing the experience for each audience.
I suspect that long-term this dual-website with overlapping content is
not a maintainable model.

What can we do?

I hope I am not committing heresy if I say that most users of
OpenOffice care as little about Apache as drinker of a Pepsi cares
about the Board of Directors of PepsiCo Corporation.  The average user
(and we're talking about millions of them) cares about downloading,
installing, using, learning about and generally being productive with
OpenOffice.  It is a tool they use to do their work. Their work is
what matters to them, not our work.

But of course we also have a growing number of users, contributors and
committers who want to get more involved with the project. OpenOffice
is interesting to them.  They identify with it.  They want to learn
more than just the basics.  They are intrigued by open source.  They
want to help.  They want to get more involved.

The trick I think, is to have websites that speak to each of these
audiences, as well as an easy/obvious way to navigate between them,
while at the same time avoiding unnecessary cross talk and redundancy.

For example, could we have something like this:

1) www.openoffice.org is the website for the OpenOffice product.  It
is the end user site, focused on their interactions with the product.
So download, help, extensions, support.  It is not how they interact
with the project.  It serves the narrow focus on the product.


2) incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg (eventually
openoffice.apache.org) on the other hand is where the project members
work and where the public (includiing users) interacts with the
project. Not the product, but the project.

This dual website is quite commonly used for managing large and
important brands.  For example, the consumer, when interfacting with
the brand Pepsi and Pepsi products goes to:

http://www.pepsi.com

But the person who wants to learn more about the company goes to another URL:

http://www.pepsico.com/

Navigating between then is possible via a link on the page footer.
But generally each site is optimized for its target audience.

Re: Proposal for retirement of openoffice.org email forwarder

[Malte Timmermann]

+1 to Rob's and Simon's suggestion.

I really have no interest in keeping my @openoffice.org email forward, 
as it's only good for receiving lots of Spam.


Malte.

On 21.11.2011 18:41, Simon Phipps wrote:


On 21 Nov 2011, at 17:27, Rob Weir wrote:


1) Check with Andrew on the latest date where we can be assured the
email forwarder will be still in operation.  I don't want users
surprised, but neither do I want this to appear open-ended.


Is Andrew also able to arrange for all the @openoffice.org addresses Oracle has 
on record to receive a one-time termination-of-service e-mail sent to them 
pointing to the blog post and wiki page? If he is able to arrange that, I 
suggest adding it to your step 1.

S.

view overlay manager

[eric b]

Hi,

Still diff'ing 3.2.x  and 3.3.+ source, code, I'm analysing the new  
view overlay manager. Can someone tell me who implemented it (sd) ?


Probably Andre or Armin ?


Thanks in advance,
Eric Bachard

--
qɔᴉɹə
Projet OOo4Kids : http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page
L'association EducOOo : http://www.educoo.org
Blog : http://eric.bachard.org/news

Re: Source Code Sponsor of OOo

[Jürgen Schmidt]

On 11/21/11 10:12 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:

Alexandro started fixing the Spanish site, but there is more to do ...


it would be interesting to know where the problem is and what the 
planned changes are. There are valid concerns about the page and i would 
really appreciate if Alexandro would describe what he want to change.


Changing or removing a PayPal button can't be a big issue.

I can't read Spanish and therefore i depend on a good explanation. But i 
would really appreciate if we as PPMC can agree on the content of all 
our pages or a least on a concept.


I repeat myself that is the reason why i would prefer a common concept 
for all pages and move more individual language community pages into the 
wiki or somewhere else.


Juergen




Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 21, 2011, at 12:38 PM, Pedro Giffuni  wrote:


Hmm...

Not pretending to defend or condemn anyone here,
but it would seem like SUN/Oracle had approved
some external uses of the trademark that the ASF
is not likely to approve.

As long as they don't carry ASF logos we should
be patient and allow time for some transition
to go on.

FWIW, I think what is going on the Spanish site
is much more problematic since it staged (still)
in an Apache domain:

http://ooo-site.apache.org/es/lecturas/lecturas_0019.html

cheers,

Pedro.

Re: view overlay manager

[Andre Fischer]

Hi Eric,

not from me.  Probably from Christian.

Regards,
Andre

On 22.11.2011 10:58, eric b wrote:

Hi,

Still diff'ing 3.2.x and 3.3.+ source, code, I'm analysing the new view
overlay manager. Can someone tell me who implemented it (sd) ?

Probably Andre or Armin ?


Thanks in advance,
Eric Bachard

Re: Rationalizing two OpenOffice websites

[Jürgen Schmidt]

it sounds like a Déjà vu and i think we had already a discussion that 
goes in this direction.


Yes, i totally agree on this separation and it makes sense to me. Moving 
forward with this separation we need much less migration and can 
concentrate on the most important pages of the main portal (for users) 
www.openoffice.org.


Hopefully we can change wiki.services.openoffice.org to 
wiki.openoffice.org and can redirect the old Url to the new short one. 
and the same for the forum users.services.openoffice.org


The portal side provide the main info about the product (mainly 
marketing material), provide the download (with the infra structure 
behind), but also provides the entry points to the wiki, to the forum 
and of course openoffice.apache.org for project members.


I really like that

Juergen


On 11/22/11 12:46 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

We have with this project something that most other Apache projects
don't have and which the legacy OOo project never had.  We have two
independent websites.

We have the legacy www.openoffice.org website, which served as an
end-user portal for OpenOffice as well as a website for project
participants.

And we have the http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/, which on
graduation probably becomes something shorter,  like
http://openoffice.apache.org.  For most Apache projects their website
also serves both purposes:  a site for users as well as project
participants.

So, we have both of these websites, and a lot of redundancy caused by
it.  This obviously has a downside.  It makes it hard to update, since
a lot of information is in both places.  And it confuses users since
the websites are out of sync on some important topics.  It also
prevents us from really optimizing the experience for each audience.
I suspect that long-term this dual-website with overlapping content is
not a maintainable model.

What can we do?

I hope I am not committing heresy if I say that most users of
OpenOffice care as little about Apache as drinker of a Pepsi cares
about the Board of Directors of PepsiCo Corporation.  The average user
(and we're talking about millions of them) cares about downloading,
installing, using, learning about and generally being productive with
OpenOffice.  It is a tool they use to do their work. Their work is
what matters to them, not our work.

But of course we also have a growing number of users, contributors and
committers who want to get more involved with the project. OpenOffice
is interesting to them.  They identify with it.  They want to learn
more than just the basics.  They are intrigued by open source.  They
want to help.  They want to get more involved.

The trick I think, is to have websites that speak to each of these
audiences, as well as an easy/obvious way to navigate between them,
while at the same time avoiding unnecessary cross talk and redundancy.

For example, could we have something like this:

1) www.openoffice.org is the website for the OpenOffice product.  It
is the end user site, focused on their interactions with the product.
So download, help, extensions, support.  It is not how they interact
with the project.  It serves the narrow focus on the product.


2) incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg (eventually
openoffice.apache.org) on the other hand is where the project members
work and where the public (includiing users) interacts with the
project. Not the product, but the project.

This dual website is quite commonly used for managing large and
important brands.  For example, the consumer, when interfacting with
the brand Pepsi and Pepsi products goes to:

http://www.pepsi.com

But the person who wants to learn more about the company goes to another URL:

http://www.pepsico.com/

Navigating between then is possible via a link on the page footer.
But generally each site is optimized for its target audience.

Re: Proposal for retirement of openoffice.org email forwarder

[Jürgen Schmidt]

+1 from me

On 11/22/11 10:04 AM, Malte Timmermann wrote:

+1 to Rob's and Simon's suggestion.

I really have no interest in keeping my @openoffice.org email forward,
as it's only good for receiving lots of Spam.

Malte.

On 21.11.2011 18:41, Simon Phipps wrote:


On 21 Nov 2011, at 17:27, Rob Weir wrote:


1) Check with Andrew on the latest date where we can be assured the
email forwarder will be still in operation. I don't want users
surprised, but neither do I want this to appear open-ended.


Is Andrew also able to arrange for all the @openoffice.org addresses
Oracle has on record to receive a one-time termination-of-service
e-mail sent to them pointing to the blog post and wiki page? If he is
able to arrange that, I suggest adding it to your step 1.

S.

Re: [CODE]: 118605 remove epm?

[Jürgen Schmidt]

Hi,

i would like to gave a short update.

I stumbled over problems using a downloaded epm 4.2 
(http://www.epmhome.org), build and install it on a Fedora 16 system 
(rpm based).


The epm call failed to build the rpm packages. It seems that epm 
triggers /bin/rpm with some parameters that are not accepted. I don't 
understand why at the moment.


I expect also problems on other systems (e.g. FreeBSD, solaris, ...). To 
move forward for now i plan to go back to use the version 3.7 of epm and 
apply our patches.


The plan is to handle it similar to dmake and investigate to a later 
time in more detail into the packaging process. I assume there is still 
some room for improvements ones the process is understand completely.


But at the moment i would like to focus and to move forward with the IP 
clearance. Means epm is only a build tool and not part of a binary 
release or a source release.


The idea is to download the source directly from the homepage and apply 
our patches and use it. Alternatively epm can be specified directly with 
the configure switch -with-epm.


Any opinions or ideas. I highly appreciate any useful idea that help us 
to move forward.


Juergen


On 11/16/11 3:36 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

On 11/15/11 5:00 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

Hi,

i am currently trying to build with a system available epm tool. And i
am right now building on a Ubuntu 11.10 with epm 4.2. Does anybody have
built with a system epm on a Linux system?



a short update on this topic. I was able to build an office on an Ubuntu
11.10 using the system epm tool 4.2.

With disabling a packagepool process in instsetoo_native the build
finished and i got my deb packages. The difference compared to an
earlier build is that the package names has changed a little bit and
that i have directories with the same name in the .../DEPS folder which
were probably the base for the packages. But that is a minor issue i
would say.

Anyway the installed office works and i have not yet identified a real
problem. But that was to easy and i expect more problems on other
platforms. Solaris (that i can't build) and a rpm based Linux system, ...

I am no expert in this packaging area on all the different systems and
may be we lose the relocation feature or something else. So if anybody
has deep knowledge with epm or packing of deb or rpm packages and is
interested to help, please contact me. Any kind of help is appreciated.

Juergen

Re: [CODE]: 118605 remove epm?

[eric b]

Le 22 nov. 11 à 11:57, Jürgen Schmidt a écrit :


Hi,



Hi,



i would like to gave a short update.

I stumbled over problems using a downloaded epm 4.2 (http:// 
www.epmhome.org), build and install it on a Fedora 16 system (rpm  
based).


The epm call failed to build the rpm packages. It seems that epm  
triggers /bin/rpm with some parameters that are not accepted. I  
don't understand why at the moment.





I remember an issue caused by rpmbuild (or buildrpm maybe) missing.  
Maybe you hit it  ?  FYI, the rpm thing is detected at configure time


Eric

--
qɔᴉɹə
Projet OOo4Kids : http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page
L'association EducOOo : http://www.educoo.org
Blog : http://eric.bachard.org/news

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

[Kazunari Hirano]

Hi Shane, Jim and all,

Thanks.

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:41 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>
> On Nov 17, 2011, at 7:24 AM, Kazunari Hirano wrote:
>>
>> If we (Apache) use OpenOffice as product name and Apache OpenOffice as
>> project name, then we can give Team OOo the OpenOffice.org brand and
>> trademark?
>>
>
> Why would we want to? You don't reward "bad behavior" so even
> if the ASF did want to "give" the OOo brand to some 3rd
> party (which we for sure do NOT want to do), it certainly
> wouldn't be TOOo

I see.

I was just wondering what the ASF keeps holding the OpenOffice.org
trademark for if Apache OpenOffice the project will develop and
release Apache OpenOffice the product.

Thanks,
khirano

[CODE] 118612: IP clearance: Remove swingExtSrc

[Andre Fischer]

Hi all,

I have removed another library, sigh.  swingExtSrc has a somewhat 
unclear license, probably LGPL. It is an experimental library that 
apparently never got the attention from Sun, now Orcale, to get a clear 
license.


It is used by the rhino library, which provides JavaScript support for 
the macro framework.  There is a new version of rhino that does not use 
swingExtSrc anymore, but whose integration into OpenOffice will require 
some work.


So, JavaScript support goes only temporarily, until there is time to use 
the new rhino lib.


Again the question for review and check-in.  Issue 118612 
(https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=118612).


Thanks,
Andre

Re: Source Code Sponsor of OOo

[Ross Gardler]

2011/11/22 Jürgen Schmidt :
> On 11/21/11 10:12 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>
>> Alexandro started fixing the Spanish site, but there is more to do ...
>
> it would be interesting to know where the problem is and what the planned
> changes are. There are valid concerns about the page and i would really
> appreciate if Alexandro would describe what he want to change.
>
> Changing or removing a PayPal button can't be a big issue.
>
> I can't read Spanish and therefore i depend on a good explanation. But i
> would really appreciate if we as PPMC can agree on the content of all our
> pages or a least on a concept.
>
> I repeat myself that is the reason why i would prefer a common concept for
> all pages and move more individual language community pages into the wiki or
> somewhere else.

+1

I would have thought the best approach is for national language pages
to be translations of the English language pages with no significant
extra/different content.

That is not to say there can't be national language support groups
with their own materials. But, at least in this transition stage we
should focus on getting the core content defined and translated.

Ross

Re: view overlay manager

[Armin Le Grand]

Hi eric,

On 22.11.2011 10:58, eric b wrote:

Hi,

Still diff'ing 3.2.x and 3.3.+ source, code, I'm analysing the new view
overlay manager. Can someone tell me who implemented it (sd) ?

Probably Andre or Armin ?


Yes, from me, but it's not so new. It allows to have an 'overlay' on the 
edit views so that you can show/hide interaction objects (all kinds, 
e.g. the green markers, but also whole SdrObjects during interaction) 
quickly. There is a buffering and non-buffering implementation, only the 
buffering obne does use extra VDevs to achieve cheap repaints.


It is also used for the new transparent cursors in Writer and Calc, for 
example. Another side effect is that all paints foir the edit views are 
buffered now which e.g. for Writer made much old code to avoid flicker 
obsolete (and avoids flicker completely). It also speeded up repaints 
(also e.g. Writer) remarkably.


Both effects (buffering and fast overlay repaints) are configurable 
using the registry, so less capable systems can switch all that off for 
less memory footprint.


HTH!


Thanks in advance,
Eric Bachard



sincerely,
Armin
--
ALG

Re: [Code] strategy for "child works spaces"

[Armin Le Grand]

Hi *,

no further responses, thus - if no complaints - I'll start adding a 
branch for svg replacement soon...


Sincerely,
Armin

On 21.11.2011 14:48, Armin Le Grand wrote:

Hi eric,

On 21.11.2011 14:26, eric b wrote:

Hi Armin,

Le 21 nov. 11 à 13:14, Armin a écrit :



[..]



Interesting point. It may be useful to grep own cwses, or releases.
Thus something like

/cws/alg/svgreplacement
/cws/alg/...
/cws/someonelse/...
/dev/aoo340
/dev/aoo350
...

would be nice. Comments, anyone?



Sorry for my dumb question, but how things will work when several devs
will work together on one feature ?


Just work together on /cws/alg/svgreplacement after (in this example) I
have created it. The branch is practically not exclusively modifyable by
be, it will just be a convention to only work on branches/cwses together
after being somewhat invited, IMHO.


Also, what about use the cws name first, then the Apache id ?


I would prefer cws first, this will give a less crowded
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ which is a dood thing
from my POV. This makes all cwses appear in cws, thus you will not have
to scan all names in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ for
what you are looking. In former developent we had somewhat of 150-200
cwses open, thus i would definitely prefer them to be in an own path,
and even add the developers name to it.

Thus, in https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ where you will
naturally look for orientation you will have something like

cws
dev
experiment
...

but not a list of 150-200 branches in the works.



Could give :

/cws/svgreplacement/alg
/cws/svgreplacement/another_contributor


This would mean that another_contributor is not joining to work on
svgreplacement, but has branched it to do his own things with it.
Possible, but hopefully never needed :-)


Please be gentle if I was plain wrong :-)


Regards,
Eric




sincerely,
Armin
--
ALG

Re: Rationalizing two OpenOffice websites

[Marcus (OOo)]

+1

Marcus



Am 11/22/2011 11:24 AM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:

it sounds like a Déjà vu and i think we had already a discussion that
goes in this direction.

Yes, i totally agree on this separation and it makes sense to me. Moving
forward with this separation we need much less migration and can
concentrate on the most important pages of the main portal (for users)
www.openoffice.org.

Hopefully we can change wiki.services.openoffice.org to
wiki.openoffice.org and can redirect the old Url to the new short one.
and the same for the forum users.services.openoffice.org

The portal side provide the main info about the product (mainly
marketing material), provide the download (with the infra structure
behind), but also provides the entry points to the wiki, to the forum
and of course openoffice.apache.org for project members.

I really like that

Juergen


On 11/22/11 12:46 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

We have with this project something that most other Apache projects
don't have and which the legacy OOo project never had. We have two
independent websites.

We have the legacy www.openoffice.org website, which served as an
end-user portal for OpenOffice as well as a website for project
participants.

And we have the http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/, which on
graduation probably becomes something shorter, like
http://openoffice.apache.org. For most Apache projects their website
also serves both purposes: a site for users as well as project
participants.

So, we have both of these websites, and a lot of redundancy caused by
it. This obviously has a downside. It makes it hard to update, since
a lot of information is in both places. And it confuses users since
the websites are out of sync on some important topics. It also
prevents us from really optimizing the experience for each audience.
I suspect that long-term this dual-website with overlapping content is
not a maintainable model.

What can we do?

I hope I am not committing heresy if I say that most users of
OpenOffice care as little about Apache as drinker of a Pepsi cares
about the Board of Directors of PepsiCo Corporation. The average user
(and we're talking about millions of them) cares about downloading,
installing, using, learning about and generally being productive with
OpenOffice. It is a tool they use to do their work. Their work is
what matters to them, not our work.

But of course we also have a growing number of users, contributors and
committers who want to get more involved with the project. OpenOffice
is interesting to them. They identify with it. They want to learn
more than just the basics. They are intrigued by open source. They
want to help. They want to get more involved.

The trick I think, is to have websites that speak to each of these
audiences, as well as an easy/obvious way to navigate between them,
while at the same time avoiding unnecessary cross talk and redundancy.

For example, could we have something like this:

1) www.openoffice.org is the website for the OpenOffice product. It
is the end user site, focused on their interactions with the product.
So download, help, extensions, support. It is not how they interact
with the project. It serves the narrow focus on the product.


2) incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg (eventually
openoffice.apache.org) on the other hand is where the project members
work and where the public (includiing users) interacts with the
project. Not the product, but the project.

This dual website is quite commonly used for managing large and
important brands. For example, the consumer, when interfacting with
the brand Pepsi and Pepsi products goes to:

http://www.pepsi.com

But the person who wants to learn more about the company goes to
another URL:

http://www.pepsico.com/

Navigating between then is possible via a link on the page footer.
But generally each site is optimized for its target audience.

Re: Source Code Sponsor of OOo

[Kazunari Hirano]

Hi Ross and all,

Shall we use "native language" instead of "national language" please?

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Ross Gardler
 wrote:
> That is not to say there can't be national language support groups
> with their own materials. But, at least in this transition stage we
> should focus on getting the core content defined and translated.

This is good.  If the core contents are defined, we will be ready to
translate them into Japanese using our Japanese mailing list,
ooo-general...@incubator.apache.org and making a translation working
page on the wiki.

So we would like the mod_mbox to implement translation soon.
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52195
:)

Thanks,
khirano

Re: [CODE]: 118605 remove epm?

[Pedro Giffuni]

Hi Juergen;

I dont have an easy solution for you but perhaps
you should try OpenPKG, as it produces RPM
and has a better license:
 http://www.openpkg.net/

And dont worry about FreeBSD as none of those
packagers work with the new pkgng format.

Cheers,

Pedro.

--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:

> From: Jürgen Schmidt 
> Subject: Re: [CODE]: 118605 remove epm?
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Date: Tuesday, November 22, 2011, 5:57 AM
> Hi,
> 
> i would like to gave a short update.
> 
> I stumbled over problems using a downloaded epm 4.2 (http://www.epmhome.org), 
> build and install it on a
> Fedora 16 system (rpm based).
> 
> The epm call failed to build the rpm packages. It seems
> that epm triggers /bin/rpm with some parameters that are not
> accepted. I don't understand why at the moment.
> 
> I expect also problems on other systems (e.g. FreeBSD,
> solaris, ...). To move forward for now i plan to go back to
> use the version 3.7 of epm and apply our patches.
> 
> The plan is to handle it similar to dmake and investigate
> to a later time in more detail into the packaging process. I
> assume there is still some room for improvements ones the
> process is understand completely.
> 
> But at the moment i would like to focus and to move forward
> with the IP clearance. Means epm is only a build tool and
> not part of a binary release or a source release.
> 
> The idea is to download the source directly from the
> homepage and apply our patches and use it. Alternatively epm
> can be specified directly with the configure switch
> -with-epm.
> 
> Any opinions or ideas. I highly appreciate any useful idea
> that help us to move forward.
> 
> Juergen
> 
> 
> On 11/16/11 3:36 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> > On 11/15/11 5:00 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> 
> >> i am currently trying to build with a system
> available epm tool. And i
> >> am right now building on a Ubuntu 11.10 with epm
> 4.2. Does anybody have
> >> built with a system epm on a Linux system?
> >> 
> > 
> > a short update on this topic. I was able to build an
> office on an Ubuntu
> > 11.10 using the system epm tool 4.2.
> > 
> > With disabling a packagepool process in
> instsetoo_native the build
> > finished and i got my deb packages. The difference
> compared to an
> > earlier build is that the package names has changed a
> little bit and
> > that i have directories with the same name in the
> .../DEPS folder which
> > were probably the base for the packages. But that is a
> minor issue i
> > would say.
> > 
> > Anyway the installed office works and i have not yet
> identified a real
> > problem. But that was to easy and i expect more
> problems on other
> > platforms. Solaris (that i can't build) and a rpm
> based Linux system, ...
> > 
> > I am no expert in this packaging area on all the
> different systems and
> > may be we lose the relocation feature or something
> else. So if anybody
> > has deep knowledge with epm or packing of deb or rpm
> packages and is
> > interested to help, please contact me. Any kind of
> help is appreciated.
> > 
> > Juergen
> > 
> > 
> 
>

Re: Source Code Sponsor of OOo

[Ross Gardler]

On 22 November 2011 11:36, Kazunari Hirano  wrote:
> Hi Ross and all,
>
> Shall we use "native language" instead of "national language" please?

Yes - thanks for reminding me.

Ross


>
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Ross Gardler
>  wrote:
>> That is not to say there can't be national language support groups
>> with their own materials. But, at least in this transition stage we
>> should focus on getting the core content defined and translated.
>
> This is good.  If the core contents are defined, we will be ready to
> translate them into Japanese using our Japanese mailing list,
> ooo-general...@incubator.apache.org and making a translation working
> page on the wiki.
>
> So we would like the mod_mbox to implement translation soon.
> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52195
> :)
>
> Thanks,
> khirano
>



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

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

[Rob Weir]

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 6:03 AM, Kazunari Hirano  wrote:
> Hi Shane, Jim and all,
>
> Thanks.
>
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:41 AM, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>>
>> On Nov 17, 2011, at 7:24 AM, Kazunari Hirano wrote:
>>>
>>> If we (Apache) use OpenOffice as product name and Apache OpenOffice as
>>> project name, then we can give Team OOo the OpenOffice.org brand and
>>> trademark?
>>>
>>
>> Why would we want to? You don't reward "bad behavior" so even
>> if the ASF did want to "give" the OOo brand to some 3rd
>> party (which we for sure do NOT want to do), it certainly
>> wouldn't be TOOo
>
> I see.
>
> I was just wondering what the ASF keeps holding the OpenOffice.org
> trademark for if Apache OpenOffice the project will develop and
> release Apache OpenOffice the product.
>

Maybe think of it this way;  Kentucky Fried Chicken decided to rebrand
itself as "KFC" because the wanted to deemphasize the "fried" part,
for modern health-conscious consumers.  But that doesn't meant that
anyone can go out and open a store and call it "Kentucky Friend
Chicken".  Both trademarks continue to be enforced.

(Do you have KFC in Japan?)

Regards,

-Rob


> Thanks,
> khirano
>

Re: [CODE]: 118605 remove epm?

[Pedro Giffuni]

Hmmm ...

Nevermind, OpenPKG is rather bulky.
Unfortunately portable packagers seem not
to be too common anymore.

Pedro.

--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Pedro Giffuni  wrote:

> From: Pedro Giffuni 
> Subject: Re: [CODE]: 118605 remove epm?
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Date: Tuesday, November 22, 2011, 7:24 AM
> Hi Juergen;
> 
> I dont have an easy solution for you but perhaps
> you should try OpenPKG, as it produces RPM
> and has a better license:
>      http://www.openpkg.net/
> 
> And dont worry about FreeBSD as none of those
> packagers work with the new pkgng format.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Pedro.
> 
> --- On Tue, 11/22/11, Jürgen Schmidt 
> wrote:
> 
> > From: Jürgen Schmidt 
> > Subject: Re: [CODE]: 118605 remove epm?
> > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Date: Tuesday, November 22, 2011, 5:57 AM
> > Hi,
> > 
> > i would like to gave a short update.
> > 
> > I stumbled over problems using a downloaded epm 4.2
> (http://www.epmhome.org), build and install it on a
> > Fedora 16 system (rpm based).
> > 
> > The epm call failed to build the rpm packages. It
> seems
> > that epm triggers /bin/rpm with some parameters that
> are not
> > accepted. I don't understand why at the moment.
> > 
> > I expect also problems on other systems (e.g.
> FreeBSD,
> > solaris, ...). To move forward for now i plan to go
> back to
> > use the version 3.7 of epm and apply our patches.
> > 
> > The plan is to handle it similar to dmake and
> investigate
> > to a later time in more detail into the packaging
> process. I
> > assume there is still some room for improvements ones
> the
> > process is understand completely.
> > 
> > But at the moment i would like to focus and to move
> forward
> > with the IP clearance. Means epm is only a build tool
> and
> > not part of a binary release or a source release.
> > 
> > The idea is to download the source directly from the
> > homepage and apply our patches and use it.
> Alternatively epm
> > can be specified directly with the configure switch
> > -with-epm.
> > 
> > Any opinions or ideas. I highly appreciate any useful
> idea
> > that help us to move forward.
> > 
> > Juergen
> > 
> > 
> > On 11/16/11 3:36 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> > > On 11/15/11 5:00 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >> 
> > >> i am currently trying to build with a system
> > available epm tool. And i
> > >> am right now building on a Ubuntu 11.10 with
> epm
> > 4.2. Does anybody have
> > >> built with a system epm on a Linux system?
> > >> 
> > > 
> > > a short update on this topic. I was able to build
> an
> > office on an Ubuntu
> > > 11.10 using the system epm tool 4.2.
> > > 
> > > With disabling a packagepool process in
> > instsetoo_native the build
> > > finished and i got my deb packages. The
> difference
> > compared to an
> > > earlier build is that the package names has
> changed a
> > little bit and
> > > that i have directories with the same name in
> the
> > .../DEPS folder which
> > > were probably the base for the packages. But that
> is a
> > minor issue i
> > > would say.
> > > 
> > > Anyway the installed office works and i have not
> yet
> > identified a real
> > > problem. But that was to easy and i expect more
> > problems on other
> > > platforms. Solaris (that i can't build) and a
> rpm
> > based Linux system, ...
> > > 
> > > I am no expert in this packaging area on all the
> > different systems and
> > > may be we lose the relocation feature or
> something
> > else. So if anybody
> > > has deep knowledge with epm or packing of deb or
> rpm
> > packages and is
> > > interested to help, please contact me. Any kind
> of
> > help is appreciated.
> > > 
> > > Juergen
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> >
>

Re: [CODE]: 118605 remove epm?

[Jürgen Schmidt]

Hi Pedro,

On 11/22/11 1:52 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:


Hmmm ...

Nevermind, OpenPKG is rather bulky.
Unfortunately portable packagers seem not
to be too common anymore.


the point is simply that we have to understand the whole packaging 
process better. I thought it was worse to check if it's possible to use 
a system epm. Sometimes things become easier over time or even obsolete. 
But in this case it seems that we have to stick with the 3.7 epm and the 
patches we have because they are very specific for OOo.


I hope that we can simplify this packaging process in the future a 
little bit because we can concentrate on one product only. In the past 
all processes here were designed to make it possible to build a 
StarOffice/Oracle Office version on top of it.


The problem is that we have to analyze the whole process to understand 
how it works. In the past one developer worked full-time on this 
packaging stuff ...


Juergen



Pedro.

--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Pedro Giffuni  wrote:


From: Pedro Giffuni
Subject: Re: [CODE]: 118605 remove epm?
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Date: Tuesday, November 22, 2011, 7:24 AM
Hi Juergen;

I dont have an easy solution for you but perhaps
you should try OpenPKG, as it produces RPM
and has a better license:
  http://www.openpkg.net/

And dont worry about FreeBSD as none of those
packagers work with the new pkgng format.

Cheers,

Pedro.

--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Jürgen Schmidt
wrote:


From: Jürgen Schmidt
Subject: Re: [CODE]: 118605 remove epm?
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Date: Tuesday, November 22, 2011, 5:57 AM
Hi,

i would like to gave a short update.

I stumbled over problems using a downloaded epm 4.2

(http://www.epmhome.org), build and install it on a

Fedora 16 system (rpm based).

The epm call failed to build the rpm packages. It

seems

that epm triggers /bin/rpm with some parameters that

are not

accepted. I don't understand why at the moment.

I expect also problems on other systems (e.g.

FreeBSD,

solaris, ...). To move forward for now i plan to go

back to

use the version 3.7 of epm and apply our patches.

The plan is to handle it similar to dmake and

investigate

to a later time in more detail into the packaging

process. I

assume there is still some room for improvements ones

the

process is understand completely.

But at the moment i would like to focus and to move

forward

with the IP clearance. Means epm is only a build tool

and

not part of a binary release or a source release.

The idea is to download the source directly from the
homepage and apply our patches and use it.

Alternatively epm

can be specified directly with the configure switch
-with-epm.

Any opinions or ideas. I highly appreciate any useful

idea

that help us to move forward.

Juergen


On 11/16/11 3:36 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

On 11/15/11 5:00 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

Hi,

i am currently trying to build with a system

available epm tool. And i

am right now building on a Ubuntu 11.10 with

epm

4.2. Does anybody have

built with a system epm on a Linux system?



a short update on this topic. I was able to build

an

office on an Ubuntu

11.10 using the system epm tool 4.2.

With disabling a packagepool process in

instsetoo_native the build

finished and i got my deb packages. The

difference

compared to an

earlier build is that the package names has

changed a

little bit and

that i have directories with the same name in

the

.../DEPS folder which

were probably the base for the packages. But that

is a

minor issue i

would say.

Anyway the installed office works and i have not

yet

identified a real

problem. But that was to easy and i expect more

problems on other

platforms. Solaris (that i can't build) and a

rpm

based Linux system, ...


I am no expert in this packaging area on all the

different systems and

may be we lose the relocation feature or

something

else. So if anybody

has deep knowledge with epm or packing of deb or

rpm

packages and is

interested to help, please contact me. Any kind

of

help is appreciated.


Juergen

Re: [CODE]: 118605 remove epm?

[eric b]

Le 22 nov. 11 à 14:33, Jürgen Schmidt a écrit :


Hi Pedro,

On 11/22/11 1:52 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:


Hmmm ...

Nevermind, OpenPKG is rather bulky.
Unfortunately portable packagers seem not
to be too common anymore.


the point is simply that we have to understand the whole packaging  
process better. I thought it was worse to check if it's possible to  
use a system epm. Sometimes things become easier over time or even  
obsolete. But in this case it seems that we have to stick with the  
3.7 epm and the patches we have because they are very specific for  
OOo.




I don't think so : system epm *should* work out of the box, if not,  
we need to fix the issue.


I'll try a build tonight on Linux, and if broken, I'll have a look.



I hope that we can simplify this packaging process in the future a  
little bit because we can concentrate on one product only.



Sure. That's exactly what I did with OOo4Kids.

Most of the options are given at configure time. The result is  
environment variables.


At the end, the packaging is done using perl scripts, all located in  
solenv/bin. setup_native will produce the Control files, and only  
sysui has another process, to build the menu entries.




In the past all processes here were designed to make it possible to  
build a StarOffice/Oracle Office version on top of it.


The problem is that we have to analyze the whole process to  
understand how it works. In the past one developer worked full-time  
on this packaging stuff ...





I'd suggest to document it on the wiki.  We are several to know well  
the build process on this list.


What is your issue ? Do you have a log ?


Lat but not least, I really think we should make IRC ClassRoom, and  
invite newcomers to try building Apache OpenOffice.org (sorry, I'll  
keep the .org) : 10 or +  builders, means the most little issue is  
immediately detected, and often, directly fixed.



Eric

Re: oooforum.org

[Andrew Douglas Pitonyak]

On 11/20/2011 04:33 AM, Peter Junge wrote:

Hi,

is there any admin of oooforum.org around here?

It's getting spamed with really disgusting content on the front page.

Peter



The OOoForum is fully managed to Ed Buck. He has two low level 
administrators of which I am one.


Ed appears to have good intention, but he is the only high level 
administrator. I do not believe that he can give others this access 
because then they would have access to the machine itself, which runs 
other things for the company hosting the forum.


Ed has stated for more than a year that he would update the forum so 
that spammers could be better prevented from accessing the forum. To 
date, he has done nothing but make promises. The user services forum was 
started because some community members desired a forum where 
decentralized control was available so that the required manpower might 
be available to keep things under control.


Presently, spammers seem to use OOoForum as they desire. This is 
particularly difficult when a particular spammer opts to hit the site 
with message after message. The moderators are not able to stop a rogue 
poster, they can only react to the messages themselves. New means of 
preventing the spammers are not available without updating the forum 
software, so this is not likely to change.


The volume of spam has been so great that some moderators have left. I 
rarely post to the forum any more because when I go to the forum I spend 
my time removing spam and trying to lock out spammers based on user name 
and specific IP address - which is a loosing battle.



--
Andrew Pitonyak
My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt
Info:  http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php

Re: oooforum.org

[Andrew Douglas Pitonyak]

I posted this to their forum, see if it may motivate some people there

http://www.oooforum.org/forum/viewtopic.phtml?p=456167#456167




--
Andrew Pitonyak
My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt
Info:  http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php

Re: oooforum.org

[RGB ES]

2011/11/22 Andrew Douglas Pitonyak 

>
> I posted this to their forum, see if it may motivate some people there
>
> http://www.oooforum.org/forum/**viewtopic.phtml?p=456167#**456167
>
>
>
I don't think that some emails on the AOO mailing list can be considered as
an "Apache petition". There is nothing "official" on this thread, IMO, just
people worried about the situation and some random thoughts.
I think you need to rephrase your post.

Ricardo

Re: oooforum.org

[Shane Curcuru]

+1 as well, your thread really is not a good description of the thought 
process here, nor is the reference to the "Apache group" (which means 
something different) a good idea.


It would be really, really helpful to find a way for PPMC members on 
this list to work directly with the server admins for oooforum to talk; 
this should be a positive engagement, not a negative one.


- Shane

On 2011-11-22 9:40 AM, RGB ES wrote:

2011/11/22 Andrew Douglas Pitonyak



I posted this to their forum, see if it may motivate some people there

http://www.oooforum.org/forum/**viewtopic.phtml?p=456167#**456167




I don't think that some emails on the AOO mailing list can be considered as
an "Apache petition". There is nothing "official" on this thread, IMO, just
people worried about the situation and some random thoughts.
I think you need to rephrase your post.

Ricardo

Re: [CODE]: 118605 remove epm?

[Pedro Giffuni]

Well ...

We need something that works now and basically something
that will produce RPMs. Having something to do this is handy
but should not a requirement for building. I think with just
having it disabled by default we comply with the ASF policies.

All other packages that I know of just have an installation
script and leave the packaging for someone else to do: for
FreeBSD we use a script that calls tar (it's more portable
than cp), and then we have some support in the ports tree
to package that stuff automatically.  

Hmm... since you are apparently planning to further edit
fetch_tarballs.sh, perhaps you can test my update to that
script? (attached).

cheers,

Pedro.


--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:

> Hi Pedro,
> 
> On 11/22/11 1:52 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> >
> > Hmmm ...
> >
> > Nevermind, OpenPKG is rather bulky.
> > Unfortunately portable packagers seem not
> > to be too common anymore.
> 
> the point is simply that we have to understand the whole
> packaging 
> process better. I thought it was worse to check if it's
> possible to use 
> a system epm. Sometimes things become easier over time or
> even obsolete. 
> But in this case it seems that we have to stick with the
> 3.7 epm and the 
> patches we have because they are very specific for OOo.
> 
> I hope that we can simplify this packaging process in the
> future a 
> little bit because we can concentrate on one product only.
> In the past 
> all processes here were designed to make it possible to
> build a 
> StarOffice/Oracle Office version on top of it.
> 
> The problem is that we have to analyze the whole process to
> understand 
> how it works. In the past one developer worked full-time on
> this 
> packaging stuff ...
> 
> Juergen
> 

Re: oooforum.org

[drew]

On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 09:31 -0500, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote:
> I posted this to their forum, see if it may motivate some people there
> 
> http://www.oooforum.org/forum/viewtopic.phtml?p=456167#456167
> 

Hi Andrew,

I added some comments to the forum post above.

For those that don't follow the forums I'll include the full text of
those comments here:

-
Hello Andrew, 

Noticed your comment to the Apache OpenOffice mailing list and your link
to this post. 

I just wanted to add some personal comments to what you posted. 

First - I did not see the images that sparked this either, but from what
I can gather they hit a nerve with a few individuals. 

Second - it is true that a couple of individuals, whom I don't believe
have any history with any of the forums, made comments on the Apache
OpenOffice mailing list along the lines you describe - HOWEVER - there
was, to my reading of the list, no uptake to the idea at all. 

Also - the Apache OpenOffice group has been dealing with some issues
concercning another website, one that has nothing to do with the forum
here, and I think everyone was a bit on edge, a bit more rhetoric flying
around then is really healthy - so what I think is that the timing on
this particular 'event', happening while peoples emotions where already
heightened was a large contributing factor to most of the comments. 

That all I wanted to add to this particular subject. 

Best wishes, 

Drew

Re: Source Code Sponsor of OOo

[Pedro Giffuni]

--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:
...
> 
> Changing or removing a PayPal button can't be a big issue.
> 

+1, I can do it but will that mean I have to maintain it?

> I can't read Spanish and therefore i depend on a good
> explanation. But i 
> would really appreciate if we as PPMC can agree on the
> content of all 
> our pages or a least on a concept.
> 

I will do a quick translation here:

OpenOffice.Org is made as a non-profit effort, however it
has a cost as the effort of many volunteers that contribute
their time to the proyect. You can also contribute your time as
a develoer (HTM, graphic desing, etc.) or as an end user (mailing, list, 
marketing, translations, etc. ).

But if you cannot contribute your time to the comunity, why not give
something back donating money?

Yo can help ensure the community keeps evolving making both type
of donations so this community keeps working for many years, Your
donations will help us take new challenges:

Hiring programmers
Sponsoring programmers for conferences
Developing extensions
Create a Spanish Spell Checker.

OpenOffice.Org is a registered trademark of the Apache Foundation.
The donations will go to the oooES organization that  has no legal
relationship with the (Apache) Foundation.

(Then the prominent DONATION buttons)
You can contact directly the leader of the project
Alexandro Colorado
_

Now .. what I don't like is:
- It's a donation page, not really useful for contributors.
- The Apache disclaimer is not very visible in relationship
  with the very visible buttons and it's clearly insufficient:
  there's no link to contribute to Apache.
- There is no hint if oooES has any foundation status or
  if it's for-profit and it would appear to have support
  from the ASF.
- Under no circumstance should we ask for money like this.
  I would think the oooES people should have the independent
  page and perhaps have a discrete link from the AOO site
  but not something so prominent as this.

> I repeat myself that is the reason why i would prefer a
> common concept 
> for all pages and move more individual language community
> pages into the 
> wiki or somewhere else.
>

My concern with that is that I doubt we have sufficient
volunteers for such a task. OTOH, some sites have made a
great job: the italian site is outdated but has many
relevant links to the community.

Pedro

Fwd: buildbot failure in ASF Buildbot on ooo-site-site-staging

[Rob Weir]

I noticed this coming to the commits mailing list.  That is OK, if we
want it that way.  But please note that we also have an
ooo-notifications.i.a.o mailing list.  This was requested and created,
per the original podling proposal, to use for CI notifications.  So if
we want to send these notes to ooo-notifications, the list is
available.

-Rob


-- Forwarded message --
From:  
Date: Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 8:55 PM
Subject: buildbot failure in ASF Buildbot on ooo-site-site-staging
To: ooo-comm...@incubator.apache.org


The Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder
ooo-site-site-staging while building ASF Buildbot.
Full details are available at:
 http://ci.apache.org/builders/ooo-site-site-staging/builds/83

Buildbot URL: http://ci.apache.org/

Buildslave for this Build: bb-cms-slave

Build Reason: scheduler
Build Source Stamp: [branch incubator/ooo/ooo-site] 1204763
Blamelist: kschenk

BUILD FAILED: failed shell

sincerely,
 -The Buildbot

Re: Apache Open Office Bugzilla

[Pedro Giffuni]

+1 Greatly needed.

However, it's the PPMC who has to do the request.

Oh and David has to sign the iCLA if he hasn't already.

cheers,

Pedro.

--- On Mon, 11/21/11, David McKay wrote:

> Hi Dave,
> 
> I hope you're the right person for me to ask this question
> to. I have tried raising the issue a few times on the the
> dev list but got nothing back.
> 
> Amongst other things, I'm a Bugzilla administrator at my
> day job. I'd like to help in whatever fashion I can with the
> Bugzilla instance used for the Apache Open Office. do you
> have any idea who I should contact to get started or offer
> my services?
> 
> Regards, Dave McKay.
> 

[CODE] issue 118608: IP clearance: Remove cppunit source

[Andre Fischer]

Hi all,

Another category-x licensed library is gone.  A pre-installed cppunit 
can be used instead. The gnu make build system needed some convincing to 
accept this change, though.


Would anybody like to review and commit?

More information about issue 118608 can be found here: 
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=118608



Thanks,
Andre

Re: Apache Open Office Bugzilla

[Rob Weir]

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Pedro Giffuni  wrote:
> +1 Greatly needed.
>
> However, it's the PPMC who has to do the request.
>
> Oh and David has to sign the iCLA if he hasn't already.
>

Dave is already a committer, Apache ID= thegurkha.

If he gets no response from sending an email to the admin ID for BZ,
then I'd recommend he open a JIRA issue with Infra@.  It is possible
that we have no one on the project currently with admin privileges.

-Rob


> cheers,
>
> Pedro.
>
> --- On Mon, 11/21/11, David McKay wrote:
>
>> Hi Dave,
>>
>> I hope you're the right person for me to ask this question
>> to. I have tried raising the issue a few times on the the
>> dev list but got nothing back.
>>
>> Amongst other things, I'm a Bugzilla administrator at my
>> day job. I'd like to help in whatever fashion I can with the
>> Bugzilla instance used for the Apache Open Office. do you
>> have any idea who I should contact to get started or offer
>> my services?
>>
>> Regards, Dave McKay.
>>
>
>

RE: Rationalizing two OpenOffice websites

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

++1

AH!! Jürgen said the magic word: PORTAL.  Now I can say something that has been 
nagging at me without words.

It will be extremely valuable for the openoffice.org web site to remain the 
portal of the openoffice.org lineage, where the entry to Apache OpenOffice is 
more tightly-coupled but not exclusive. And user support is for the lineage, 
even though activity may become more about Apache OpenOffice releases in the 
future. 

One concern about changing the URLs for the wiki and the forums:  This will 
break absolute bookmarks and cross-references from users and from elsewhere in 
the site, including in the forums, unless the existing URLs are (also) 
preserved.  This also impacts existing search-engine indexing.

I would rather preserve those URLs.  The shorter ones are nice and the old ones 
could redirect to them.  And I wouldn't do this quickly unless it is clearly a 
no-brainer and the redirect/rewrite works perfectly. It is also something that 
could be done independently of all the static-page remodeling that is needed.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@googlemail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 02:25
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Rationalizing two OpenOffice websites

it sounds like a Déjà vu and i think we had already a discussion that 
goes in this direction.

Yes, i totally agree on this separation and it makes sense to me. Moving 
forward with this separation we need much less migration and can 
concentrate on the most important pages of the main portal (for users) 
www.openoffice.org.

Hopefully we can change wiki.services.openoffice.org to 
wiki.openoffice.org and can redirect the old Url to the new short one. 
and the same for the forum users.services.openoffice.org

The portal side provide the main info about the product (mainly 
marketing material), provide the download (with the infra structure 
behind), but also provides the entry points to the wiki, to the forum 
and of course openoffice.apache.org for project members.

I really like that

Juergen


On 11/22/11 12:46 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
> We have with this project something that most other Apache projects
> don't have and which the legacy OOo project never had.  We have two
> independent websites.
>
[ ... ]
>
> For example, could we have something like this:
>
> 1) www.openoffice.org is the website for the OpenOffice product.  It
> is the end user site, focused on their interactions with the product.
> So download, help, extensions, support.  It is not how they interact
> with the project.  It serves the narrow focus on the product.
>
>
> 2) incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg (eventually
> openoffice.apache.org) on the other hand is where the project members
> work and where the public (includiing users) interacts with the
> project. Not the product, but the project.
>
> This dual website is quite commonly used for managing large and
> important brands.  For example, the consumer, when interfacting with
> the brand Pepsi and Pepsi products goes to:
>
> http://www.pepsi.com
>
> But the person who wants to learn more about the company goes to another URL:
>
> http://www.pepsico.com/
>
> Navigating between then is possible via a link on the page footer.
> But generally each site is optimized for its target audience.

RE: [DISCUSS]: content of the about dialog box

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

+1 

"All rights reserved" is some legalese hangover, and is a factually incorrect 
claim that makes folks nutty.  It is better not to use it at all.

I believe the standard Apache notice suggested by Gianluca is appropriate. 
There could be buttons (or links) for accessing the installed copies LICENSE 
and NOTICE and a few words about details being there.  Any README about what 
this is, where it is from, how to find the source, more-recent information, and 
details of the release is also worthy.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Gianluca Turconi [mailto:pub...@letturefantastiche.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 00:37
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]: content of the about dialog box

2011/11/21 Rob Weir :
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Andrea Pescetti
>  wrote:
>> Rob Weir wrote:
>>>
>>> So in total, maybe something like:
>>> =
>>> Copyright © 2011 Apache Software Foundation. All rights reserved.
>>
[ ... ]

I think it would be better to use the same wording that there will be in
the NOTICE file (according to http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html):

"Apache [PRODUCT_NAME]
Copyright [] The Apache Software Foundation

*This product includes software developed at
The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/)*."

In this way Apache wouldn't claim* full rights* (including intellectual
ownership) in the about dialog box that instead is denying in a
hypothetical NOTICE file for specific files.

Regards,

Gianluca
-- 
Lettura gratuita o acquisto di libri e racconti di fantascienza,
fantasy, horror, noir, narrativa fantastica e tradizionale:
http://www.letturefantastiche.com/

Re: oooforum.org

[Rob Weir]

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak
 wrote:
> On 11/20/2011 04:33 AM, Peter Junge wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> is there any admin of oooforum.org around here?
>>
>> It's getting spamed with really disgusting content on the front page.
>>
>> Peter
>>
>
> The OOoForum is fully managed to Ed Buck. He has two low level
> administrators of which I am one.
>
> Ed appears to have good intention, but he is the only high level
> administrator. I do not believe that he can give others this access because
> then they would have access to the machine itself, which runs other things
> for the company hosting the forum.
>

I see from this old post that Ed thought bringing the forums together
on the OOo domain might be a good idea:

http://markmail.org/message/yjkoklovwnr3gevt

Views may change over time, of course, but that sounds encouraging.

-Rob

> Ed has stated for more than a year that he would update the forum so that
> spammers could be better prevented from accessing the forum. To date, he has
> done nothing but make promises. The user services forum was started because
> some community members desired a forum where decentralized control was
> available so that the required manpower might be available to keep things
> under control.
>
> Presently, spammers seem to use OOoForum as they desire. This is
> particularly difficult when a particular spammer opts to hit the site with
> message after message. The moderators are not able to stop a rogue poster,
> they can only react to the messages themselves. New means of preventing the
> spammers are not available without updating the forum software, so this is
> not likely to change.
>
> The volume of spam has been so great that some moderators have left. I
> rarely post to the forum any more because when I go to the forum I spend my
> time removing spam and trying to lock out spammers based on user name and
> specific IP address - which is a loosing battle.
>
>
> --
> Andrew Pitonyak
> My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt
> Info:  http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
>
>

RE: Source Code Sponsor of OOo

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

Thanks Pedro,

I agree, that Spanish donation page should not be under the openoffice.org 
domain.  

Jürgen's proposal for a consistent contribution/participation page across all 
native language sub-sites is good. 

I think Alexandro's approach is in the right spirit, but the donation 
solicitation and details of how to donate should be on an oooES site and not 
es.oo.o.  I would hope that Alexandro can assist us in this and it would 
provide a model for any similar situation with any of the other NL pages.

A policy on linking to support organizations needs to be determined, perhaps 
with links on a single multi-lingual page that is maintained in only one place, 
with the top linkage being to the ASF donation page.  I think there are 
creative ways to manage linking with clean separation between support and 
advocacy organizations and OO.o, with appropriate oversight by AOO on what is 
being linked to and how carefully that is done from OO.o.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Pedro Giffuni [mailto:p...@apache.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 07:59
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Source Code Sponsor of OOo



--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:
...
> 
> Changing or removing a PayPal button can't be a big issue.
> 

+1, I can do it but will that mean I have to maintain it?

> I can't read Spanish and therefore i depend on a good
> explanation. But i 
> would really appreciate if we as PPMC can agree on the
> content of all 
> our pages or a least on a concept.
> 

I will do a quick translation here:

OpenOffice.Org is made as a non-profit effort, however it
has a cost as the effort of many volunteers that contribute
their time to the proyect. You can also contribute your time as
a develoer (HTM, graphic desing, etc.) or as an end user (mailing, list, 
marketing, translations, etc. ).

But if you cannot contribute your time to the comunity, why not give
something back donating money?

Yo can help ensure the community keeps evolving making both type
of donations so this community keeps working for many years, Your
donations will help us take new challenges:

Hiring programmers
Sponsoring programmers for conferences
Developing extensions
Create a Spanish Spell Checker.

OpenOffice.Org is a registered trademark of the Apache Foundation.
The donations will go to the oooES organization that  has no legal
relationship with the (Apache) Foundation.

(Then the prominent DONATION buttons)
You can contact directly the leader of the project
Alexandro Colorado
_

Now .. what I don't like is:
- It's a donation page, not really useful for contributors.
- The Apache disclaimer is not very visible in relationship
  with the very visible buttons and it's clearly insufficient:
  there's no link to contribute to Apache.
- There is no hint if oooES has any foundation status or
  if it's for-profit and it would appear to have support
  from the ASF.
- Under no circumstance should we ask for money like this.
  I would think the oooES people should have the independent
  page and perhaps have a discrete link from the AOO site
  but not something so prominent as this.

> I repeat myself that is the reason why i would prefer a
> common concept 
> for all pages and move more individual language community
> pages into the 
> wiki or somewhere else.
>

My concern with that is that I doubt we have sufficient
volunteers for such a task. OTOH, some sites have made a
great job: the italian site is outdated but has many
relevant links to the community.

Pedro

Re: Source Code Sponsor of OOo

[Ariel Constenla-Haile]

Hi Jürgen, *,

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 11:05:07AM +0100, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/21/11 10:12 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> >Alexandro started fixing the Spanish site, but there is more to do ...
> 
> it would be interesting to know where the problem is and what the
> planned changes are. There are valid concerns about the page and i
> would really appreciate if Alexandro would describe what he want to
> change.
> 
> Changing or removing a PayPal button can't be a big issue.

it seems it's not only a button, but severals: today I crossed across

http://ooo-site.apache.org/es/comunidad/irc.html
http://ooo-site.apache.org/es/lecturas/lecturas_0020.html
the last one asking for 1000 U$S

 
> I can't read Spanish 

I can :) 
Anyway, using chrome to translate them to English gives an accurate idea
about what was going on. 

> and therefore i depend on a good explanation.
> But i would really appreciate if we as PPMC can agree on the content
> of all our pages or a least on a concept.

this should be done ASAP, commiters have access to
http://ooo-site.apache.org/ but the old kenai site has very restricted
access for PPMC members. I don't find Alexandro's reluctance to change
http://ooo-site.apache.org/es as harmful as the fact that this content
is still on the main public site http://es.openoffice.org/ , where 
only he has access to change it.

I'm checking out
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ooo-site/trunk/content/es
Can one review the content and commit the changes directly on svn? (I've
read there is some kind of web tool for this).


Regards
-- 
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina


pgpvji7mVkj3r.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Source Code Sponsor of OOo

[Pedro Giffuni]

Hi Ariel;

--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Ariel Constenla-Haile  wrote:

> 
> I'm checking out
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ooo-site/trunk/content/es
> Can one review the content and commit the changes directly
> on svn? (I've
> read there is some kind of web tool for this).
> 

It's much easier!
Check the Javascript bookmark mentioned here:

https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/the_asf_cms

You go to the webpage you want to edit and call
the bookmark.

enjoy,

Pedro.

Re: [CODE] issue 118608: IP clearance: Remove cppunit source

[Pedro Giffuni]

I will review it as the external cppunit was breaking 
the build on SAL here.

Thanks!

Pedro.

--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Andre Fischer  wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Another category-x licensed library is gone.  A
> pre-installed cppunit can be used instead. The gnu make
> build system needed some convincing to accept this change,
> though.
> 
> Would anybody like to review and commit?
> 
> More information about issue 118608 can be found here: 
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=118608
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Andre
>

Re: Source Code Sponsor of OOo

[Ariel Constenla-Haile]

Hi Pedro,

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 10:44:20AM -0800, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> > I'm checking out
> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/ooo-site/trunk/content/es
> > Can one review the content and commit the changes directly
> > on svn? (I've
> > read there is some kind of web tool for this).
> > 
> 
> It's much easier!
> Check the Javascript bookmark mentioned here:
> 
> https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/the_asf_cms
> 
> You go to the webpage you want to edit and call
> the bookmark.

thanks, didn't know that bookmark. It took quite a lot to load the page.
As I didn't find a way to search for content there, I ended up vim and
grep ;) 

Regards
-- 
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina


pgpv1ZDg7kzoW.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Update OOo Bugzilla account to AOO Bugzilla

[Regina Henschel]

Hi all,

I have added a page

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Update+OOo+Bugzilla+account+to+Apache+OpenOffice+Bugzilla

I don't know where to put it.

The text misses the label of the field, where you have to enter the new 
mail address, because after doing it, that field is no longer there and 
the label has changed, and I forget to note it.


I'm no native speaker, so the text will surely need some corrections.

Kind regards
Regina

Re: oooforum.org

[Louis R Suárez-Potts]

Ed is indeed a good guy :-) and has long supported OOo and its activities 
(long: as in a decade).


On 2011-11-22, at 12:58 , Rob Weir wrote:

> I see from this old post that Ed thought bringing the forums together
> on the OOo domain might be a good idea:
> 
> http://markmail.org/message/yjkoklovwnr3gevt
> 
> Views may change over time, of course, but that sounds encouraging.


Yes. He does this work—as do the others—as a volunteer and has relatively 
little time to spend on it. Anything that makes it easier would likely be 
helpful, I'd imagine.

-louis

Re: Non-Apache maintenance release for OOo 3.3?

[Louis R Suárez-Potts]

Hi,


On 2011-11-16, at 20:23 , Rob Weir wrote:

> This topic sounds important, so I'm moving it to its own thread.
> 
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Martin Hollmichel
>  wrote:
>> 
>> removal of the Oracle branding is the easy part. As said before, having a
>> joint messaging with ASF about this release and the future releases is some
>> work to do. Adopting references from old OpenOffice.org instances (forums,
>> mailing lists, issue tracking) to the new ones in the ReadMe File is another
>> issue we are still working on.
>> 
> 
> It is hard to think about a joint message when we know almost nothing
> about what you are doing.  What we're doing here at Apache is clear --
> you see our mailing lists, wiki, SVN repository, etc.  It is all very
> open and transparent.
> 
> Do you have a mailing list or something that we can subscribe to?
> Could you say a little about what your short term and longer term
> goals are?
> 
> -Rob


Can I suggest an agenda for a meeting—teleconference, I suppose, or its 
newfangled equivalent—where we place those items that Martin (hi Martin) 
mentions as well as the concerns Rob expresses? 

That is: 

* Role of Team OOo going forward and its relation to Apache OO
* Obligations in fulfilling this role
* Work to do to finalize the migration

And so on.

But a general caveat, worthy of a new subject line when it comes due: 

Please, let's not repeat the mistakes of OOo's governance architecture. :-) As 
we used to say last century, been there, done that.

Please, let's focus on development here, and provide the space (or frontier, 
finally) for user-focused sites affiliated (federated) with the effort here. 
For what we found difficult, and not just because of Sun's or Oracle's 
interests, was in reconciling the developer focus of OOo with the large enduser 
communities. I would much rather have separate foci, but not sacrifice 
communication between the two. (Developers need to attend to endusers, and vice 
versa.)  One thing that is really important here is the manifold of ecosystems 
constituting the wider OOo community.


> 
> 
>> The coding work we've done in the 3.3.1 is about some security and bugfixing
>> issues,
>> 
>> Martin
>> 

Louis

System broken at mythes

[Pedro Giffuni]

Hello;

I am getting this after r1204995 :

...
=
Building module mythes
=

...
configure: creating ./config.status
config.status: creating Makefile
config.status: creating mythes.pc
config.status: creating config.h
config.status: executing depfiles commands
config.status: executing libtool commands
mkdir: ./unxfbsdx.pro/misc/build/mythes-1.2.0/: File exists
"Makefile", line 88: Need an operator
"Makefile", line 90: Need an operator
"Makefile", line 92: Need an operator
make: fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue
dmake:  Error code 1, while making './unxfbsdx.pro/misc/build/so_built_mythes'

1 module(s): 
mythes
need(s) to be rebuilt

Reason(s):

ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making 
/usr/ports/editors/openoffice.org-3-devel/work/ooo/main/mythes

When you have fixed the errors in that module you can resume the build by 
running:

build --all:mythes

*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/ports/editors/openoffice.org-3-devel.
...

Re: [CODE]: 118605 remove epm?

[Michael Stahl]

On 22.11.2011 11:57, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> I stumbled over problems using a downloaded epm 4.2 
> (http://www.epmhome.org), build and install it on a Fedora 16 system 
> (rpm based).
> 
> The epm call failed to build the rpm packages. It seems that epm 
> triggers /bin/rpm with some parameters that are not accepted. I don't 
> understand why at the moment.

/bin/rpm on a recent Fedora can not build packages, it can only do the
things necessary on a running system: install etc.; there is an extra
package "rpm-build" with a /usr/bin/rpmbuild program that is used to build
packages.

IIRC i once changed configure to complain if you have a /bin/rpm that
cannot build and no rpmbuild, perhaps that check bitrotted...

[ i have no idea why we use a "patched" epm, or whether an unpatched epm
would work ]

regards,
 michael

Re: [CODE] issue 118608: IP clearance: Remove cppunit source

[Pedro Giffuni]

Hi;

Andre's patch looks good: it passes SAL on my system.

My compile is now broken by an unrelated commit so
if someone feels confident to commit it please go
ahead.

Pedro.


--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Pedro Giffuni  wrote:

> I will review it as the external cppunit was breaking 
> the build on SAL here.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Pedro.
> 
> --- On Tue, 11/22/11, Andre Fischer 
> wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Another category-x licensed library is gone.  A
> > pre-installed cppunit can be used instead. The gnu
> make
> > build system needed some convincing to accept this
> change,
> > though.
> > 
> > Would anybody like to review and commit?
> > 
> > More information about issue 118608 can be found here:
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=118608
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Andre
> >
>

Re: [CODE]: 118605 remove epm?

[eric b]

Hi Michael,


Le 22 nov. 11 à 22:25, Michael Stahl a écrit :


On 22.11.2011 11:57, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
I stumbled over problems using a downloaded epm 4.2  (http:// 
www.epmhome.org), build and install it on a Fedora 16 system  (rpm  
based).


The epm call failed to build the rpm packages. It seems that epm   
triggers /bin/rpm with some parameters that are not accepted. I  
don't  understand why at the moment.


/bin/rpm on a recent Fedora can not build packages, it can only do  
the things necessary on a running system: install etc.; there is an  
extra package "rpm-build" with a /usr/bin/rpmbuild program that is  
used to build packages.


Thanks, I didn't remember the exact name  :)


[ i have no idea why we use a "patched" epm, or whether an  
unpatched epm

would work ]



There is a beginning of answer in  main/solenv/bin/ 
make_installer.pl , around line 1642


+ more information in main/solenv/modules/installer/epmfile.pm  
(around line 859)



Regards,
Eric

--
qɔᴉɹə
Projet OOo4Kids : http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page
L'association EducOOo : http://www.educoo.org
Blog : http://eric.bachard.org/news

Re: System broken at mythes

[Ariel Constenla-Haile]

Hi Pedro,

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 01:16:47PM -0800, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> Hello;
> 
> I am getting this after r1204995 :
> 
> ...
> =
> Building module mythes
> =
> 
> ...
> configure: creating ./config.status
> config.status: creating Makefile
> config.status: creating mythes.pc
> config.status: creating config.h
> config.status: executing depfiles commands
> config.status: executing libtool commands
> mkdir: ./unxfbsdx.pro/misc/build/mythes-1.2.0/: File exists
> "Makefile", line 88: Need an operator
> "Makefile", line 90: Need an operator
> "Makefile", line 92: Need an operator

this looks like the lines that disable building the example.
In my generated Makefile they look like

ifeq "$(ENABLE_EXAMPLE)" "no"
PROGRAMS=
else
PROGRAMS = $(noinst_PROGRAMS)
endif

Please look in the log at the point where the patches are applied. Are
there applied or your patch program reports problems? It worked fine on
Linux and Windows7/XP, where I tested.


Regards
-- 
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina


pgpqzR0SYQrdd.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: System broken at mythes

[Pedro Giffuni]

--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Ariel Constenla-Haile  wrote:

> From: Ariel Constenla-Haile 
> Subject: Re: System broken at mythes
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Date: Tuesday, November 22, 2011, 4:41 PM
> Hi Pedro,
> 
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 01:16:47PM -0800, Pedro Giffuni
> wrote:
> > Hello;
> > 
> > I am getting this after r1204995 :
> > 
> > ...
> > =
> > Building module mythes
> > =
> > 
> > ...
> > configure: creating ./config.status
> > config.status: creating Makefile
> > config.status: creating mythes.pc
> > config.status: creating config.h
> > config.status: executing depfiles commands
> > config.status: executing libtool commands
> > mkdir: ./unxfbsdx.pro/misc/build/mythes-1.2.0/: File
> exists
> > "Makefile", line 88: Need an operator
> > "Makefile", line 90: Need an operator
> > "Makefile", line 92: Need an operator
> 
> this looks like the lines that disable building the
> example.
> In my generated Makefile they look like
> 
> ifeq "$(ENABLE_EXAMPLE)" "no"
> PROGRAMS=
> else
> PROGRAMS = $(noinst_PROGRAMS)
> endif
> 
It looks exactly like yours:
...
libmythes_1_2_la_OBJECTS = $(am_libmythes_1_2_la_OBJECTS)
ifeq "$(ENABLE_EXAMPLE)" "no"
PROGRAMS=
else
PROGRAMS = $(noinst_PROGRAMS)
endif
am_example_OBJECTS = example.$(OBJEXT)
...

FYI:

> gmake --version
GNU Make 3.82
Built for amd64-portbld-freebsd9.0
> gpatch --version
patch 2.6.1

cheers,

Pedro.


> Please look in the log at the point where the patches are
> applied. Are
> there applied or your patch program reports problems? It
> worked fine on
> Linux and Windows7/XP, where I tested.
> 
> 
> Regards
> -- 
> Ariel Constenla-Haile
> La Plata, Argentina
> 

Re: [CODE]: 118605 remove epm?

[Ariel Constenla-Haile]

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 10:25:43PM +0100, Michael Stahl wrote:
> On 22.11.2011 11:57, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> > I stumbled over problems using a downloaded epm 4.2 
> > (http://www.epmhome.org), build and install it on a Fedora 16 system 
> > (rpm based).
> > 
> > The epm call failed to build the rpm packages. It seems that epm 
> > triggers /bin/rpm with some parameters that are not accepted. I don't 
> > understand why at the moment.
> 
> /bin/rpm on a recent Fedora can not build packages, it can only do the
> things necessary on a running system: install etc.; there is an extra
> package "rpm-build" with a /usr/bin/rpmbuild program that is used to build
> packages.

epm executes rpmbuild here (Fedora 16):

/mnt/build/openoffice/apache/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/unxlngx6/OpenOffice/rpm/listfile/en-US/epm_gid_Module_Root_Files_Images.lst
--output-dir RPMS -v9  2>&1 |
Building target platforms: x86_64
Building for target x86_64
Processing files: ooobasis3.4-images-3.4.0-9584.x86_64
Requires(rpmlib): rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files
/mnt/build/openoffice/apache/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/unxlngx6/OpenOffice/rpm/install/en-US_inprogress/RPMS/buildroot
Wrote:
/mnt/build/openoffice/apache/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/unxlngx6/OpenOffice/rpm/install/en-US_inprogress/RPMS/RPMS/x86_64/ooobasis3.4-images-3.4.0-9584.x86_64.rpm
Executing(%clean): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.TNTmTG
+ umask 022
+ cd
/mnt/build/openoffice/apache/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/unxlngx6/OpenOffice/rpm/install/en-US_inprogress/RPMS/BUILD
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.TNTmTG: line 27: cd:
/mnt/build/openoffice/apache/trunk/main/instsetoo_native/unxlngx6/OpenOffice/rpm/install/en-US_inprogress/RPMS/BUILD:
No such file or directory
PROBLEM: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.TNTmTG (%clean)


The error is clear: when trying to clean, it cds into a 
non-existent directory and thus aborts.
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.TNTmTG is also clear about it.


Looking at RPMS folder while generating the first package, there is no BUILD 
folder inside.
With the patched epm 3.7 the BUILD folder is there, and removed after
the package is built.

I'm not sure where the issue is here, the whole thing does not look very
rpmbuild standard.
In a standard rpmbuild you have a root folder, usually ~/rpmbuild with
the following content:

RPMS 
BUILD
SOURCES
SPECS
SRPMS

and packages are built inside ~/rpmbuild/BUILD, that's why rpmbuild
tries to cd there and clean.


Regards
-- 
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina


pgpWyV8SIjqJb.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Non-Apache maintenance release for OOo 3.3?

[Shane Curcuru]

On 2011-11-22 4:06 PM, Louis R Suárez-Potts wrote:
...

Can I suggest an agenda for a meeting—teleconference, I suppose, or its 
newfangled equivalent—where we place those items that Martin (hi Martin) 
mentions as well as the concerns Rob expresses?


We have a mailing list that is made for just this purpose, right here. 
Heck, we even have a mailing list that's privately archived, if people 
really feel the need to express private thoughts about possibly 
unannounced business plans over at ooo-private@.


We don't need a group call.  We need people to actually engage here on 
(one of) the Apache lists, to work on the actual Apache OpenOffice project.


- Shane

Re: System broken at mythes

[Ariel Constenla-Haile]

Hi Pedro,

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 02:00:40PM -0800, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> 
> 
> --- On Tue, 11/22/11, Ariel Constenla-Haile  wrote:
> 
> > From: Ariel Constenla-Haile 
> > Subject: Re: System broken at mythes
> > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Date: Tuesday, November 22, 2011, 4:41 PM
> > Hi Pedro,
> > 
> > On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 01:16:47PM -0800, Pedro Giffuni
> > wrote:
> > > Hello;
> > > 
> > > I am getting this after r1204995 :
> > > 
> > > ...
> > > =
> > > Building module mythes
> > > =
> > > 
> > > ...
> > > configure: creating ./config.status
> > > config.status: creating Makefile
> > > config.status: creating mythes.pc
> > > config.status: creating config.h
> > > config.status: executing depfiles commands
> > > config.status: executing libtool commands
> > > mkdir: ./unxfbsdx.pro/misc/build/mythes-1.2.0/: File
> > exists
> > > "Makefile", line 88: Need an operator
> > > "Makefile", line 90: Need an operator
> > > "Makefile", line 92: Need an operator
> > 
> > this looks like the lines that disable building the
> > example.
> > In my generated Makefile they look like
> > 
> > ifeq "$(ENABLE_EXAMPLE)" "no"
> > PROGRAMS=
> > else
> > PROGRAMS = $(noinst_PROGRAMS)
> > endif
> > 
> It looks exactly like yours:
> ...
> libmythes_1_2_la_OBJECTS = $(am_libmythes_1_2_la_OBJECTS)
> ifeq "$(ENABLE_EXAMPLE)" "no"
> PROGRAMS=
> else
> PROGRAMS = $(noinst_PROGRAMS)
> endif

now that I look at it, is seems tabs were removed in the patch, anyway,
in cygwin and Fedora it compiled, and the syntax is right
http://www.gnu.org/s/hello/manual/make/Conditional-Syntax.html

Please try running make directly inside
/unxfbsdx.pro/misc/build/mythes-1.2.0
after changing the following:

* add tabs:

ifeq "$(ENABLE_EXAMPLE)" "no"
PROGRAMS=
else
PROGRAMS = $(noinst_PROGRAMS)
endif

(sure you get the idea though vim is replacing now the tabs by spaces).
Googling for "Need an operator" most entries are FreeBSD related...
looks like I'll install FreeBSD on a VM. In the mean time try playing
with these lines in the Makefile and running make/gmake in that folder
to see if something works.


> am_example_OBJECTS = example.$(OBJEXT)
> ...
> 
> FYI:
> 
> > gmake --version
> GNU Make 3.82

the same version here

> Built for amd64-portbld-freebsd9.0
> > gpatch --version
> patch 2.6.1

same here.
(it does not mean much, sure both version are not upstream)


Regards
-- 
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina


pgpRRPHDrleE5.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: System broken at mythes

[Pedro Giffuni]

--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Ariel Constenla-Haile  wrote:

> From: Ariel Constenla-Haile 
> Subject: Re: System broken at mythes
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Date: Tuesday, November 22, 2011, 5:48 PM
> 
> Hi Pedro,
> 
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 02:00:40PM -0800, Pedro Giffuni
> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > --- On Tue, 11/22/11, Ariel Constenla-Haile 
> wrote:
> > 
> > > From: Ariel Constenla-Haile 
> > > Subject: Re: System broken at mythes
> > > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > Date: Tuesday, November 22, 2011, 4:41 PM
> > > Hi Pedro,
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 01:16:47PM -0800, Pedro
> Giffuni
> > > wrote:
> > > > Hello;
> > > > 
> > > > I am getting this after r1204995 :
> > > > 
> > > > ...
> > > > =
> > > > Building module mythes
> > > > =
> > > > 
> > > > ...
> > > > configure: creating ./config.status
> > > > config.status: creating Makefile
> > > > config.status: creating mythes.pc
> > > > config.status: creating config.h
> > > > config.status: executing depfiles commands
> > > > config.status: executing libtool commands
> > > > mkdir:
> ./unxfbsdx.pro/misc/build/mythes-1.2.0/: File
> > > exists
> > > > "Makefile", line 88: Need an operator
> > > > "Makefile", line 90: Need an operator
> > > > "Makefile", line 92: Need an operator
> > > 
> > > this looks like the lines that disable building
> the
> > > example.
> > > In my generated Makefile they look like
> > > 
> > > ifeq "$(ENABLE_EXAMPLE)" "no"
> > > PROGRAMS=
> > > else
> > > PROGRAMS = $(noinst_PROGRAMS)
> > > endif
> > > 
> > It looks exactly like yours:
> > ...
> > libmythes_1_2_la_OBJECTS =
> $(am_libmythes_1_2_la_OBJECTS)
> > ifeq "$(ENABLE_EXAMPLE)" "no"
> > PROGRAMS=
> > else
> > PROGRAMS = $(noinst_PROGRAMS)
> > endif
> 
> now that I look at it, is seems tabs were removed in the
> patch, anyway,
> in cygwin and Fedora it compiled, and the syntax is right
> http://www.gnu.org/s/hello/manual/make/Conditional-Syntax.html
> 
> Please try running make directly inside
> /unxfbsdx.pro/misc/build/mythes-1.2.0
> after changing the following:
> 
> * add tabs:
> 
> ifeq "$(ENABLE_EXAMPLE)" "no"
>     PROGRAMS=
> else
>     PROGRAMS = $(noinst_PROGRAMS)
> endif
> 
> (sure you get the idea though vim is replacing now the tabs
> by spaces).

Still no joy. but it builds if I type "gmake" intead of "make"
"make" is BSD's parallel make (pmake) .

It looks like there is no ifeq in BSD make.

Pedro.

Re: [CODE] issue 118604 - IP clearance: Remove dmake source

[Ariel Constenla-Haile]

Hi all,

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 03:42:58PM +0100, Andre Fischer wrote:
> 
> 2. Executable in a non-standard location.  Use the
> --with-dmake-path= option to specify its
> location.

I couldn't make this work (tested on Fedora and Win/cygwin).
I tried 

--with-dmake-path=/home/ariel/src/devel/dmake/INST/bin
--with-dmake-path=/home/ariel/src/devel/dmake/INST/bin/dmake
--with-dmake-path=/home/ariel/src/devel/dmake/INST/bin/
etc.

and I get always

checking for dmake... checking for dmake... no
checking for dmake... (cached) no
configure: no system or user-provided dmake found
configure: WARNING: no URL for dmake source code specified, either.
configure: WARNING: dmake will be built from internal sources but these
will be removed in the future"
configure: error: please use --with-dmake-path or --with-dmake-url to
specify dmake executable or source


I gave up and placed dmake in ~/bin
Any idea how to make it work?


Regards
-- 
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina


pgpu0ev9oqzAI.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: System broken at mythes

[Pedro Giffuni]

BTW,

Instead of setting

ENABLE_EXAMPLE="no"

and then a conditional, why not just avoid the extra
conditionals and change line 88 to

PROGRAMS=

:)

cheers,

Pedro.

--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Ariel Constenla-Haile  wrote:

> From: Ariel Constenla-Haile 
> Subject: Re: System broken at mythes
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Date: Tuesday, November 22, 2011, 5:48 PM
> 
> Hi Pedro,
> 
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 02:00:40PM -0800, Pedro Giffuni
> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > --- On Tue, 11/22/11, Ariel Constenla-Haile 
> wrote:
> > 
> > > From: Ariel Constenla-Haile 
> > > Subject: Re: System broken at mythes
> > > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > Date: Tuesday, November 22, 2011, 4:41 PM
> > > Hi Pedro,
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 01:16:47PM -0800, Pedro
> Giffuni
> > > wrote:
> > > > Hello;
> > > > 
> > > > I am getting this after r1204995 :
> > > > 
> > > > ...
> > > > =
> > > > Building module mythes
> > > > =
> > > > 
> > > > ...
> > > > configure: creating ./config.status
> > > > config.status: creating Makefile
> > > > config.status: creating mythes.pc
> > > > config.status: creating config.h
> > > > config.status: executing depfiles commands
> > > > config.status: executing libtool commands
> > > > mkdir:
> ./unxfbsdx.pro/misc/build/mythes-1.2.0/: File
> > > exists
> > > > "Makefile", line 88: Need an operator
> > > > "Makefile", line 90: Need an operator
> > > > "Makefile", line 92: Need an operator
> > > 
> > > this looks like the lines that disable building
> the
> > > example.
> > > In my generated Makefile they look like
> > > 
> > > ifeq "$(ENABLE_EXAMPLE)" "no"
> > > PROGRAMS=
> > > else
> > > PROGRAMS = $(noinst_PROGRAMS)
> > > endif
> > > 
> > It looks exactly like yours:
> > ...
> > libmythes_1_2_la_OBJECTS =
> $(am_libmythes_1_2_la_OBJECTS)
> > ifeq "$(ENABLE_EXAMPLE)" "no"
> > PROGRAMS=
> > else
> > PROGRAMS = $(noinst_PROGRAMS)
> > endif
> 
> now that I look at it, is seems tabs were removed in the
> patch, anyway,
> in cygwin and Fedora it compiled, and the syntax is right
> http://www.gnu.org/s/hello/manual/make/Conditional-Syntax.html
> 
> Please try running make directly inside
> /unxfbsdx.pro/misc/build/mythes-1.2.0
> after changing the following:
> 
> * add tabs:
> 
> ifeq "$(ENABLE_EXAMPLE)" "no"
>     PROGRAMS=
> else
>     PROGRAMS = $(noinst_PROGRAMS)
> endif
> 
> (sure you get the idea though vim is replacing now the tabs
> by spaces).
> Googling for "Need an operator" most entries are FreeBSD
> related...
> looks like I'll install FreeBSD on a VM. In the mean time
> try playing
> with these lines in the Makefile and running make/gmake in
> that folder
> to see if something works.
> 
> 
> > am_example_OBJECTS = example.$(OBJEXT)
> > ...
> > 
> > FYI:
> > 
> > > gmake --version
> > GNU Make 3.82
> 
> the same version here
> 
> > Built for amd64-portbld-freebsd9.0
> > > gpatch --version
> > patch 2.6.1
> 
> same here.
> (it does not mean much, sure both version are not
> upstream)
> 
> 
> Regards
> -- 
> Ariel Constenla-Haile
> La Plata, Argentina
>

[GENERAL] status of legacy OOo site migration to ooo-site.apache.org

[Kay Schenk]

Folks--

I have been doing some cleanup/fixing of  the OOo legacy site as we're
transporting to ooo-site.apache.org.

The legacy site is QUITE large, and because of the more or less single
trunk we have now, much of what I'm doing will no doubt affect your local
repository sizes. So, if you do an update soon, you will definitely notice
this.

Nearly all of the legacy projects sites were incomplete with only one level
of information whereas most contain many sub-directories -- this is what
I'm trying to fix.

Monday and Tues, the following areas were fixed with the following sizes by
directory:

qa: 679M
api: 196M
documentation: 2.3G
dba: 37M
bibliographic: 48M

Hopefully by this coming Sunday, barring an unforeseen issues, I will also
"fix" (update) the following areas:
external: 1.6M
framework: 27M
graphics: 3.3M
gsl: 5.2M
ui: 571M
marketing: 1.6G
xml: 41M
ux: 170M
tools: 359M
udk: 69M
ucb: 864K
installation: 975M
lingucomponent: 11M
porting: 19M
sc: 80M
sw: 170K



I might suggest that if you are on a system that allows it, that you setup
svn  "ignores" for whatever areas you're not interested in and see if this
prevents "loading" to your local repository. Other than that, i don't have
any suggestions.

I know this is quite different than the very containized repositories we've
had in the past, so it might come as a bit of a shock.

Currently, although we have back-ups of the old "incubator" areas, I'm not
sure what we'll bedoing with them.





-- 

MzK

"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged
 by the way its animals are treated."
  -- Mohandas Gandhi

Re: System broken at mythes

[Ariel Constenla-Haile]

Hi Pedro

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 03:09:57PM -0800, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> BTW,
> 
> Instead of setting
> 
> ENABLE_EXAMPLE="no"
> 
> and then a conditional, why not just avoid the extra
> conditionals and change line 88 to
> 
> PROGRAMS=
> 
> :)
> 
> cheers,

well, I had to modify the configure script anyway because it asked for
hunspell, just for compiling the example; so I thought that approach was
... nicer ;)

Please try the attached patch (just replace the one in trunk/main/mythes/ 
with this new one)

Regards
-- 
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina
diff -uNrp misc/build/mythes-1.2.0/configure misc/mythes-1.2.0/configure
--- misc/build/mythes-1.2.0/configure   2010-02-27 12:57:37.0 -0300
+++ misc/mythes-1.2.0/configure 2011-11-21 10:48:03.724435792 -0300
@@ -748,6 +748,7 @@ LTLIBOBJS
 LIBOBJS
 HUNSPELL_LIBS
 HUNSPELL_CFLAGS
+ENABLE_EXAMPLE
 PKG_CONFIG
 CXXCPP
 CPP
@@ -867,6 +868,7 @@ ac_subst_files=''
 ac_user_opts='
 enable_option_checking
 enable_dependency_tracking
+enable_example
 with_gnu_ld
 enable_rpath
 enable_shared
@@ -1519,6 +1521,8 @@ Optional Features:
   optimize for fast installation [default=yes]
   --disable-libtool-lock  avoid locking (might break parallel builds)
 
+  --enable-examplecompiles the example (requires hunspell library)
+
 Optional Packages:
   --with-PACKAGE[=ARG]use PACKAGE [ARG=yes]
   --without-PACKAGE   do not use PACKAGE (same as --with-PACKAGE=no)
@@ -3723,6 +3727,19 @@ fi
 
 
 
+# Check whether --enable-example was given.
+if test "${enable_example+set}" != set; then :
+  ENABLE_EXAMPLE=no;
+  $enable_example=no;
+else
+  ENABLE_EXAMPLE=$enable_example;
+fi
+
+
+
+
+
+
 depcc="$CC"   am_compiler_list=
 
 { $as_echo "$as_me:${as_lineno-$LINENO}: checking dependency style of $depcc" 
>&5
@@ -14476,6 +14493,8 @@ $as_echo "no" >&6; }
 
 fi
 
+
+if test "$ENABLE_EXAMPLE" != "no"; then
 pkg_failed=no
 { $as_echo "$as_me:${as_lineno-$LINENO}: checking for HUNSPELL" >&5
 $as_echo_n "checking for HUNSPELL... " >&6; }
@@ -14561,6 +14580,9 @@ else
 $as_echo "yes" >&6; }
:
 fi
+fi
+export ENABLE_EXAMPLE
+
 
 ac_config_files="$ac_config_files Makefile mythes.pc"
 
diff -uNrp misc/build/mythes-1.2.0/Makefile.in misc/mythes-1.2.0/Makefile.in
--- misc/build/mythes-1.2.0/Makefile.in 2010-02-27 12:57:35.0 -0300
+++ misc/mythes-1.2.0/Makefile.in   2011-11-22 20:39:45.589038536 -0300
@@ -675,7 +675,7 @@ distcleancheck: distclean
   exit 1; } >&2
 check-am: all-am
 check: check-am
-all-am: Makefile $(LTLIBRARIES) $(PROGRAMS) $(SCRIPTS) $(DATA) \
+all-am: Makefile $(LTLIBRARIES) $(SCRIPTS) $(DATA) \
$(HEADERS) config.h
 installdirs:
for dir in "$(DESTDIR)$(libdir)" "$(DESTDIR)$(bindir)" 
"$(DESTDIR)$(pkgconfdir)" "$(DESTDIR)$(libmythes_1_2_includedir)"; do \


pgpMAjkXTWSxE.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: System broken at mythes

[Ariel Constenla-Haile]

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 02:59:58PM -0800, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> 
> Still no joy. but it builds if I type "gmake" intead of "make"
> "make" is BSD's parallel make (pmake) .
> 
> It looks like there is no ifeq in BSD make.

the underlying error is on the original mythes/makefile.mk:
it shouldn't set the BUILD_ACTION to make, but to $(GNUMAKE)
Can you try this in when "$(GUI)"=="UNX" ?
This should solve the problem :)

Regards
-- 
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina


pgpUvmCDiBm5k.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Non-Apache maintenance release for OOo 3.3?

[Dave Fisher]

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 22, 2011, at 4:24 PM, Shane Curcuru  wrote:

> On 2011-11-22 4:06 PM, Louis R Suárez-Potts wrote:
> ...
>> Can I suggest an agenda for a meeting—teleconference, I suppose, or its 
>> newfangled equivalent—where we place those items that Martin (hi Martin) 
>> mentions as well as the concerns Rob expresses?
> 
> We have a mailing list that is made for just this purpose, right here. Heck, 
> we even have a mailing list that's privately archived, if people really feel 
> the need to express private thoughts about possibly unannounced business 
> plans over at ooo-private@.
> 
> We don't need a group call.  We need people to actually engage here on (one 
> of) the Apache lists, to work on the actual Apache OpenOffice project.

+1.

Please engage on the lists.

Regards,
Dave

PS. Wondering where TOOo and Louis were Four Months ago!

> 
> - Shane

Re: System broken at mythes

[Pedro Giffuni]

--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Ariel Constenla-Haile  wrote:
...
> 
> the underlying error is on the original
> mythes/makefile.mk:
> it shouldn't set the BUILD_ACTION to make, but to
> $(GNUMAKE)
> Can you try this in when "$(GUI)"=="UNX" ?
> This should solve the problem :)
> 
I tried it but it broke further ahead.

I will commit the simpler patch you sent... that is
working fine.

Thank you for your patience and attention!

Pedro.

Re: [GENERAL] status of legacy OOo site migration to ooo-site.apache.org

[Rob Weir]

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
> Folks--
>
> I have been doing some cleanup/fixing of  the OOo legacy site as we're
> transporting to ooo-site.apache.org.
>
> The legacy site is QUITE large, and because of the more or less single
> trunk we have now, much of what I'm doing will no doubt affect your local
> repository sizes. So, if you do an update soon, you will definitely notice
> this.
>
> Nearly all of the legacy projects sites were incomplete with only one level
> of information whereas most contain many sub-directories -- this is what
> I'm trying to fix.
>
> Monday and Tues, the following areas were fixed with the following sizes by
> directory:
>
> qa: 679M
> api: 196M
> documentation: 2.3G
> dba: 37M
> bibliographic: 48M
>
> Hopefully by this coming Sunday, barring an unforeseen issues, I will also
> "fix" (update) the following areas:
> external: 1.6M
> framework: 27M
> graphics: 3.3M
> gsl: 5.2M
> ui: 571M
> marketing: 1.6G
> xml: 41M
> ux: 170M
> tools: 359M
> udk: 69M
> ucb: 864K
> installation: 975M
> lingucomponent: 11M
> porting: 19M
> sc: 80M
> sw: 170K
>

You'll want to check with Infra@ for how much the SVN sync can take at
once.  My guess is these large chunks (975M, etc.) will need to be
broken up into smaller commits.


>
>
> I might suggest that if you are on a system that allows it, that you setup
> svn  "ignores" for whatever areas you're not interested in and see if this
> prevents "loading" to your local repository. Other than that, i don't have
> any suggestions.
>
> I know this is quite different than the very containized repositories we've
> had in the past, so it might come as a bit of a shock.
>
> Currently, although we have back-ups of the old "incubator" areas, I'm not
> sure what we'll bedoing with them.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 
> MzK
>
> "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged
>  by the way its animals are treated."
>                              -- Mohandas Gandhi
>

Re: [GENERAL] status of legacy OOo site migration to ooo-site.apache.org

[Raphael Bircher]

Am 23.11.11 02:54, schrieb Rob Weir:

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:

Folks--

I have been doing some cleanup/fixing of  the OOo legacy site as we're
transporting to ooo-site.apache.org.

The legacy site is QUITE large, and because of the more or less single
trunk we have now, much of what I'm doing will no doubt affect your local
repository sizes. So, if you do an update soon, you will definitely notice
this.

Nearly all of the legacy projects sites were incomplete with only one level
of information whereas most contain many sub-directories -- this is what
I'm trying to fix.

Monday and Tues, the following areas were fixed with the following sizes by
directory:

qa: 679M
api: 196M
documentation: 2.3G
dba: 37M
bibliographic: 48M

Hopefully by this coming Sunday, barring an unforeseen issues, I will also
"fix" (update) the following areas:
external: 1.6M
framework: 27M
graphics: 3.3M
gsl: 5.2M
ui: 571M
marketing: 1.6G
xml: 41M
ux: 170M
tools: 359M
udk: 69M
ucb: 864K
installation: 975M
lingucomponent: 11M
porting: 19M
sc: 80M
sw: 170K


You'll want to check with Infra@ for how much the SVN sync can take at
once.  My guess is these large chunks (975M, etc.) will need to be
broken up into smaller commits.
Yes, that's true. The SVN is mirrored, and if the pieces are too big, 
the svn mirror has no chance to update. This make trubble.


Greetings Raphael

--
My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/

Re: [CODE] issue 118608: IP clearance: Remove cppunit source

[Pedro Giffuni]

I was able to continue building and so far it looks good.

I will commit it unless something breaks in the next half
hour or so :).

Thanks Andre!

Pedro.

--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Pedro Giffuni wrote:

> Hi;
> 
> Andre's patch looks good: it passes SAL on my system.
> 
> My compile is now broken by an unrelated commit so
> if someone feels confident to commit it please go
> ahead.
> 
> Pedro.
> 
> 
> --- On Tue, 11/22/11, Pedro Giffuni 
> wrote:
> 
> > I will review it as the external cppunit was breaking
> 
> > the build on SAL here.
> > 
> > Thanks!
> > 
> > Pedro.
> > 
> > --- On Tue, 11/22/11, Andre Fischer 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > Another category-x licensed library is gone.  A
> > > pre-installed cppunit can be used instead. The
> gnu
> > make
> > > build system needed some convincing to accept
> this
> > change,
> > > though.
> > > 
> > > Would anybody like to review and commit?
> > > 
> > > More information about issue 118608 can be found
> here:
> > https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=118608
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Andre
> > >
> >
>

Re: [CODE] issue 118608: IP clearance: Remove cppunit source

[Raphael Bircher]

Am 23.11.11 04:07, schrieb Pedro Giffuni:

I was able to continue building and so far it looks good.

I will commit it unless something breaks in the next half
hour or so :).
Let's wait a little bit longer, that we can do same more tests. We have 
time.


Thanks Andre!

Pedro.

--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Pedro Giffuni wrote:


Hi;

Andre's patch looks good: it passes SAL on my system.

My compile is now broken by an unrelated commit so
if someone feels confident to commit it please go
ahead.

Pedro.


--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Pedro Giffuni
wrote:


I will review it as the external cppunit was breaking
the build on SAL here.

Thanks!

Pedro.

--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Andre Fischer
wrote:


Hi all,

Another category-x licensed library is gone.  A
pre-installed cppunit can be used instead. The

gnu

make

build system needed some convincing to accept

this

change,

though.

Would anybody like to review and commit?

More information about issue 118608 can be found

here:

https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=118608


Thanks,
Andre




--
My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/

Re: [CODE] issue 118608: IP clearance: Remove cppunit source

[Pedro Giffuni]

--- On Tue, 11/22/11, Raphael Bircher  wrote:

> Am 23.11.11 04:07, schrieb Pedro Giffuni:
> > I was able to continue building and so far it looks
> good.
> >
> > I will commit it unless something breaks in the next
> > half hour or so :).
> Let's wait a little bit longer, that we can do same more
> tests. We have time.

Sure, no problem. I did test building without cppunit
and with the external cppunit: and in fact Andre's
patches fix a bug with the external cppunit.

While here, there are some extra tests in the
BZ database:

https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=86525

cheers,

Pedro.

Re: Update OOo Bugzilla account to AOO Bugzilla

[YongLin Ma]

Thank you. I have updated my account successfully by following your guide.

On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 4:27 AM, Regina Henschel wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I have added a page
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**
> Update+OOo+Bugzilla+account+**to+Apache+OpenOffice+Bugzilla
>
> I don't know where to put it.
>
> The text misses the label of the field, where you have to enter the new
> mail address, because after doing it, that field is no longer there and the
> label has changed, and I forget to note it.
>
> I'm no native speaker, so the text will surely need some corrections.
>
> Kind regards
> Regina
>
>
>

Re: [CODE] issue 118608: IP clearance: Remove cppunit source

[eric b]

Hello Pedro,

I'm about to start a build.  Can you post your configure command line ?

This way we could define guidelines for newcomers.


Thanks,
Eric


--
qɔᴉɹə
Projet OOo4Kids : http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page
L'association EducOOo : http://www.educoo.org
Blog : http://eric.bachard.org/news

[AOO 3.4 Test Plan Discussion]Overview

[xia zhao]

Hi all,
I think it's time for use to discuss and detail AOO 3.4 test plan now.
Basically at current time I suggest:

   1. Leverage OpenOffice users on General Usage test
   2. Focus on establishing automation mechanism. Start from Build
   Verification Testing(BVT in short).
   3. Focus on test infrastructure set up. Start from case management tool.
   For 3.4, place the test cases on wiki and volunteer can do general testing
   against. If volunteer couldn't write cases, may give the test scope he
   would do. For example, which component etc. And then report defects in
   Apache Bugzilla.
   4. Focus on Performance Verification Testing(PVT in short)
   investigation, and setup benchmark PVT environment.
   5. Establish QA entry in AOO wiki https://cwiki.apache.org/
   6. Build private build before official build is ready
   7. Platform will be covered


   - Windows XP
   - Win7 32bit/64bit
   - Where we only have a 32bit windows version, it should run against
   62bit windows version.
   - Redhat 6 32 bit/64 bit
   - Ubuntu 10.04 32 bit/64 bit
   - Mac 10.7
   - Mac 10.6.x
   - FreeBSD 9.0/8.2 (9.0 is suppose to release at 12/07/2011?)
   - OS2

Welcome your comments.