date:20120603

Hi Armin:

I send an Email to Texmaths's author ,  asked he some questions, communicate
with each other as follows:

My question:
LaTeX will equations can be inserted as images (SVG or PNG formats) and
 the LaTeX, code is saved into the image attribute for further editing.

His reply:
Image attributes are not stored directly in the png file but in LibreOffice
data that are attached to the image.


But he did not tell me how to attached the image in openOffice data,could
you tell me?

Re: how Get Bitmap file from SVG module?

2012-06-03 Thread RGB ES

2012/6/3 jianlizhao jianlizh...@hotmail.com:
 Hi Armin:

 I send an Email to Texmaths's author ,  asked he some questions, communicate
 with each other as follows:

 My question:
 LaTeX will equations can be inserted as images (SVG or PNG formats) and
  the LaTeX, code is saved into the image attribute for further editing.

 His reply:
 Image attributes are not stored directly in the png file but in LibreOffice
 data that are attached to the image.


 But he did not tell me how to attached the image in openOffice data,could
 you tell me?


KLatexFormula(1) works pretty well on AOO 3.4. You can also install an
extension that makes easy to later edit the equation. It also offer an
openoffice compatible image format that gives good results when
exporting to PDF. This program is a completely different beast than
the extension you mention: it can be used as stand alone program to
generate images, provide a library of formulas... etc.

(1) http://klatexformula.sourceforge.net/

Regards
Ricardo

how Get Bitmap file from SVG module?

Hi Armin:

I send an Email to Texmaths's author ,  asked he some questions, communicate
with each other as follows:

My question:
LaTeX will equations can be inserted as images (SVG or PNG formats) and
 the LaTeX, code is saved into the image attribute for further editing.

His reply:
Image attributes are not stored directly in the png file but in LibreOffice
data that are attached to the image.


 attached the image attribute in openOffice data  below:( basic code)
,,,
Sub SetAttributes( oShape as Variant, iEqSize as Integer, sEqType as String,
sCode as String) 
 'Add the Latex attribute to the image.
 Dim oAttributes as Variant, oLatexAttribute as Variant
 oAttributes = oShape.UserDefinedAttributes
 oLatexAttribute = createUnoStruct(
;com.sun.star.xml.AttributeDataquot; )
 oLatexAttribute.Type =  
 oLatexAttribute.Value = 
 oAttributes.insertByName( ) 
 oShape.UserDefinedAttributes = oAttributes
End Sub
,,,

My question is:
When the image attribute very long, example 10M bytes, if it  will  wrong.
The image attribute can  as a zip file saved in the odf?

 Look forward to your reply.
 Best Regards!

Custom Attributes on Shapes ( Writer)?

Hello my friend:

User Defined Attributes in OpenOffice.org as below:

userAttrs = oShape.getPropertyValue( UserDefinedAttributes )
myAttr = uno.createUnoStruct( com.sun.star.xml.AttributeData )
myAttr.Type = CDATA
myAttr.Value = test
userAttrs.insertByName( url, myAttr )
oShape.UserDefinedAttributes = myAttr

my question is
1） myAttr.Value maybe a url.  example:  c:\mystyle.zip 
  or  c:\mystyle.css.
2） If the first one was established。
   What is the file extension type？


Look forward  your reply.
Best Regards!

Re: Custom Attributes on Shapes ( Writer)?

2012-06-03 Thread Alexandro Colorado

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 5:33 AM, jianlizhao jianlizh...@hotmail.com wrote:
 Hello my friend:

 User Defined Attributes in OpenOffice.org as below:

 userAttrs = oShape.getPropertyValue( UserDefinedAttributes )
 myAttr = uno.createUnoStruct( com.sun.star.xml.AttributeData )
 myAttr.Type = CDATA
 myAttr.Value = test
 userAttrs.insertByName( url, myAttr )
 oShape.UserDefinedAttributes = myAttr

 my question is
 1） myAttr.Value maybe a url.  example:  c:\mystyle.zip
  or  c:\mystyle.css.
 2） If the first one was established。
   What is the file extension type？

I haven't verify it, but my guess it would be odg. Or OpenOffice Draw.
Which is an SVG-like format.




 Look forward  your reply.
 Best Regards!

Re: [UX] The Questions for users

2012-06-03 Thread Albino B Neto

Hi.

Thanks for suggestions, anyone else.

Let's add them.

Albino

Is the document needs to be saved?

Hello my friend:

In  Openoffice's  write  extention, how Judgment the document is modify has
not save?

 Best Regards!

Re: What to do with the Czech homepage?

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 2:20 AM, Pavel Janík pa...@janik.cz wrote:
 Not from myside. I would delete them as well.

 But why not ask our Czech committer. ;-)

 @Pavel: Could you sheet some light on the cz webpage? What do you think?

 Delete them, yes.
 --

OK.  I've updated the page, added the new 3.4 links, updated the
branding and cleaned up similar issue.  A review is welcome, to make
sure I did not introduce any language errors.

Thanks.

-Rob

 Pavel Janík

Re: Is the document needs to be saved?

2012-06-03 Thread zhangjf

You can refer to
http://www.openoffice.org/api/docs/common/ref/com/sun/star/util/XModifiable.html#isModified.

API XModifiable.isModified() should help, if a document was saved or
unchanged, it returns false. You can get the XModifiable interface
from an XComponent object.

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 8:51 PM, jianlizhao jianlizh...@hotmail.com wrote:
 Hello my friend:

 In  Openoffice's  write  extention, how Judgment the document is modify has
 not save?

  Best Regards!

Re: [EXT]Discontinued Base extensions

2012-06-03 Thread Roberto Galoppini

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Reizinger Zoltán zreizin...@hdsnet.hu wrote:
 2012.05.29. 15:23 keltezéssel, Roberto Galoppini írta:

 On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Reizinger Zoltánzreizin...@hdsnet.hu
  wrote:

 The code   the two extensions no more developed by us, due to license
 incompatibilities.

 The Oracle report builder, and the MySQL connector.
 http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/en/project/reportdesign
 http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/en/project/mysql_connector

 To inform AOO 3.4 users about this situation, I added a comment to report
 builder,
 and want to add to MySQL, but the commenting not possible.

 How can I put some words to this extensions page?

 My understanding is that for some extensions comments have been
 disabled for spam.
 Should we enable comments for this extensions for good or just
 temporarily? By the wat, what about the other extensions with disabled
 comments?

 About how to manage this issue in a pro-active way, we could write
 something like:

 On MySQL connector page:
 Add some words before yours:

 The extensions might work with Apache OpenOffice 3.4, but development
 stopped.
 The known, not fixed bugs on Mac, on Linux 64 bit versions, make it unusable
 on these platforms.
 Use ODBC or JDBC connectors to MySQL databases.

Done.

Roberto

 The source code for this extension was transferred to the Apache
 OpenOffice project in 2011. If you are interested in volunteering to
 develop this extension, please contact the Apache OpenOffice mailing
 list: ooo-dev at incubator.apache.org

 Thoughts?


 Zoltan

 Roberto

 Zoltan



-- 

This e- mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. It 
may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the 
intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this e-mail and any attachment(s) is strictly 
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately 
notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachment(s) from your system. Thank you.

Re: What to do with the Czech homepage?

On Sun, 2012-06-03 at 09:19 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
 On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 2:20 AM, Pavel Janík pa...@janik.cz wrote:
  Not from myside. I would delete them as well.
 
  But why not ask our Czech committer. ;-)
 
  @Pavel: Could you sheet some light on the cz webpage? What do you think?
 
  Delete them, yes.
  --
 
 OK.  I've updated the page, added the new 3.4 links, updated the
 branding and cleaned up similar issue.  A review is welcome, to make
 sure I did not introduce any language errors.
 
 Thanks.
 
Hi Rob

Looks good.

One question though on this site (page now I suppose, not a site) there
is a right side menu, same is on many of the other language pages. A
left over I think from the old CMS system, not just embedded in the
html. 

I checked another 8 pages with this and they all just go to 404 error
page, shouldn't we (and I'll go do it today if so) just remove these?


//drew

Re: What to do with the Czech homepage?

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 10:56 AM, drew d...@baseanswers.com wrote:
 On Sun, 2012-06-03 at 09:19 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
 On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 2:20 AM, Pavel Janík pa...@janik.cz wrote:
  Not from myside. I would delete them as well.
 
  But why not ask our Czech committer. ;-)
 
  @Pavel: Could you sheet some light on the cz webpage? What do you think?
 
  Delete them, yes.
  --

 OK.  I've updated the page, added the new 3.4 links, updated the
 branding and cleaned up similar issue.  A review is welcome, to make
 sure I did not introduce any language errors.

 Thanks.

 Hi Rob

 Looks good.

 One question though on this site (page now I suppose, not a site) there
 is a right side menu, same is on many of the other language pages. A
 left over I think from the old CMS system, not just embedded in the
 html.

 I checked another 8 pages with this and they all just go to 404 error
 page, shouldn't we (and I'll go do it today if so) just remove these?


Remove, or if you know the new location of a particular link, update it.

I also updated the Japanese and Hungarian pages to point to the AOO
3.4.  I noticed an immediate jump up in downloads of the Japanese AOO
3.4 when I did this.


-Rob


 //drew

Re: What to do with the Czech homepage?

2012-06-03 Thread Reizinger Zoltán


2012.06.03. 17:23 keltezéssel, Rob Weir írta:

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 10:56 AM, drewd...@baseanswers.com  wrote:

On Sun, 2012-06-03 at 09:19 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 2:20 AM, Pavel Janíkpa...@janik.cz  wrote:

Not from myside. I would delete them as well.

But why not ask our Czech committer. ;-)

@Pavel: Could you sheet some light on the cz webpage? What do you think?

Delete them, yes.
--

OK.  I've updated the page, added the new 3.4 links, updated the
branding and cleaned up similar issue.  A review is welcome, to make
sure I did not introduce any language errors.

Thanks.


Hi Rob

Looks good.

One question though on this site (page now I suppose, not a site) there
is a right side menu, same is on many of the other language pages. A
left over I think from the old CMS system, not just embedded in the
html.

I checked another 8 pages with this and they all just go to 404 error
page, shouldn't we (and I'll go do it today if so) just remove these?


Remove, or if you know the new location of a particular link, update it.

I also updated the Japanese and Hungarian pages to point to the AOO
3.4.

Thaks Rob.
Zoltan

I noticed an immediate jump up in downloads of the Japanese AOO
3.4 when I did this.


-Rob


//drew

Re: What to do with the Czech homepage?


Am 06/03/2012 05:23 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 10:56 AM, drewd...@baseanswers.com  wrote:

On Sun, 2012-06-03 at 09:19 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 2:20 AM, Pavel Janíkpa...@janik.cz  wrote:

Not from myside. I would delete them as well.

But why not ask our Czech committer. ;-)

@Pavel: Could you sheet some light on the cz webpage? What do you think?


Delete them, yes.
--


OK.  I've updated the page, added the new 3.4 links, updated the
branding and cleaned up similar issue.  A review is welcome, to make
sure I did not introduce any language errors.

Thanks.


Hi Rob

Looks good.

One question though on this site (page now I suppose, not a site) there
is a right side menu, same is on many of the other language pages. A
left over I think from the old CMS system, not just embedded in the
html.

I checked another 8 pages with this and they all just go to 404 error
page, shouldn't we (and I'll go do it today if so) just remove these?



Remove, or if you know the new location of a particular link, update it.

I also updated the Japanese and Hungarian pages to point to the AOO
3.4.  I noticed an immediate jump up in downloads of the Japanese AOO
3.4 when I did this.


Wow, interest effect that is visible so fast.

Thanks for updating the webpages.

Marcus

Re: What to do with the Czech homepage?


Am 06/03/2012 08:26 AM, schrieb Pavel Janík:

Hi Louis,

On Jun 3, 2012, at 2:22 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:


Should Pavel be disinclined to update these—I have no reason to think he would 
be, and he's been involved with OOo and AOO for about as long as I


yup, few days ago (on Monday) I have celebrated my ten years with the project (and 
being a perfectionist, I started my IZ life with #i5332#). I do not count months before where I 
with my collegues binary hacked the Polish resources of StarOffice and prepared Czech 
version of StarOffice ;-)


ah, just awesome. :-)

Marcus

Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4

2012-06-03 Thread Andrew Douglas Pitonyak


On 06/01/2012 09:48 PM, Felix Brown wrote:
The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4 was: 
Today the automatic update to 3.4 happened.

Today I opened a WordPad file, (Which I open often; It's my list of birthdays.);
And to my surprise, Your piece of junk software had hijacked all of my documents
to where they open with Open Office ; AND THAT SURE AS HECK WAS NOT A CHOICE
THAT I MADE.


I hate programs that act like a virus.
Fix this ; Then tell me, (IN PERSON, BY EMAIL OF PHONE.) ; And then, MAYBE I'LL
REINSTALL IT.


Felix Brown
316 722-3744
buy-a-thing-or-...@sbcglobal.net
Felix Brown was running an older version of OOo and the software was 
automatically updated to 3.4 using a secondary package. He does not 
believe that he said it was OK to change the permissions, but after 
removing OOo his file associations are back to pre-OOo state. OOo is no 
longer currently installed on the computer.


The primary purpose of his post was to indicate why he had removed OOo 
so that it might be fixed in a future version.


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

Re: [HEADS UP] Re: [UPDATE SERVICE] proposal a OOo 3.3 update service

2012-06-03 Thread Andrea Pescetti


On 02/06/2012 Roberto Galoppini wrote:

Andrea, that page looks actually like the localized version of
http://www.openoffice.org/download/ right?
Both seems a very good start, I think.


http://www.openoffice.org/it/download/ is now aligned with the 
international and the Spanish page. It is slightly customized, including 
some minor validity fixes.



What about putting the Please Contribute content we have on
SourceForge download pages?


Thanks, I included links from that block in the right hand side column, 
while preserving the links we used to have there.


Regards,
  Andrea.

Re: [DISCUSS] Rules of voting for new committers and PPMC members

FWIW,

The Foundation Roles are explained here:

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

Pretty much in line to what you are thinking.

Pedro.

--- Dom 3/6/12, Yong Lin Ma mayo...@gmail.com ha scritto:

 This was a discussion about rules of
 voting for new committer and PPMC
 member. We think it is more appropriate to let all
 contributors get
 involved in this. So I moved the discussion to ooo-dev.
 
 General process about voting in a new committer and PPMC
 member is here
 http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html
 
 By far the practice is most candidates were voted for
 committer and
 PPMC member at the same time.
 And no concreate critrial defined in public for AOO.
 
 Your comments are welcomed.
 
 
 A comment from Rob:
 
 If it were entirely up to me I'd have it be like:
 
 1) Contributor -- anyone who contributes to the project,
 mailing list
 discussions, patches, translations, bug reports, doc,
 support.  This
 comes in all flavors and sizes.  We need to do a better
 job giving
 them credit and acknowledging their contributions.  If
 the feeling is
 that someone is not valued unless they are voted in as a
 PPMC member,
 then we're doing something wrong.
 
 2) Committer -- The threshold question:  Do we
 trust their judgement
 with respect to the area of their contributions?  The
 move from
 contributor to committer is a move from RTC (patches must be
 reviewed)
 to CTR.  So we really need to have a sense that they
 are doing quality
 work.  Committers also have veto rights on all of our
 commits.  So we
 need to trust their judgement.
 
 3) PMC member -- The threshold question:  Do they
 understand The
 Apache Way and our community-based decision making? On
 average are
 they solving more community problems than they are
 causing?  Are they
 helping others in the community succeed?  When we
 graduate, and our
 Mentors move on to other podlings, the PMC collectively
 needs to
 mentor new members to the project.  So I think the PMC
 is more about
 trusting their community skills rather than their technical
 skills.
 
 It might be possible for someone to qualify for 2 and 3
 at the same
 time.  But probably not in every case.
 
 Note:  This is not how we have operated
 previously.  I think there was
 an bootstrapping issue where we needed to have a PPMC
 suitably large
 and diverse to provide balance.  We also obviously
 started with a PPMC
 consisting of people who did not fully understand
 Apache.  That is the
 nature of Incubation.  But I don't think this approach
 is necessarily
 something we should continue with a year later, as we
 approach
 graduation.

Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice

It was part of the original AOO 3.4 release plan to have a blog post
that explained the rebranding.  That didn't occur due to the Roller
issues that occurred then.

But better late than never.

Here is the draft:
https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=openoffice_org_is_now_apache

Improvement are welcome.

-Rob

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice

2012-06-03 Thread RGB ES

2012/6/3 Rob Weir rabas...@gmail.com:
 It was part of the original AOO 3.4 release plan to have a blog post
 that explained the rebranding.  That didn't occur due to the Roller
 issues that occurred then.

 But better late than never.

 Here is the draft:
 https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=openoffice_org_is_now_apache

 Improvement are welcome.

 -Rob

Maybe add both, old and new logo side by side? But I think the post is
just perfect as it is now: short and to the point.

Regards
Ricardo

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice


Am 06/03/2012 09:41 PM, schrieb RGB ES:

2012/6/3 Rob Weirrabas...@gmail.com:

It was part of the original AOO 3.4 release plan to have a blog post
that explained the rebranding.  That didn't occur due to the Roller
issues that occurred then.

But better late than never.

Here is the draft:
https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=openoffice_org_is_now_apache

Improvement are welcome.

-Rob


Maybe add both, old and new logo side by side? But I think the post is
just perfect as it is now: short and to the point.


Yes, the text if fine. But with the both logos it would underline the 
message perfectly.


Marcus

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice


--- Dom 3/6/12, RGB ES ha scritto:
...
 
 Maybe add both, old and new logo side by side? But I think
 the post is
 just perfect as it is now: short and to the point.
 

I would add one line to wrap things up:

The .org is now in Apache.

Cheers,

Pedro.

[WWW]Forums branding

2012-06-03 Thread RGB ES

Not sure if this discussion belongs to here or to the marketing
mailing lists...

Some weeks ago we started a discussion on the forums about branding,
you can find it here:

http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=102t=53754

we arrived to three draft proposals for the logo on the banner:

Drew: http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/download/file.php?id=14126

Me: http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/download/file.php?id=14130

Acknak: http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/download/file.php?id=14134

all of them based on the actual design... but none of us are
professional designers so we need some guidance here.

Regards
Ricardo

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org wrote:

 --- Dom 3/6/12, RGB ES ha scritto:
 ...

 Maybe add both, old and new logo side by side? But I think
 the post is
 just perfect as it is now: short and to the point.


I get a security exception if I try to upload a new image to the media
library.  So right now I can only link to existing images hosted on
the website (or wiki).  The new logo was easy to find, since it is on
our home page.  I added that.

Is there a URL for the old logo, in a similar size (150px high) ?


 I would add one line to wrap things up:

 The .org is now in Apache.


I like that.

 Cheers,

 Pedro.

Re: [WWW]Forums branding

On Sun, 2012-06-03 at 21:54 +0200, RGB ES wrote:
 Not sure if this discussion belongs to here or to the marketing
 mailing lists...
 
 Some weeks ago we started a discussion on the forums about branding,
 you can find it here:
 
 http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=102t=53754
 
 we arrived to three draft proposals for the logo on the banner:
 
 Drew: http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/download/file.php?id=14126
 
 Me: http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/download/file.php?id=14130
 
 Acknak: 
 http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/download/file.php?id=14134
 
 all of them based on the actual design... but none of us are
 professional designers so we need some guidance here.

Howdy Ricardo,

Of the three, I favor Acknak's most.

//drew

 
 Regards
 Ricardo

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice

2012-06-03 Thread Patrick Durusau


Rob,

+1!

Hope you are having a great weekend!

Patrick

PS: Thanks to you and everyone who has put in so much effort to make 
OpenOffice an Apache project!


On 6/3/2012 3:29 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

It was part of the original AOO 3.4 release plan to have a blog post
that explained the rebranding.  That didn't occur due to the Roller
issues that occurred then.

But better late than never.

Here is the draft:
https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=openoffice_org_is_now_apache

Improvement are welcome.

-Rob


--
Patrick Durusau
patr...@durusau.net
Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)

Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice


Am 06/03/2012 09:59 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Pedro Giffunip...@apache.org  wrote:


--- Dom 3/6/12, RGB ES ha scritto:
...


Maybe add both, old and new logo side by side? But I think
the post is
just perfect as it is now: short and to the point.



I get a security exception if I try to upload a new image to the media
library.  So right now I can only link to existing images hosted on
the website (or wiki).  The new logo was easy to find, since it is on
our home page.  I added that.

Is there a URL for the old logo, in a similar size (150px high) ?


Try this:

http://www.openoffice.org/images/ooo-logo.png
(300 x 150 px)

HTH

Marcus




I would add one line to wrap things up:

The .org is now in Apache.



I like that.


Cheers,

Pedro.

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice

On Sun, 2012-06-03 at 15:59 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
 On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org wrote:
 
  --- Dom 3/6/12, RGB ES ha scritto:
  ...
 
  Maybe add both, old and new logo side by side? But I think
  the post is
  just perfect as it is now: short and to the point.
 
 
 I get a security exception if I try to upload a new image to the media
 library.  So right now I can only link to existing images hosted on
 the website (or wiki).  The new logo was easy to find, since it is on
 our home page.  I added that.
 
 Is there a URL for the old logo, in a similar size (150px high) ?

Hi Rob,

Sent a png via DM just now, for that.

//drew

 
 
  I would add one line to wrap things up:
 
  The .org is now in Apache.
 
 
 I like that.
 
  Cheers,
 
  Pedro.

Re: AOO 3.4.0 for solaris x86 version


Am 05/29/2012 03:54 AM, schrieb L'oiseau de mer:

I notice that nobody release AOO 3.4.0 Solaris x86 version, so i first
release a unofficial verision.
But a relate problem in coinmp of category-b part, so it is still not
include mozilla support.
I still deal with this problem, maybe can release another version that
include them in future.

Download Area:
http://www.openfoundry.org/of/projects/1201/download


I would be happy to add another column for Solaris to the download 
webpage when we have an official release. :-)


Marcus

Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4

On Sat, 2012-06-02 at 09:30 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
 On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
 
  On Jun 1, 2012, at 7:18 PM, Jihui Choi wrote:
 
  On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org wrote:
  When you install it you agreed to open doc files in OpenOffice
 
  Basically installing AOO doesn't mean we agreed to open MS office
  formats in AOO.
  And it's supposed there's an option page to choose whether we'll open
  them in AOO or not.
  But I couldn't find any similar option. I installed AOO 3.4 twice to
  check this on Windows 7 32bit.
  It's very strange and shame. It should be checked and fixed.
 
  I am unsure from your statement Choi (is it proper to use the second name 
  in conversation?) whether you were confirming the user's report.
 
  If what the reporter says is true then this needs to be a bugzilla and 
  possible blocker for 3.4.1. How is this being tested on Windows? And is the 
  result that installing AOO 3.4 on it does in fact cause (or even has as a 
  default) the shifting of MS Office document types to be opened with AOO 
  instead of MS Office. If MS Office is present then this must not be the the 
  default option.
 
  The check must not be implicit to the user who just clicks continue and 
  accept buttons through the WIndows installation process. Users must 
  explicitly choose to have AOO override MS Office for MS Office documents.
 
 
 Making the opposite default could be wrong as well.  For example, the
 user could have had one of those 30-day trial versions of MS Office
 that are commonly bundled with new PC's.  The trial expires and they
 install AOO.  If we don't default to taking the file extensions, then
 the user is left in a tough position.
 
 Ideally we'd have a dialog the user could reach both in the install
 and in the product where they could see what app currently owns each
 file extension and then switch the owner.  So they could assign an
 extension to AOO, but also change their mind and set it back to MS
 Office if they wanted.

Well, I admit that I didn't do it this last time - but there has been an
option for this, for a long time. The person running the installer has
to choose custom install to see it is all - or did this change along the
way.

Making an intelligent choice for default behavior is important and needs
to be, the desire being to server most users best by limiting the amount
of interaction required to perform the installation.

It is my feeling, given the small of number of (small but also of a
frequency over time) individuals commenting in the negative on this
choice, that for the majority it is the correct choice.

It also seems to me that in most of the cases where a person did contact
one of our support channels regarding the changes that a fairly quick
response about file associations did the trick.

I'm sure however that a better way of informing the user of the option
could be found, as most things can be improved. Though it seems to me
that in the particular this has not a big issue for most Windows users.

//drew


 
  Regards,
  Dave
 
 
  --
  Regards,
  JiHui Choi

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote:
 Am 06/03/2012 09:59 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:

 On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Pedro Giffunip...@apache.org  wrote:


 --- Dom 3/6/12, RGB ES ha scritto:
 ...


 Maybe add both, old and new logo side by side? But I think
 the post is
 just perfect as it is now: short and to the point.


 I get a security exception if I try to upload a new image to the media
 library.  So right now I can only link to existing images hosted on
 the website (or wiki).  The new logo was easy to find, since it is on
 our home page.  I added that.

 Is there a URL for the old logo, in a similar size (150px high) ?


 Try this:

 http://www.openoffice.org/images/ooo-logo.png
 (300 x 150 px)


I added that to the draft:
https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=openoffice_org_is_now_apache

The scale is off to my eyes though.  Maybe we need to match the same
point size, say the size of the O's, rather than the absolute height
of the image?

 HTH

 Marcus




 I would add one line to wrap things up:

 The .org is now in Apache.


 I like that.

 Cheers,

 Pedro.

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 4:24 PM, drew d...@baseanswers.com wrote:
 On Sun, 2012-06-03 at 15:59 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
 On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org wrote:
 
  --- Dom 3/6/12, RGB ES ha scritto:
  ...
 
  Maybe add both, old and new logo side by side? But I think
  the post is
  just perfect as it is now: short and to the point.
 

 I get a security exception if I try to upload a new image to the media
 library.  So right now I can only link to existing images hosted on
 the website (or wiki).  The new logo was easy to find, since it is on
 our home page.  I added that.

 Is there a URL for the old logo, in a similar size (150px high) ?

 Hi Rob,

 Sent a png via DM just now, for that.


Thanks, but the issue is I am not able to upload new images to the
blog.  It appears to be broken, or at least disabled. So I need a URL
of an image I can reference.  The logo you sent, is it on the website
or wiki someplace?  I could grab the URL from that.

 //drew


 
  I would add one line to wrap things up:
 
  The .org is now in Apache.
 

 I like that.

  Cheers,
 
  Pedro.

Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 4:37 PM, drew d...@baseanswers.com wrote:
 On Sat, 2012-06-02 at 09:30 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
 On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
 
  On Jun 1, 2012, at 7:18 PM, Jihui Choi wrote:
 
  On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org 
  wrote:
  When you install it you agreed to open doc files in OpenOffice
 
  Basically installing AOO doesn't mean we agreed to open MS office
  formats in AOO.
  And it's supposed there's an option page to choose whether we'll open
  them in AOO or not.
  But I couldn't find any similar option. I installed AOO 3.4 twice to
  check this on Windows 7 32bit.
  It's very strange and shame. It should be checked and fixed.
 
  I am unsure from your statement Choi (is it proper to use the second name 
  in conversation?) whether you were confirming the user's report.
 
  If what the reporter says is true then this needs to be a bugzilla and 
  possible blocker for 3.4.1. How is this being tested on Windows? And is 
  the result that installing AOO 3.4 on it does in fact cause (or even has 
  as a default) the shifting of MS Office document types to be opened with 
  AOO instead of MS Office. If MS Office is present then this must not be 
  the the default option.
 
  The check must not be implicit to the user who just clicks continue and 
  accept buttons through the WIndows installation process. Users must 
  explicitly choose to have AOO override MS Office for MS Office documents.
 

 Making the opposite default could be wrong as well.  For example, the
 user could have had one of those 30-day trial versions of MS Office
 that are commonly bundled with new PC's.  The trial expires and they
 install AOO.  If we don't default to taking the file extensions, then
 the user is left in a tough position.

 Ideally we'd have a dialog the user could reach both in the install
 and in the product where they could see what app currently owns each
 file extension and then switch the owner.  So they could assign an
 extension to AOO, but also change their mind and set it back to MS
 Office if they wanted.

 Well, I admit that I didn't do it this last time - but there has been an
 option for this, for a long time. The person running the installer has
 to choose custom install to see it is all - or did this change along the
 way.

 Making an intelligent choice for default behavior is important and needs
 to be, the desire being to server most users best by limiting the amount
 of interaction required to perform the installation.

 It is my feeling, given the small of number of (small but also of a
 frequency over time) individuals commenting in the negative on this
 choice, that for the majority it is the correct choice.


Good point.  2.7 million downloads and a handful of complaints.
Certainly there are more complaints unreported, but this is still very
small percentage wise.

 It also seems to me that in most of the cases where a person did contact
 one of our support channels regarding the changes that a fairly quick
 response about file associations did the trick.

 I'm sure however that a better way of informing the user of the option
 could be found, as most things can be improved. Though it seems to me
 that in the particular this has not a big issue for most Windows users.


Do we have any FAQ's for AOO 3.4?   Do we have a sense of what the
common questions are at this point, based on the forums and ooo-users?
 Putting such FAQ's in a prominent place would help.

 //drew



  Regards,
  Dave
 
 
  --
  Regards,
  JiHui Choi

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice

Hi Rob,

The old is 50% larger then the new..

Use the one attached here, sized to match.

//drew

ps - resized from the earlier one I mailed you BTW


On Sun, 2012-06-03 at 16:37 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
 On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote:
  Am 06/03/2012 09:59 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
 
  On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Pedro Giffunip...@apache.org  wrote:
 
 
  --- Dom 3/6/12, RGB ES ha scritto:
  ...
 
 
  Maybe add both, old and new logo side by side? But I think
  the post is
  just perfect as it is now: short and to the point.
 
 
  I get a security exception if I try to upload a new image to the media
  library.  So right now I can only link to existing images hosted on
  the website (or wiki).  The new logo was easy to find, since it is on
  our home page.  I added that.
 
  Is there a URL for the old logo, in a similar size (150px high) ?
 
 
  Try this:
 
  http://www.openoffice.org/images/ooo-logo.png
  (300 x 150 px)
 
 
 I added that to the draft:
 https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=openoffice_org_is_now_apache
 
 The scale is off to my eyes though.  Maybe we need to match the same
 point size, say the size of the O's, rather than the absolute height
 of the image?
 
  HTH
 
  Marcus
 
 
 
 
  I would add one line to wrap things up:
 
  The .org is now in Apache.
 
 
  I like that.
 
  Cheers,
 
  Pedro.

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice


Am 06/03/2012 10:37 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de  wrote:

Am 06/03/2012 09:59 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:


On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Pedro Giffunip...@apache.orgwrote:



--- Dom 3/6/12, RGB ES ha scritto:
...



Maybe add both, old and new logo side by side? But I think
the post is
just perfect as it is now: short and to the point.



I get a security exception if I try to upload a new image to the media
library.  So right now I can only link to existing images hosted on
the website (or wiki).  The new logo was easy to find, since it is on
our home page.  I added that.

Is there a URL for the old logo, in a similar size (150px high) ?



Try this:

http://www.openoffice.org/images/ooo-logo.png
(300 x 150 px)



I added that to the draft:
https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=openoffice_org_is_now_apache

The scale is off to my eyes though.  Maybe we need to match the same
point size, say the size of the O's, rather than the absolute height
of the image?


I've no clue howto re-scale the image. But maybe it's OK to limit the 
display of the image in the blog post. When switching to HTML mode (via 
the Toggle HTML source icon) you can enter the following:


...
p align=centerimg height=100 width=200 
src=http://www.openoffice.org/images/ooo-logo.png; / /p

...
p align=centerimg height=100 width=200 
src=http://www.openoffice.org/images/AOO_logos/OOo_Website_v2_copy.png; 
/ /p

...

Then both logos will be scaled to 100x200px of size. In the preview of 
blog roller it looks fine.


HTH

Marcus




I would add one line to wrap things up:

The .org is now in Apache.



I like that.


Cheers,

Pedro.

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote:
 Am 06/03/2012 10:37 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:

 On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de  wrote:

 Am 06/03/2012 09:59 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:

 On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Pedro Giffunip...@apache.org    wrote:



 --- Dom 3/6/12, RGB ES ha scritto:
 ...



 Maybe add both, old and new logo side by side? But I think
 the post is
 just perfect as it is now: short and to the point.


 I get a security exception if I try to upload a new image to the media
 library.  So right now I can only link to existing images hosted on
 the website (or wiki).  The new logo was easy to find, since it is on
 our home page.  I added that.

 Is there a URL for the old logo, in a similar size (150px high) ?



 Try this:

 http://www.openoffice.org/images/ooo-logo.png
 (300 x 150 px)


 I added that to the draft:

 https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=openoffice_org_is_now_apache

 The scale is off to my eyes though.  Maybe we need to match the same
 point size, say the size of the O's, rather than the absolute height
 of the image?


 I've no clue howto re-scale the image. But maybe it's OK to limit the
 display of the image in the blog post. When switching to HTML mode (via the
 Toggle HTML source icon) you can enter the following:

 ...
 p align=centerimg height=100 width=200
 src=http://www.openoffice.org/images/ooo-logo.png; / /p
 ...
 p align=centerimg height=100 width=200
 src=http://www.openoffice.org/images/AOO_logos/OOo_Website_v2_copy.png; /
 /p
 ...

 Then both logos will be scaled to 100x200px of size. In the preview of blog
 roller it looks fine.


Good.  I did that.  One image had a hard coded white background and
the other was a PNG with alpha transparency.  That looked bad.  So I
set the background on the entire table to white.  That now looks good.


 HTH

 Marcus



 I would add one line to wrap things up:

 The .org is now in Apache.


 I like that.

 Cheers,

 Pedro.

Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4

2012-06-03 Thread Rory O'Farrell

On Sun, 3 Jun 2012 16:44:28 -0400
Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:

 On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 4:37 PM, drew d...@baseanswers.com wrote:
  On Sat, 2012-06-02 at 09:30 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
  On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
  
   On Jun 1, 2012, at 7:18 PM, Jihui Choi wrote:
  
   On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org 
   wrote:
   When you install it you agreed to open doc files in OpenOffice
  
   Basically installing AOO doesn't mean we agreed to open MS office
   formats in AOO.
   And it's supposed there's an option page to choose whether we'll open
   them in AOO or not.
   But I couldn't find any similar option. I installed AOO 3.4 twice to
   check this on Windows 7 32bit.
   It's very strange and shame. It should be checked and fixed.
  
   I am unsure from your statement Choi (is it proper to use the second 
   name in conversation?) whether you were confirming the user's report.
  
   If what the reporter says is true then this needs to be a bugzilla and 
   possible blocker for 3.4.1. How is this being tested on Windows? And is 
   the result that installing AOO 3.4 on it does in fact cause (or even has 
   as a default) the shifting of MS Office document types to be opened with 
   AOO instead of MS Office. If MS Office is present then this must not be 
   the the default option.
  
   The check must not be implicit to the user who just clicks continue and 
   accept buttons through the WIndows installation process. Users must 
   explicitly choose to have AOO override MS Office for MS Office documents.
  
 
  Making the opposite default could be wrong as well.  For example, the
  user could have had one of those 30-day trial versions of MS Office
  that are commonly bundled with new PC's.  The trial expires and they
  install AOO.  If we don't default to taking the file extensions, then
  the user is left in a tough position.
 
  Ideally we'd have a dialog the user could reach both in the install
  and in the product where they could see what app currently owns each
  file extension and then switch the owner.  So they could assign an
  extension to AOO, but also change their mind and set it back to MS
  Office if they wanted.
 
  Well, I admit that I didn't do it this last time - but there has been an
  option for this, for a long time. The person running the installer has
  to choose custom install to see it is all - or did this change along the
  way.
 
  Making an intelligent choice for default behavior is important and needs
  to be, the desire being to server most users best by limiting the amount
  of interaction required to perform the installation.
 
  It is my feeling, given the small of number of (small but also of a
  frequency over time) individuals commenting in the negative on this
  choice, that for the majority it is the correct choice.
 
 
 Good point.  2.7 million downloads and a handful of complaints.
 Certainly there are more complaints unreported, but this is still very
 small percentage wise.
 
  It also seems to me that in most of the cases where a person did contact
  one of our support channels regarding the changes that a fairly quick
  response about file associations did the trick.
 
  I'm sure however that a better way of informing the user of the option
  could be found, as most things can be improved. Though it seems to me
  that in the particular this has not a big issue for most Windows users.
 
 
 Do we have any FAQ's for AOO 3.4?   Do we have a sense of what the
 common questions are at this point, based on the forums and ooo-users?
  Putting such FAQ's in a prominent place would help.
 

Three immediate subjects for such an FAQ come to mind:
1) The file associations just discussed
2) When Java is needed for Windows it should be 32bit and version 1.6
3) that there is currently no 64 bit AOO for Windows

-- 
Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice


Am 06/03/2012 11:25 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.de  wrote:

Am 06/03/2012 10:37 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:


On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Marcus (OOo)marcus.m...@wtnet.dewrote:


Am 06/03/2012 09:59 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:


On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Pedro Giffunip...@apache.org  wrote:




--- Dom 3/6/12, RGB ES ha scritto:
...




Maybe add both, old and new logo side by side? But I think
the post is
just perfect as it is now: short and to the point.



I get a security exception if I try to upload a new image to the media
library.  So right now I can only link to existing images hosted on
the website (or wiki).  The new logo was easy to find, since it is on
our home page.  I added that.

Is there a URL for the old logo, in a similar size (150px high) ?




Try this:

http://www.openoffice.org/images/ooo-logo.png
(300 x 150 px)



I added that to the draft:

https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=openoffice_org_is_now_apache

The scale is off to my eyes though.  Maybe we need to match the same
point size, say the size of the O's, rather than the absolute height
of the image?



I've no clue howto re-scale the image. But maybe it's OK to limit the
display of the image in the blog post. When switching to HTML mode (via the
Toggle HTML source icon) you can enter the following:

...
p align=centerimg height=100 width=200
src=http://www.openoffice.org/images/ooo-logo.png; /  /p
...
p align=centerimg height=100 width=200
src=http://www.openoffice.org/images/AOO_logos/OOo_Website_v2_copy.png; /
/p
...

Then both logos will be scaled to 100x200px of size. In the preview of blog
roller it looks fine.



Good.  I did that.  One image had a hard coded white background and
the other was a PNG with alpha transparency.  That looked bad.  So I
set the background on the entire table to white.  That now looks good.


Yes, much better.

What about changing the logos? The new one on top?

Or side by side with a comment like:

From the past old logo to the future new logo.

OK, good night for today.

Marcus




I would add one line to wrap things up:

The .org is now in Apache.



I like that.


Cheers,

Pedro.

MSO on ipad in November

2012-06-03 Thread Ian Lynch

http://read.bi/LdKYRD

How easy to package AOO for Android and ipad?

-- 
Ian

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ)

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

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

Re: [WWW]Forums branding

2012-06-03 Thread Hagar Delest


For the record, I've sent a similar message to the marketing list. But it needs 
to be approved since I'm not subscribed to the marketing list.

Hagar


Le dim. 03 juin 2012 22:03:25 CEST, drew d...@baseanswers.com a écrit :


On Sun, 2012-06-03 at 21:54 +0200, RGB ES wrote:

Not sure if this discussion belongs to here or to the marketing
mailing lists...

Some weeks ago we started a discussion on the forums about branding,
you can find it here:

http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=102t=53754

we arrived to three draft proposals for the logo on the banner:

Drew: http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/download/file.php?id=14126

Me: http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/download/file.php?id=14130

Acknak: http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/download/file.php?id=14134

all of them based on the actual design... but none of us are
professional designers so we need some guidance here.


Howdy Ricardo,

Of the three, I favor Acknak's most.

//drew



Regards
Ricardo

Re: [DISCUSS] Rules of voting for new committers and PPMC members




On 06/03/2012 11:48 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:

FWIW,

The Foundation Roles are explained here:

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


yes, this is standard ASF policy.

My question/concern at this point would be --

how well do we think this works for Apache OpenOffice?




Pretty much in line to what you are thinking.

Pedro.

--- Dom 3/6/12, Yong Lin Mamayo...@gmail.com  ha scritto:


This was a discussion about rules of
voting for new committer and PPMC
member. We think it is more appropriate to let all
contributors get
involved in this. So I moved the discussion to ooo-dev.

General process about voting in a new committer and PPMC
member is here
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html

By far the practice is most candidates were voted for
committer and
PPMC member at the same time.
And no concreate critrial defined in public for AOO.

Your comments are welcomed.


A comment from Rob:


If it were entirely up to me I'd have it be like:



1) Contributor -- anyone who contributes to the project,

mailing list
discussions, patches, translations, bug reports, doc,
support.� This
comes in all flavors and sizes.� We need to do a better
job giving
them credit and acknowledging their contributions.� If
the feeling is
that someone is not valued unless they are voted in as a
PPMC member,
then we're doing something wrong.


2) Committer -- The threshold question:� Do we

trust their judgement
with respect to the area of their contributions?� The
move from
contributor to committer is a move from RTC (patches must be
reviewed)
to CTR.� So we really need to have a sense that they
are doing quality
work.� Committers also have veto rights on all of our
commits.� So we
need to trust their judgement.


3) PMC member -- The threshold question:� Do they

understand The
Apache Way and our community-based decision making? On
average are
they solving more community problems than they are
causing?� Are they
helping others in the community succeed?� When we
graduate, and our
Mentors move on to other podlings, the PMC collectively
needs to
mentor new members to the project.� So I think the PMC
is more about
trusting their community skills rather than their technical
skills.


It might be possible for someone to qualify for 2 and 3

at the same
time.� But probably not in every case.


Note:� This is not how we have operated

previously.� I think there was
an bootstrapping issue where we needed to have a PPMC
suitably large
and diverse to provide balance.� We also obviously
started with a PPMC
consisting of people who did not fully understand
Apache.� That is the
nature of Incubation.� But I don't think this approach
is necessarily
something we should continue with a year later, as we
approach
graduation.



--

MzK

So let it rock, let it roll
Let the bible belt come and save my soul
Hold on to sixteen as long as you can
Changes come around real soon make us woman and men.
  -- Jack and Diane, John Mellencamp

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice




On 06/03/2012 12:50 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:


--- Dom 3/6/12, RGB ES ha scritto:
...


Maybe add both, old and new logo side by side? But I think
the post is
just perfect as it is now: short and to the point.



I would add one line to wrap things up:

The .org is now in Apache.


Pedro, Rob --

I see that this comment got added but I can't really say I understand 
what it means. I wonder if others might have the same problem.


No need to take it out if we feel strongly about it, but 





Cheers,

Pedro.



--

MzK

So let it rock, let it roll
Let the bible belt come and save my soul
Hold on to sixteen as long as you can
Changes come around real soon make us woman and men.
  -- Jack and Diane, John Mellencamp

AOO 3.4 FAQ's (was: Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4)

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote:
 On Sun, 3 Jun 2012 16:44:28 -0400
 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:

snip

Moving this to its own thread.


 Do we have any FAQ's for AOO 3.4?   Do we have a sense of what the
 common questions are at this point, based on the forums and ooo-users?
  Putting such FAQ's in a prominent place would help.


 Three immediate subjects for such an FAQ come to mind:
 1) The file associations just discussed
 2) When Java is needed for Windows it should be 32bit and version 1.6
 3) that there is currently no 64 bit AOO for Windows


Maybe also:

- What about language X, why is it not included?

-Rob

Re: OOo electronic distribution

old business...see Rob's responses below

Would it be OK to extract some of Rob's responses and add them (in a
general way) to the modified --

http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/

page?

Maybe as sort of a general FAQ on redistributing?

But with a caveat that ooo-dev should still be contacted.

At least this might forego addressing the same sorts of issues again and
again.

On 04/03/2012 04:39 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Issac Goldstandis...@volo-net.com wrote:

Hi,

At ACNA I mentioned to Shane that the company that I work for was
interested in re-distributing OO but was concerned over the legalities of
doing so - specifically regarding trademark use. After explaining the
company and project in detail he said that he thought it could work out,
and directed me to poll the podling as a prerequisite for getting trademark
approval from the ASF. Although that project (at work) was frozen by the
time I returned from Vancouver, it's come up in discussion again, so I'd
like to ask the podling for permission to use the trademarks and guidance
on how to best keep the podling's interests in mind.

The company focuses on monetized installers, similar to those found in
Oracle's JAVA windows installer or on CNET downloads (which is actually our
product), where we offer an opt-in bundled software download as part of the
installer.

Currently, our team has come up with mockups for the installer and landing
page for the download, which I'd be happy to provide in the form of
attachments on-list, or off-list (or on a wiki if that's the right way to
do it).

Hi Isaac,

Here are my personal thoughts. Don't take this as a final decision by the
project, but just me weighing in, and hoping that other project members do
as well.

First, thanks for asking. Not everyone does that, though they should.

Links to your mock-up would be great.

For background, I would note that some of our users have been confused but
such monitized installers before, and we have received complaints.
(However, to be fair I don't think they were from your company).

Since we cannot control the quality or the user experience for modified
installs, and the experience for the user would differ from our released
OpenOffice, it would probably be confusing to the user to call your product
just OpenOffice.org or Apache OpenOffice without further distinction.
IMHO, one of the attributes of our brand is that it is non-commercial,
free, open source software.

So I think you should consider another primary name that distinguish your
offering, while truthfully indicating that it is based on OpenOffice. For
example, Super Office, powered by Apache OpenOffice, where Super Office
could be any name of your choice that you have rights to use. That might
be the name of your overall bundle.

So if there is a link that says, Click here to download OpenOffice.org,
and that link does not actually point directly to an unmodified release of
OpenOffice.org, then that is a problem. If it says, Click here to
download the Super Office Bundle, powered by OpenOffice.org (TM), then
that might be OK.

What we want to know, specifically is:
1) How to brand the product? Given we're talking about 3.3.0 (at least
until 3.4.0 happens), we thought to simply brand it OpenOffice.org Should
we continue that line, or use Apache OpenOffice? If the latter, should we
include Incubating and the logos set out at https://cwiki.apache.org/**
confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**AOOLogo+proposalhttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposalor
not?

3.3 should be called OpenOffice.org, 3.4 should be called Apache
OpenOffice.

2) We'd like pointers on the right place (if any) to include (TM) or (R)
or anything else both on the landing page and on the installer.

OpenOffice.org would be (R). Apache OpenOffice would be (TM)

Acknowledgment of the trademarks is key. Also, if users might be confused
as to the source of the bundle, a disclaimer might be appropriate, e.g.,
Super Office is a product of Foo Corporation and is not affiliated with or
endorsed by the Apache Software Foundation. OpenOffice.org is a
trademark of the Apache Software Foundation.

3) Other general pointers that you have.

Policy is here: http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/

My recommendation would be first to resolve the name question and how to
avoid users confusing the bundled software with an Apache source or
endorsement. That is the key question.

Regards,

-Rob

Thanks,
Issac

MzK

So let it rock, let it roll
Let the bible belt come and save my soul
Hold on to sixteen as long as you can
Changes come around real soon make us woman and men.
-- Jack and Diane, John Mellencamp

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice



--- Dom 3/6/12, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com ha scritto:

 Da: Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com
 Oggetto: Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice
 A: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
 Data: Domenica 3 giugno 2012, 17:23
 
 
 On 06/03/2012 12:50 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
 
  --- Dom 3/6/12, RGB ES ha scritto:
  ...
 
  Maybe add both, old and new logo side by side? But
 I think
  the post is
  just perfect as it is now: short and to the point.
 
 
  I would add one line to wrap things up:
 
  The .org is now in Apache.
 
 Pedro, Rob --
 
 I see that this comment got added but I can't really say I
 understand what it means. I wonder if others might have
 the same problem.
 
It is a reference that as an organization OpenOffice is
now part of Apache, which is also a .org .
I think it is misplaced: it could be either the title or
the last sentence which would make it stronger. But I
dont have strong feelings about it.

 No need to take it out if we feel strongly about it, but
 
 

FWIW, I think upon graduation we should also make emphasis
that being in Apache is a fulfillment of the original
promise from SUN to give the code to an independent
organization with a governance model based on the ASF.
Nowhere better to fulfill that promise than in the ASF !

Pedro.

 
 -- 
 
 MzK
 
 So let it rock, let it roll
 Let the bible belt come and save my soul
 Hold on to sixteen as long as you can
 Changes come around real soon make us woman and men.
            -- Jack and
 Diane, John Mellencamp

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org wrote:



 --- Dom 3/6/12, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com ha scritto:

  Da: Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com
  Oggetto: Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice
  A: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
  Data: Domenica 3 giugno 2012, 17:23
 
 
  On 06/03/2012 12:50 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
  
   --- Dom 3/6/12, RGB ES ha scritto:
   ...
  
   Maybe add both, old and new logo side by side? But
  I think
   the post is
   just perfect as it is now: short and to the point.
  
  
   I would add one line to wrap things up:
  
   The .org is now in Apache.
 
  Pedro, Rob --
 
  I see that this comment got added but I can't really say I
  understand what it means. I wonder if others might have
  the same problem.
 
 It is a reference that as an organization OpenOffice is
 now part of Apache, which is also a .org .


Well I realized that but I don't know how many others would.



 I think it is misplaced: it could be either the title or
 the last sentence which would make it stronger. But I
 dont have strong feelings about it.


Putting this in the title would probably take away from the nice opening
paragraph.

Maybe leave it where it is but show as --

The .org  is now in Apache.

Then I think people then might get a better idea about what this means.

But, I think the blog post is great! I think many folks out there are still
very confused about a lot of this.

So, let's do it!




  No need to take it out if we feel strongly about it, but
  
 

 FWIW, I think upon graduation we should also make emphasis
 that being in Apache is a fulfillment of the original
 promise from SUN to give the code to an independent
 organization with a governance model based on the ASF.
 Nowhere better to fulfill that promise than in the ASF !

 Pedro.

 
  --
  
  MzK
 
  So let it rock, let it roll
  Let the bible belt come and save my soul
  Hold on to sixteen as long as you can
  Changes come around real soon make us woman and men.
 -- Jack and
  Diane, John Mellencamp
 




-- 

MzK

So let it rock, let it roll
Let the bible belt come and save my soul
Hold on to sixteen as long as you can
Changes come around real soon make us woman and men.
   -- Jack and Diane, John Mellencamp

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice

2012-06-03 Thread Albino B Neto

Hi.

2012/6/3 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org:
 https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=openoffice_org_is_now_apache

Good text.

Albino

Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4

2012-06-03 Thread Fernando Cassia

On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
 Ideally we'd have a dialog the user could reach both in the install
 and in the product where they could see what app currently owns each
 file extension and then switch the owner.  So they could assign an
 extension to AOO, but also change their mind and set it back to MS
 Office if they wanted.

+1

That' s the approach I' d like to see.

FC

Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4

2012-06-03 Thread Paulo de Souza Lima

2012/6/3 Fernando Cassia fcas...@gmail.com

 On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
  Ideally we'd have a dialog the user could reach both in the install
  and in the product where they could see what app currently owns each
  file extension and then switch the owner.  So they could assign an
  extension to AOO, but also change their mind and set it back to MS
  Office if they wanted.

 +1


+1


 That' s the approach I' d like to see.

 FC




-- 
Paulo de Souza Lima
http://almalivre.wordpress.com
Curitiba - PR
Linux User #432358
Ubuntu User #28729

Re: Draft Blog post: OpenOffice.org is now Apache OpenOffice

2012-06-03 Thread Larry Gusaas


On 2012-06-03 5:35 PM  Albino B Neto wrote:

Hi.

2012/6/3 Rob Weirrobw...@apache.org:

https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=openoffice_org_is_now_apache

Good text.

Albino


The line The .org  is now in Apache makes no sense at all.

The only people who will understand the intended meaning are those who already know all about 
the migration to Apache and the renaming process. The line itself is rubbish and meaning less.



--
_

Larry I. Gusaas
Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs. - 
Edgard Varese

Re: Moving Category-B tarballs (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Starting the graduation process)



--- Sab 2/6/12, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com ha scritto:

 This situation doesn't seem to be
 diffusing itself,
 even tho I have tried to explain that the 3.4.0 release
 deps packaging does not comply with infra policy.
 
 Surely there is a middle ground here- that the missing
 release deps package simply be generated from those
 tarballs in svn.  So long as the source release uses
 
 deps from the (downloaded from mirrors) deps package
 
 instead of directly from svn, AFAICT this project will
 be in compliance with all legal and infra policies.



I certainly think this makes sense.

Discriminating the Category-B tarballs in the mirrors
is easier and does not give the impression that it is
ASF code or that we are maintaining it. Plus mirrors
are absolutely more adequate for distributing tarballs
than a SVN repository.

Pedro.

Incubator PMC/Board report for Jun 2012 ([ppmc])

2012-06-03 Thread Marvin



Dear podling,

This email was sent by an automated system on behalf of the Apache Incubator 
PMC.
It is an initial reminder to give you plenty of time to prepare your quarterly
board report.

The board meeting is scheduled for Wed, 20 June 2012, 10:00:00 PST. The report 
for your podling will form a part of the Incubator PMC report. The Incubator 
PMC 
requires your report to be submitted 2 weeks before the board meeting, to allow 
sufficient time for review and submission (Wed, Jun 6th).

Please submit your report with sufficient time to allow the incubator PMC, and 
subsequently board members to review and digest. Again, the very latest you 
should submit your report is 2 weeks prior to the board meeting.

Thanks,

The Apache Incubator PMC

Submitting your Report
--

Your report should contain the following:

 * Your project name
 * A brief description of your project, which assumes no knowledge of the 
project
   or necessarily of its field
 * A list of the three most important issues to address in the move towards 
   graduation.
 * Any issues that the Incubator PMC or ASF Board might wish/need to be aware of
 * How has the community developed since the last report
 * How has the project developed since the last report.
 
This should be appended to the Incubator Wiki page at:

  http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/June2012

Note: This manually populated. You may need to wait a little before this page is
  created from a template.

Mentors
---
Mentors should review reports for their project(s) and sign them off on the 
Incubator wiki page. Signing off reports shows that you are following the 
project - projects that are not signed may raise alarms for the Incubator PMC.

Incubator PMC

Re: OOo electronic distribution

2012-06-03 Thread Dave Fisher

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 3, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote:

old business...see Rob's responses below

Would it be OK to extract some of Rob's responses and add them (in a general
way) to the modified --

http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/

page?

Maybe as sort of a general FAQ on redistributing?

But with a caveat that ooo-dev should still be contacted.

At least this might forego addressing the same sorts of issues again and
again.

Regards,
Dave

On 04/03/2012 04:39 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Issac Goldstandis...@volo-net.com wrote:

Hi,

Hi Isaac,

Here are my personal thoughts. Don't take this as a final decision by the
project, but just me weighing in, and hoping that other project members do
as well.

First, thanks for asking. Not everyone does that, though they should.

Links to your mock-up would be great.

3.3 should be called OpenOffice.org, 3.4 should be called Apache
OpenOffice.

2) We'd like pointers on the right place (if any) to include (TM) or (R)
or anything else both on the landing page and on the installer.

OpenOffice.org would be (R). Apache OpenOffice would be (TM)

3) Other general pointers that you have.

Policy is here: http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/

My recommendation would be first to resolve the name question and how to
avoid users confusing the bundled software with an Apache source or
endorsement. That is the key question.

Regards,

-Rob

Thanks,
Issac

MzK

So let it rock, let it roll
Let the bible belt come and save my soul
Hold on to sixteen as long as you can
Changes come around real soon make us woman and men.

Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4

+1.
Even it's not available currently, we should make it happen in coming
future.

2012/6/4 Fernando Cassia fcas...@gmail.com

 On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
  Ideally we'd have a dialog the user could reach both in the install
  and in the product where they could see what app currently owns each
  file extension and then switch the owner.  So they could assign an
  extension to AOO, but also change their mind and set it back to MS
  Office if they wanted.

 +1

 That' s the approach I' d like to see.

 FC

Re: [BUILD] There is a build break on Mac OS X 10.5.8

2012-06-03 Thread Chao Huang

hi, Herbert

I tried to build module SAL with flag verbose=t. There is the same error
message
--
Entering
/Users/hchao/Apache/build/aoo.340.20120601/aoo.340.r1343441/main/sal/util

ERROR: error 10 occurred while making
/Users/hchao/Apache/build/aoo.340.20120601/aoo.340.r1343441/main/sal/util
--

I'm sure that the file main/sal/util/makefile.mk is broken in some
extent. I created a new file, copied the contents from main/sal/util/
makefile.mk to it, then replace main/sal/util/makefile.mk with it. It's
OK to build module SAL with the new file.


2012/6/1 Herbert Duerr h...@apache.org

 Hello Chao Huang,


  The build break was reported in module SAL. Here is the details
 --**--**
 --**--**--
 Entering /Users/hchao/Apache/build/aoo.**340.20120601/aoo.340.r1343441/**
 main/sal/util

 ERROR: error 10 occurred while making
 /Users/hchao/Apache/build/aoo.**340.20120601/aoo.340.r1343441/**
 main/sal/util


 I suggest to:

 cd /Users/hchao/Apache/build/aoo.**340.20120601/aoo.340.r1343441/**
 main/sal/
 build verbose=t

 and then report the errors here. Please note that attachments seem to get
 stripped on this mailing list.

 Herbert




-- 
Best regards,
Chao Huang

Re: AOO 3.4 FAQ's (was: Re: The reason I removed the program called Open Office 3.4)

My question fyi:
1) Any requirement for OS/software/hardware before installation of Aoo 3.4?
If java is necessary/unnecessary for Windows/Linux/Mac, then list it and
our recommendation.
If no 64 bit Aoo for windows, shall we list all platforms we support/don't
support?
2) I wonder if differences/new features between 3.4 and previous one should
be included?

Seems to be a long list from my view.
Or some may be put to release notes and we give a link inf FAQ? No idea.

Regards

2012/6/4 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org

 On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie wrote:
  On Sun, 3 Jun 2012 16:44:28 -0400
  Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
 
 snip

 Moving this to its own thread.

 
  Do we have any FAQ's for AOO 3.4?   Do we have a sense of what the
  common questions are at this point, based on the forums and ooo-users?
   Putting such FAQ's in a prominent place would help.
 
 
  Three immediate subjects for such an FAQ come to mind:
  1) The file associations just discussed
  2) When Java is needed for Windows it should be 32bit and version 1.6
  3) that there is currently no 64 bit AOO for Windows
 

 Maybe also:

 - What about language X, why is it not included?

 -Rob

Re: [UX] The Questions for users

Hi,
I hope you can have draft which reflects suggestions so far.
I am too lazy to go through all previous mails to figure out what it looks
like now..

Ps, I just go through previous mails.
Shall uses' expectation/suggestion be added to this list?
- Stability
- More functions
- Easy to use
- Better Development Guide/Experience through UNO API (so on)

Thanks a lot for your great work/effort for it!

Regards

2012/6/3 Albino B Neto bino...@gmail.com

 Hi.

 Thanks for suggestions, anyone else.

 Let's add them.

 Albino

Re: [DISCUSS] Rules of voting for new committers and PPMC members

...

--- Dom 3/6/12, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net ha scritto:
...

  
  On 06/03/2012 11:48 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
  FWIW,
  
  The Foundation Roles are explained here:
  
  http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles
  
  yes, this is standard ASF policy.
  
  My question/concern at this point would be --
  
  how well do we think this works for Apache OpenOffice?
 
 The PPMC has had the practice of making Committers into PPMC
 members on the same VOTE. This is the practice for some
 Apache projects, but not all. I think that from now on this
 project should always have separate votes as a matter of
 policy.

 What do others think?
 
I agree. But I see two level of problems:

1) Pootle. At this time it's not possible to identify
contributors and the PPMC is basically forced to
bring them in as committers. Here the committer+PPMC
vote is usually abused.

2) The PPMC has a tendency to bring in non-developers
that usually don't need to be committers at all. I am
not sure this fits strictly the Apache model but while
it is clear that not all contributions are in code
form, there is no other way of empowering them that
does not go through making them committers first.

If there were a way to make people members of the
(P)PMC without making them committers I am sure that
would be used a lot but it would seem meritocratically
incorrect to bring into the PPMC people that are not
committers but not offer the same opportunity to
committers by default.

Pedro.


 
 Regards,
 Dave
 
 
  
  
  Pretty much in line to what you are thinking.
  
  Pedro.
  
  --- Dom 3/6/12, Yong Lin Mamayo...@gmail.com 
 ha scritto:
  
  This was a discussion about rules of
  voting for new committer and PPMC
  member. We think it is more appropriate to let
 all
  contributors get
  involved in this. So I moved the discussion to
 ooo-dev.
  
  General process about voting in a new committer
 and PPMC
  member is here
  http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html
  
  By far the practice is most candidates were
 voted for
  committer and
  PPMC member at the same time.
  And no concreate critrial defined in public for
 AOO.
  
  Your comments are welcomed.
  
  
  A comment from Rob:
  
  If it were entirely up to me I'd have it be
 like:
  
  1) Contributor -- anyone who contributes to
 the project,
  mailing list
  discussions, patches, translations, bug
 reports, doc,
  support.� This
  comes in all flavors and sizes.� We need to
 do a better
  job giving
  them credit and acknowledging their
 contributions.� If
  the feeling is
  that someone is not valued unless they are
 voted in as a
  PPMC member,
  then we're doing something wrong.
  
  2) Committer -- The threshold question:�
 Do we
  trust their judgement
  with respect to the area of their
 contributions?� The
  move from
  contributor to committer is a move from RTC
 (patches must be
  reviewed)
  to CTR.� So we really need to have a sense
 that they
  are doing quality
  work.� Committers also have veto rights on
 all of our
  commits.� So we
  need to trust their judgement.
  
  3) PMC member -- The threshold question:�
 Do they
  understand The
  Apache Way and our community-based decision
 making? On
  average are
  they solving more community problems than they
 are
  causing?� Are they
  helping others in the community succeed?�
 When we
  graduate, and our
  Mentors move on to other podlings, the PMC
 collectively
  needs to
  mentor new members to the project.� So I
 think the PMC
  is more about
  trusting their community skills rather than
 their technical
  skills.
  
  It might be possible for someone to qualify
 for 2 and 3
  at the same
  time.� But probably not in every case.
  
  Note:� This is not how we have operated
  previously.� I think there was
  an bootstrapping issue where we needed to have
 a PPMC
  suitably large
  and diverse to provide balance.� We also
 obviously
  started with a PPMC
  consisting of people who did not fully
 understand
  Apache.� That is the
  nature of Incubation.� But I don't think this
 approach
  is necessarily
  something we should continue with a year later,
 as we
  approach
  graduation.
  
  
  -- 
 
 
  MzK
  
  So let it rock, let it roll
  Let the bible belt come and save my soul
  Hold on to sixteen as long as you can
  Changes come around real soon make us woman and men.
           -- Jack and Diane,
 John Mellencamp

Re: Turkish Translation

hi Fatih,
Many thanks for your joining mailing list and affording your help!
Please refer to Juergen's suggestions below.

hi Juergen
Sorry for stealing your mail here and deleting some info..
Let me know if I misunderstand anything.

btw, is there any special mailing list for translation since guys
interested in translation are so easily flushed by a lot of other mails..

Regards
-- Forwarded message --
From: Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com
Date: 2012/6/1
Subject: Re: [Request] Korean language pack and id for pootle server
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org

first of all thanks for joining the mailing list and offering your help.

If you are able to work offline directly on the po files, I can send you
the files via email. And when you have finished the work you can send
the files back to me.

Or you can make suggestion as unknown on pootle and inform me when you
have finished the work. A committer have to review your changes and can
accept them.

I know it is not very convenient but the only possibility we have right now.

But I am trying to work with volunteers to establish them as soon as
possible in the project.

When you are interested to get deeper involved in the project over time
you might think about sending the iCLA back to Apache. More information
about the iCLA and the reason why it is important for us here at Apache
can find here http://www.apache.org/licenses/#clas

iCLA can be found here http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt

Please let me know which way you prefer and I will send you the po files
asap.

I am working also on preparing some basic information how new
translators can start...

Thanks again

Juergen


2012/6/2 Fatih Can Akay fatihcan.a...@gmail.com

 Hello,My name is Fatih Can AKAY and I'm from Turkey.
 This is my first message.

 I want to contribute to your project about Turkish translation of version
 3.4.

 I have no knowledge of C++ or coding but i have experiences in
 English-Turkish translation (movie or TV-show subtitles,medical articles
 etc.)

 I heard that nobody is working on the Turkish Translation and there is no
 Turkish mailing list at the moment. People who wants to translate it to
 Turkish,we can create our mailing-list and make a start.

 Regards

Re: [DISCUSS] Rules of voting for new committers and PPMC members

2012-06-03 Thread Yong Lin Ma

PMC Member
A PMC member is a developer or a committer that was elected due to
merit for the evolution of the project and demonstration of
commitment. They have write access to the code repository, an
apache.org mail address, the right to vote for the community-related
decisions and the right to propose an active user for committership.
The PMC as a whole is the entity that controls the project, nobody
else.

According to this, a committer has every rights to become a PMC member
unless he or she not willing to get involve in it.

We may separate the votes but it will just prolong the process. Or
simple make PMC member a commiter+. Understanding how Apache works is
must. But that is not rocket science, and shouldn't be a hurdle.

We also can never know in advance who will cause more trouble than help.

We should also encourage people reasigning from PMC if he or she is
not interested in it anymore.


On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org wrote:
 FWIW,

 The Foundation Roles are explained here:

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

 Pretty much in line to what you are thinking.

 Pedro.

 --- Dom 3/6/12, Yong Lin Ma mayo...@gmail.com ha scritto:

 This was a discussion about rules of
 voting for new committer and PPMC
 member. We think it is more appropriate to let all
 contributors get
 involved in this. So I moved the discussion to ooo-dev.

 General process about voting in a new committer and PPMC
 member is here
 http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html

 By far the practice is most candidates were voted for
 committer and
 PPMC member at the same time.
 And no concreate critrial defined in public for AOO.

 Your comments are welcomed.


 A comment from Rob:

 If it were entirely up to me I'd have it be like:

 1) Contributor -- anyone who contributes to the project,
 mailing list
 discussions, patches, translations, bug reports, doc,
 support.  This
 comes in all flavors and sizes.  We need to do a better
 job giving
 them credit and acknowledging their contributions.  If
 the feeling is
 that someone is not valued unless they are voted in as a
 PPMC member,
 then we're doing something wrong.

 2) Committer -- The threshold question:  Do we
 trust their judgement
 with respect to the area of their contributions?  The
 move from
 contributor to committer is a move from RTC (patches must be
 reviewed)
 to CTR.  So we really need to have a sense that they
 are doing quality
 work.  Committers also have veto rights on all of our
 commits.  So we
 need to trust their judgement.

 3) PMC member -- The threshold question:  Do they
 understand The
 Apache Way and our community-based decision making? On
 average are
 they solving more community problems than they are
 causing?  Are they
 helping others in the community succeed?  When we
 graduate, and our
 Mentors move on to other podlings, the PMC collectively
 needs to
 mentor new members to the project.  So I think the PMC
 is more about
 trusting their community skills rather than their technical
 skills.

 It might be possible for someone to qualify for 2 and 3
 at the same
 time.  But probably not in every case.

 Note:  This is not how we have operated
 previously.  I think there was
 an bootstrapping issue where we needed to have a PPMC
 suitably large
 and diverse to provide balance.  We also obviously
 started with a PPMC
 consisting of people who did not fully understand
 Apache.  That is the
 nature of Incubation.  But I don't think this approach
 is necessarily
 something we should continue with a year later, as we
 approach
 graduation.

Re: Friendly Web www.OOoNinja.com