Am 27.01.2017 um 21:18 schrieb toki:
> On 01/27/2017 05:58 PM, Marcus wrote:
>
>> For the source code Readme it's for sure enough. However, I don't know if it
>> should be just for the this Readme.
> Maybe the main help page (http://www.openoffice.org/support/index.html)
> can have a link saying "
Am 27.01.2017 um 23:57 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
Am 27.01.2017 um 23:54 schrieb Marcus:
Am 27.01.2017 um 23:20 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
We did not have our own favicon.ico for openoffice.apache.org. So the
site took the one from apache.org.
But that one was faulty. ;-)
https://issues.apache.org
Am 27.01.2017 um 23:54 schrieb Marcus:
> Am 27.01.2017 um 23:20 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> We did not have our own favicon.ico for openoffice.apache.org. So the
>> site took the one from apache.org.
>> But that one was faulty. ;-)
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13370
>>
>> So I
Am 27.01.2017 um 23:20 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
We did not have our own favicon.ico for openoffice.apache.org. So the
site took the one from apache.org.
But that one was faulty. ;-)
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13370
So I created our own feather icon.
My question is: Should we s
Hello all,
We did not have our own favicon.ico for openoffice.apache.org. So the
site took the one from apache.org.
But that one was faulty. ;-)
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13370
So I created our own feather icon.
My question is: Should we stay with the Apache feather or can we
This post with patches doesn't got a reply until now. So, please can a
developer have a look?
Thanks a lot
Marcus
Am 28.12.2016 um 05:33 schrieb Páder Rezső:
Hi all,
I now compiled the rev 1776040 from svn export, and I found some build
issues.
I not a developer or c/c++ programmer, so my
Some misc. comments:
In reply to Peter Kovacs;
Would it be more wise to go for BSD as OS instead of one distribution
FreeBSD? Or are BSD variants incompatible to each other?
BSD variants are certainly incompatible with each other as the result
of about 25 years of divergence.
AFAICT, the onl
Am 27.01.2017 um 21:22 schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton:
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Matthias Seidel [mailto:matthias.sei...@hamburg.de]
>> Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 11:46
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [lazy consensus] FreeBSD as a new supported platform?
>>
>> Am 27.
Am 27.01.2017 um 20:46 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
Am 27.01.2017 um 20:39 schrieb Marcus:
Am 27.01.2017 um 20:23 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
On 27.01.2017 20:17, Marcus wrote:
And it is crucial that the hashes and signature files *not* be
mirrored. Having them only available at dist.apache.org is the
> On 2017-01-27, at 14:04, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>
> While there was much heat, I don't think Sun was pure in this matter. Not by
> any means. Whatever the case, when Apache OpenOffice was founded, it was as
> an Apache Project, not any other kind. The "original" that you speak of
> ex
> -Original Message-
> From: Matthias Seidel [mailto:matthias.sei...@hamburg.de]
> Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 11:46
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [lazy consensus] FreeBSD as a new supported platform?
>
> Am 27.01.2017 um 20:39 schrieb Marcus:
> > Am 27.01.2017 um 20:2
On 27.01.2017 20:39, Marcus wrote:
Am 27.01.2017 um 20:23 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
On 27.01.2017 20:17, Marcus wrote:
And it is crucial that the hashes and signature files *not* be
mirrored. Having them only available at dist.apache.org is the secure
way to detect that the mirror-downloaded bin
On 27.01.2017 20:39, Marcus wrote:
Am 27.01.2017 um 20:23 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
On 27.01.2017 20:17, Marcus wrote:
And it is crucial that the hashes and signature files *not* be
mirrored. Having them only available at dist.apache.org is the secure
way to detect that the mirror-downloaded bin
Am 27.01.2017 um 20:39 schrieb Marcus:
> Am 27.01.2017 um 20:23 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> On 27.01.2017 20:17, Marcus wrote:
>>> And it is crucial that the hashes and signature files *not* be
>>> mirrored. Having them only available at dist.apache.org is the secure
>>> way to detect that the mirror
Am 27.01.2017 um 20:23 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
On 27.01.2017 20:17, Marcus wrote:
And it is crucial that the hashes and signature files *not* be
mirrored. Having them only available at dist.apache.org is the secure
way to detect that the mirror-downloaded binary is authentic and
unaltered.
right
Has this been taken care of?
We have a growing number of volunteers on l10n@ waiting for a Pootle
account or even an answer...
I remember, some time ago when I wanted to contribute as a user I had to
write 3 (!) mails to the list to get an account.
This must be improved, because we do not only l
On 27.01.2017 20:17, Marcus wrote:
And it is crucial that the hashes and signature files *not* be
mirrored. Having them only available at dist.apache.org is the secure
way to detect that the mirror-downloaded binary is authentic and
unaltered.
right, we as OpenOffice project we should make s
Am 27.01.2017 um 20:04 schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton:
-Original Message-
From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 09:55
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: [lazy consensus] FreeBSD as a new supported platform?
Am 27.01.2017 um 18:50 schrieb Dennis E
> -Original Message-
> From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
> Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 09:55
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [lazy consensus] FreeBSD as a new supported platform?
>
> Am 27.01.2017 um 18:50 schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton:
> >
> >
> >> -Original
> -Original Message-
> From: Jörg Schmidt [mailto:joe...@j-m-schmidt.de]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 00:08
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Community building: give our User a chance to contribute!
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Simon Phipps [mailt
Am 27.01.2017 um 12:45 schrieb toki:
On 01/27/2017 07:41 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
I don't think we need complex categories here (especially because with
them a maintenance burden would come). In that source code README,
"supported" probably means "a platform for which we strive at producing
b
Am 27.01.2017 um 18:50 schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton:
-Original Message-
From: Rory O'Farrell [mailto:ofarr...@iol.ie]
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 07:59
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: [lazy consensus] FreeBSD as a new supported platform?
On Fri, 27 Jan 2017 07:49:51 -0800
> -Original Message-
> From: Rory O'Farrell [mailto:ofarr...@iol.ie]
> Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 07:59
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [lazy consensus] FreeBSD as a new supported platform?
>
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2017 07:49:51 -0800
> "Dennis E. Hamilton" wrote:
>
> > In
On Fri, 27 Jan 2017 07:49:51 -0800
"Dennis E. Hamilton" wrote:
> In thinking about this, I suggest that supported means (1) dist.apache.org
> authenticated binary distributions (as mirrored) are provided from source
> releases and (2) bugzilla provides for the platform as a named OS [type].
>
In thinking about this, I suggest that supported means (1) dist.apache.org
authenticated binary distributions (as mirrored) are provided from source
releases and (2) bugzilla provides for the platform as a named OS [type].
I note that OS/2 and FreeBSD (and Solaris) qualify under (2) but not unde
I think in future independent download source can become less accepted.
We should think of officially accept certain distribution routes.
For the definition of support I would go for what the community provides.
If we have people interested in FreeBSD then it's fine for me to call it
supported. If
26 matches
Mail list logo
