oh sorry I just realized this discussion was from 4 years ago! it seemed
more recent at first. I see there is a wiki page for Groovy
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Groovy_UNO_Extension , and I saw now a
reference to Carl's github repo https://github.com/cbmarcum/guno-extension .
-- John
On Fri,
I've touched up the wiki page in the past week or so, as I've been using
the Netbeans plugin on more recent versions of Netbeans.
I believe Patricia was asking about the wiki for the Groovy / Gradle tests?
Is there any information on how to proceed in testing the Groovy / Gradle
implementation?
O
On 03/27/2016 10:59 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
On 3/27/2016 3:53 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
On 03/27/2016 05:01 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
On 3/27/2016 12:26 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
...
When we have three PMC members willing to commit to voting (at due
time)
on the NetBeans plugin, this di
On 3/27/2016 3:53 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
On 03/27/2016 05:01 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
On 3/27/2016 12:26 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
...
When we have three PMC members willing to commit to voting (at due time)
on the NetBeans plugin, this discussion will make sense. Otherwise we
are wasting
On 03/27/2016 05:01 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
On 3/27/2016 12:26 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
...
When we have three PMC members willing to commit to voting (at due time)
on the NetBeans plugin, this discussion will make sense. Otherwise we
are wasting our time.
I generally have at least one
On 3/27/2016 12:26 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
...
When we have three PMC members willing to commit to voting (at due time)
on the NetBeans plugin, this discussion will make sense. Otherwise we
are wasting our time.
I generally have at least one Windows box with Netbeans installed, so I
should
+1 on the three PMC members
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2016 12:26
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache OpenOffice API plugin for NetBeans
>
> Dennis E. Hami
Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
From: Andrea Pescetti
On 27/03/2016 Patricia Shanahan wrote:
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html.
Then all of us are violating the policy every time we update the
website.
[orcmid]
That is not the case for *any* Apache Project web site or the web site for
Apache i
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2016 09:46
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache OpenOffice API plugin for NetBeans
>
> On 27/03/2016 Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>
On 27/03/2016 Patricia Shanahan wrote:
On 3/26/2016 10:37 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
3) We recognize that http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ has
different areas, and that not all of them should be subject to the same
policy. Just like I don't call a release vote when I change a web page
(t
On 03/26/2016 05:58 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2016 10:38
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache OpenOffice API plugin for NetBeans
On 20/03/2016 Patricia
On 3/26/2016 2:58 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
-Original Message- From: Andrea Pescetti
[mailto:pesce...@apache.org] Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2016 10:38
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache
OpenOffice API plugin for NetBeans
On 20/03/2016 Patricia
On 3/26/2016 10:37 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
On 20/03/2016 Patricia Shanahan wrote:
The issue is whether it is ASF distributed software, for which ASF
trademarks can appropriately be used. I think it is and should continue
to be ASF distributed software.
...
3) We recognize that http://svn.ap
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
> Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2016 10:38
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache OpenOffice API plugin for NetBeans
>
> On 20/03/2016 Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> &
On 20/03/2016 Patricia Shanahan wrote:
The issue is whether it is ASF distributed software, for which ASF
trademarks can appropriately be used. I think it is and should continue
to be ASF distributed software.
So far we've adopted another approach: it is a development tool meant to
ease OpenOf
elsewhere is a
good idea.
-Original Message-
From: Carl Marcum [mailto:cmar...@apache.org]
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 09:49
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache OpenOffice API plugin for NetBeans
[ ... ]
I do prefer this is from the project and if it needs
s of Apache
OpenOffice, it can be taken to Apache legal and elsewhere
where review and approval at the Foundation level is
required.
- Dennis
-Original Message-
From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 04:31
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Relea
+1
I think exploring that source being at ASF and the artifact be elsewhere is a
good idea.
> -Original Message-
> From: Carl Marcum [mailto:cmar...@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 09:49
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache OpenOf
s of Apache
OpenOffice, it can be taken to Apache legal and elsewhere
where review and approval at the Foundation level is
required.
- Dennis
-Original Message-
From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 04:31
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Relea
ndicator of the
>> project's viability.
>>
>> If the Apache OpenOffice Project Management Committee
>> words and procedurally-approves a narrow, specific request
>> for an exception with regard to the UNO Tools of Apache
>> OpenOffice, it can be take
ere review and approval at the Foundation level is required.
- Dennis
-Original Message-
From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 04:31
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache OpenOffice API plugin for NetBeans
Am 03/20/2016 11:29 A
l is required.
- Dennis
> -Original Message-
> From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
> Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 04:31
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache OpenOffice API plugin for NetBeans
>
> Am 03/20/2016 11:29 AM, schrieb
Am 03/20/2016 11:29 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
On 20/03/2016 Marcus wrote:
Am 03/18/2016 12:19 AM, schrieb Carl Marcum:
Do we need to treat the submission of plugin artifacts for availability
at NetBeans.org and through their update mechanism as official project
releases requiring a vote? ...
On 20/03/2016 Marcus wrote:
Am 03/18/2016 12:19 AM, schrieb Carl Marcum:
Do we need to treat the submission of plugin artifacts for availability
at NetBeans.org and through their update mechanism as official project
releases requiring a vote? ...
@all:
Is there anything that would speak against
On Sun, 20 Mar 2016 10:04:43 +0100
Marcus wrote:
> Am 03/18/2016 12:19 AM, schrieb Carl Marcum:
> > Do we need to treat the submission of plugin artifacts for availability
> > at NetBeans.org and through their update mechanism as official project
> > releases requiring a vote?
> >
> > If so, what
Am 03/18/2016 12:19 AM, schrieb Carl Marcum:
Do we need to treat the submission of plugin artifacts for availability
at NetBeans.org and through their update mechanism as official project
releases requiring a vote?
If so, what would the verification procedure look like?
We had the first Japanes
Hi All,
Do we need to treat the submission of plugin artifacts for availability
at NetBeans.org and through their update mechanism as official project
releases requiring a vote?
If so, what would the verification procedure look like?
We had the first Japanese language update for our Apache b
27 matches
Mail list logo