Re: [VOTE] Accept Sqoop for Incubation

+1 (non-binding) On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Tommaso Teofili wrote: > +1 (binding) > Tommaso > > 2011/6/8 arv...@cloudera.com > >> As there are no active discussions on the [PROPOSAL] thread for a few >> days now, I will like to initiate the vote to accept Sqoop as an >> Apache Incubator pro

Re: [VOTE] Accept Sqoop for Incubation

+1 (binding) Tommaso 2011/6/8 arv...@cloudera.com > As there are no active discussions on the [PROPOSAL] thread for a few > days now, I will like to initiate the vote to accept Sqoop as an > Apache Incubator project. The proposal discussion thread and full text > of the proposal can be found at

Re: [VOTE] Flume to join the Incubator.

+1 (binding) Tommaso 2011/6/8 Jonathan Hsieh > Hi all, > > Since there have been no new conversations on this Flume [PROPOSAL] thread, > I'd like to call a vote. > > At the end of this mail, I've put a copy of the current proposal. Here is > a > link to the document in the wiki: > http://wiki.a

Re: Fwd: Add incubator group to podling committers

>> Can the people below be added to the incubator group so they can >> update the ONGL website? I have hear our inc-chair is ooo (wow, that >> acronym got somehow hijiacked in this list) - do we have a deputy >> handling it? >> > > Thirty-six other people on the Incubator PMC have sufficient karma:

Re: [VOTE] Accept Sqoop for Incubation

+1 (binding) LieGrue, strub --- On Wed, 6/8/11, Julien Vermillard wrote: > From: Julien Vermillard > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Accept Sqoop for Incubation > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Date: Wednesday, June 8, 2011, 5:59 AM > +1 (binding), > Agreeing with Chris, looks awesome ! > > On Wed, J

Re: Fwd: Add incubator group to podling committers

Christian Grobmeier wrote on Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 09:24:45 +0200: > Hello, > > I sent this to infra, but I have been told the incubator chair should > handle this. > > Can the people below be added to the incubator group so they can > update the ONGL website? I have hear our inc-chair is ooo (wow

Re: [VOTE] Accept Sqoop for Incubation

+1 -Nigel On Jun 7, 2011, at 8:39 PM, arv...@cloudera.com wrote: > As there are no active discussions on the [PROPOSAL] thread for a few > days now, I will like to initiate the vote to accept Sqoop as an > Apache Incubator project. The proposal discussion thread and full text > of the proposal c

Re: [VOTE] Flume to join the Incubator.

+1 -Nigel On Jun 7, 2011, at 9:38 PM, Jonathan Hsieh wrote: > Hi all, > > Since there have been no new conversations on this Flume [PROPOSAL] thread, > I'd like to call a vote. > > At the end of this mail, I've put a copy of the current proposal. Here is a > link to the document in the wiki:

Re: [VOTE] Accept Sqoop for Incubation

+1 (non binding) -- *Ioannis Canellos* * http://iocanel.blogspot.com Apache Karaf Committer & PMC Apache ServiceMix Committer *

Re: [VOTE] Flume to join the Incubator.

Here is my +1 (non binding) -- *Ioannis Canellos* * http://iocanel.blogspot.com Apache Karaf Committer & PMC Apache ServiceMix Committer *

Re: [VOTE] Flume to join the Incubator.

+1 On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Jonathan Hsieh wrote: > Hi all, > > Since there have been no new conversations on this Flume [PROPOSAL] thread, > I'd like to call a vote. > > At the end of this mail, I've put a copy of the current proposal. Here is > a > link to the document in the wiki: >

Introducing orcmid

Hi, My name is Dennis Hamilton. I am a semi-retired software system architect living in Seattle, Washington. My profile of profiles is already up at . The "orcmid" handle goes back to DecWars on a PDP-10 and the early CompuServe CB chat rooms. My con

Re: [VOTE] Flume to join the Incubator.

+1 (binding) Ralph On Jun 7, 2011, at 9:38 PM, Jonathan Hsieh wrote: > Hi all, > > Since there have been no new conversations on this Flume [PROPOSAL] thread, > I'd like to call a vote. > > At the end of this mail, I've put a copy of the current proposal. Here is a > link to the document in t

Re: [VOTE] Accept Sqoop for Incubation

+1 (binding), Agreeing with Chris, looks awesome ! On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 5:39 AM, arv...@cloudera.com wrote: > As there are no active discussions on the [PROPOSAL] thread for a few > days now, I will like to initiate the vote to accept Sqoop as an > Apache Incubator project. The proposal discuss

Re: Request: Can "proposed committers" introduce themselves?

On Jun 7, 2011, at 6:54 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote: > Dave Fisher wrote on 06/07/2011 09:23:25 PM: > >> >> Sure. Hi everyone (maybe the people that Rob knows should introduce >> themselves as well - some of us are new to the community.) >> >> My name is David Fisher. I have been in the

Upstream/Downstream (was OpenOffice & LibreOffice)

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: [...] their downstream code cannot be used.  Hence, the best outcome under the current licensing regime is for all core development to be done here, and for TDF to be a downstream consumer. Just because you choose a particular license that d

[VOTE] Flume to join the Incubator.

Hi all, Since there have been no new conversations on this Flume [PROPOSAL] thread, I'd like to call a vote. At the end of this mail, I've put a copy of the current proposal. Here is a link to the document in the wiki: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/FlumeProposal And here is a link to the dis

Re: [VOTE] Accept Sqoop for Incubation

+1 (binding) Ralph On Jun 7, 2011, at 8:39 PM, arv...@cloudera.com wrote: > As there are no active discussions on the [PROPOSAL] thread for a few > days now, I will like to initiate the vote to accept Sqoop as an > Apache Incubator project. The proposal discussion thread and full text > of the p

Re: [VOTE] Accept Sqoop for Incubation

+1 (non-binding). On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 9:09 AM, arv...@cloudera.com wrote: > As there are no active discussions on the [PROPOSAL] thread for a few > days now, I will like to initiate the vote to accept Sqoop as an > Apache Incubator project. The proposal discussion thread and full text > of the

Re: [VOTE] Accept Sqoop for Incubation

+1 (binding). Good luck, awesome project! Cheers, Chris On Jun 7, 2011, at 8:39 PM, arv...@cloudera.com wrote: > As there are no active discussions on the [PROPOSAL] thread for a few > days now, I will like to initiate the vote to accept Sqoop as an > Apache Incubator project. The proposal disc

[VOTE] Accept Sqoop for Incubation

As there are no active discussions on the [PROPOSAL] thread for a few days now, I will like to initiate the vote to accept Sqoop as an Apache Incubator project. The proposal discussion thread and full text of the proposal can be found at the following locations: Discussion Thread: http://www.mail-

RE: OpenOffice & LibreOffice

Sam Ruby wrote: > Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > Core development would happen at the ASF. Everyone: IBMer, TDFer, and > > other alike would be welcomed to contribute to the core code, under > > our license, and to incorporate their own downstream changes under > > their own license. From that perspe

RE: OpenOffice & LibreOffice

Keith Curtis wrote: > This AL2 is not within the spirit of the tradition of this codebase > because it is invoking a proprietary clause. The Apache License is a fully permissive, inclusive, non-viral, Open Source license. You are entirely incorrect. > AL2 will make ongoing code sharing with LO

Re: OpenOffice & LibreOffice

I was against this experiment since my first mail but I've reading and learning a number of important facts since. So I thought I would summarize the "no" vote reasons so I can disconnect and return to my own big tasks ;-) If you've made up your mind, plz delete as I don't want to waste any more o

Re: Request: Can "proposed committers" introduce themselves?

Dave Fisher wrote on 06/07/2011 09:23:25 PM: > > Sure. Hi everyone (maybe the people that Rob knows should introduce > themselves as well - some of us are new to the community.) > > My name is David Fisher. I have been in the software industry for > over 30 years. I've worked in many computer

RE: OpenOffice & LibreOffice

"Noel J. Bergman" wrote on 06/07/2011 03:49:12 PM: > From: "Noel J. Bergman" > To: > Date: 06/07/2011 03:49 PM > Subject: RE: OpenOffice & LibreOffice > > Simon Phipps wrote: > > > I agree on both counts. My sense continues to be that the best outcome > would > > be close to my original propo

Re: Request: Can "proposed committers" introduce themselves?

Sure. Hi everyone (maybe the people that Rob knows should introduce themselves as well - some of us are new to the community.) My name is David Fisher. I have been in the software industry for over 30 years. I've worked in many computer languages - FORTRAN, PL/1, C, C++, Postscript, Java, Bas

Re: OpenOffice.org Summit Proposal

What time on Monday? I'm not available between 1PM and 6PM. (Actually evening would be better as some people might be in tutorials all day). Dona Hertel On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 14:51 -0700, Danese Cooper wrote: > And I just heard back from OSCON. We have a room available all day

Re: OpenOffice.org Summit Proposal

Jomar, I had to verify my email address, then log back in to activate the edit token. Gotta love them wikis ;-p. D On Jun 7, 2011, at 4:01 PM, "Jomar Silva (Cuca)" wrote: > Yep... but even logged in I couldn't edit it... I'm from the third > world, you know :) > > Jomar > >

Re: OpenOffice.org Summit Proposal

On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 12:01 AM, Jomar Silva (Cuca) wrote: > Yep... but even logged in I couldn't edit it... I'm from the third > world, you know :) > > Fascinating. Can you send me your login details privately and I'll see if any of the folk I have on IM can help :-) S.

Re: A little OOo history

On Jun 7, 2011 3:01 PM, "Simon Brouwer" wrote: > > Op 7-6-2011 22:37, William A. Rowe Jr. schreef: > >> On 6/7/2011 3:17 PM, Simon Brouwer wrote: >>> >>> The OpenOffice.org installation packages contain code from a considerable number of >>> "external" libraries (i.e. third party ones that are dev

Re: OpenOffice.org Summit Proposal

Yep... but even logged in I couldn't edit it... I'm from the third world, you know :) Jomar - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Code covered by the Oracle grant

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:37 PM, wrote: > Greg Stein wrote on 06/07/2011 05:50:49 PM: > > > > > Besides the content Oracle owns, it seems we could just ask the other > owners > > to give the CWS's to the ASF. I mean, really... *somebody* out there > holds > > the copyright. We just have to deter

Re: Code covered by the Oracle grant

Greg Stein wrote on 06/07/2011 05:50:49 PM: > > Besides the content Oracle owns, it seems we could just ask the other owners > to give the CWS's to the ASF. I mean, really... *somebody* out there holds > the copyright. We just have to determine who, and then ask. Some definite > legwork, but

Re: Request: Can "proposed committers" introduce themselves?

Hi, I'm Jomar Silva, member of the OASIS ODF TC since 2008 and I've been ahead of the ODF Alliance Latin America since 2007. I use OpenOffice since it was StarOffice, and I'm very active on the FLOSS and Open Standards evangelization in South America. I've being working closelly with the BrOffice

Re: OpenOffice.org Summit Proposal

Are you logged in? Accounts are free (hey, they even let me have one)! {Terse? Mobile!} On Jun 7, 2011 10:09 PM, "Jomar Silva (Cuca)" wrote: > Simon, > > I've tried to edit the wiki but I don't have permisson... shame on me :) > > Best, > > Jomar > > --

Re: A little OOo history

Op 7-6-2011 22:37, William A. Rowe Jr. schreef: On 6/7/2011 3:17 PM, Simon Brouwer wrote: The OpenOffice.org installation packages contain code from a considerable number of "external" libraries (i.e. third party ones that are developed in their own projects, not copyright Oracle and have most

Re: A little OOo history

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:37 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 6/7/2011 3:17 PM, Simon Brouwer wrote: >> The OpenOffice.org installation packages contain code from a considerable >> number of >> "external" libraries (i.e. third party ones that are developed in their own >> projects, not >> copy

Re: OpenOffice.org Summit Proposal

And I just heard back from OSCON. We have a room available all day Monday (the first tutorial day). As mentioned before, access to this meeting would be gratis. D On Jun 7, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Simon Phipps wrote: > I just heard back from the Open World Forum Programme Committee (Paris, > Octobe

Re: Code covered by the Oracle grant

Besides the content Oracle owns, it seems we could just ask the other owners to give the CWS's to the ASF. I mean, really... *somebody* out there holds the copyright. We just have to determine who, and then ask. Some definite legwork, but it seems doable. On Jun 7, 2011 10:15 AM, "Simon Phipps" wr

Re: A little OOo history

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:25 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: > The words "not surprisingly" were not necessary.  Labeling these words > as an "insult", while arguably technically accurate, increased rather > than reduced tension. Guys, aren't you married? This "not surprisingly" simply indicates you're male

Re: [OO.o] updated mailing lists in proposal

2011/6/7 André Schnabel It is only that you have at a rather low-traffic apache list guests who are > used to discuss on high-traffic lists. And discussion is often with lots of > emotion (but seems to clam down). > Ah, nostalgia, it's just like the good old days on the OOo marketing list :-) “

Re: A little OOo history

Am 07.06.2011 19:58, schrieb robert_w...@us.ibm.com: > and charge $0.99 for the download, the cost of an iPhone app. That is > over $30 million/year. Heck, I might just do that myself and retire! No, you can not retire: I will only charge $0.49 or a part of a bitcoin ;-) Cheers, Andreas

RE: A little OOo history - and lining up our arrows

I am personally quite fond of this kernel.org-style idea. It is consistent with focused attention on ensuring a rock-solid reference implementation for ODF-native office-productivity software (and reusable components) while allowing its confident use in building user-facing distributions to a

Re: OpenOffice.org Summit Proposal

Simon, I've tried to edit the wiki but I don't have permisson... shame on me :) Best, Jomar - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: OpenOffice & LibreOffice

On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 04:26:15PM -0400, Sam Ruby wrote: > That indeed would be a wonderful place to end up. > > At the present time, there are people who would rather not participate > in such an arrangement. They have something that works just fine for > them. Many are skeptical that we can d

Re: A little OOo history

On 6/7/2011 3:17 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote: > Danese Cooper wrote on 06/07/2011 03:43:56 PM: > >> Apache don't think that money is evil, but we also believe that >> seeing our code in wide use is more important than money. >> OpenOffice.org is important to the Developing World, some of w

Re: A little OOo history

On 6/7/2011 3:17 PM, Simon Brouwer wrote: > The OpenOffice.org installation packages contain code from a considerable > number of > "external" libraries (i.e. third party ones that are developed in their own > projects, not > copyright Oracle and have mostly LGPL license). So this would not be al

Re: OpenOffice & LibreOffice

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > Sam Ruby wrote: > >> my suggestion is that we not focus on the differences we have. >> Let's instead focus on how we can maximize the areas we have >> in common. > > Isn't that what: > >> > Core development would happen at the ASF.  Everyone

RE: OpenOffice & LibreOffice

Sam Ruby wrote: > my suggestion is that we not focus on the differences we have. > Let's instead focus on how we can maximize the areas we have > in common. Isn't that what: > > Core development would happen at the ASF. Everyone: IBMer, TDFer, and > > other alike would be welcomed to contribute

Re: A little OOo history

Danese Cooper wrote on 06/07/2011 03:43:56 PM: > > robert_w...@us.ibm.com: > > Not surprisingly, you missed my point (or chose to ignore it). We at Honestly, your insult does surprise me. > Apache don't think that money is evil, but we also believe that > seeing our code in wide use is more

Re: A little OOo history

Op 7-6-2011 18:31, William A. Rowe Jr. schreef: On 6/7/2011 11:11 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote: On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 4:52 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: Just to clarify, only source code is "released" by the ASF. Yes, there may I don't believe this is true - we have to release the source, but

Re: OpenOffice & LibreOffice

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > Simon Phipps wrote: > >> I agree on both counts. My sense continues to be that the best outcome > would >> be close to my original proposal[1], although that got substantial > push-back >> from some quarters. > > So let's address the push-ba

RE: OpenOffice & LibreOffice

Simon Phipps wrote: > I agree on both counts. My sense continues to be that the best outcome would > be close to my original proposal[1], although that got substantial push-back > from some quarters. So let's address the push-back. The proposal, as I understand it, is for OpenOffice to exist at

Re: A little OOo history

robert_w...@us.ibm.com: Not surprisingly, you missed my point (or chose to ignore it). We at Apache don't think that money is evil, but we also believe that seeing our code in wide use is more important than money. OpenOffice.org is important to the Developing World, some of whom will pay for c

Re: Happy happy joy joy

On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 6:17 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > Guys, if we are going to argue over the mistakes of the pasts > and the slights of the past, quite frankly, we aren't going to > get very far. > > This is supposed to be a happy occasion; let's not bicker > and argue about who-killed-who... :)

Re: OpenOffice & LibreOffice

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 8:34 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Simon Phipps wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 7:57 PM, Noel J. Bergman > wrote: > > > >> Simon Phipps wrote: > >> > >> > unless either the Apache project or the LibreOffice project do > extremely > >> > substanti

Re: OpenOffice & LibreOffice

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Simon Phipps wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 7:57 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > >> Simon Phipps wrote: >> >> > unless either the Apache project or the LibreOffice project do extremely >> > substantial refactoring very fast, both projects will be using the same >> >

Re: Request: Can "proposed committers" introduce themselves?

Hi all, I'm Carl Marcum. Independent Java developer. Lately I have been doing custom OOo installations and extensions for a client. I look forward to helping out with the project where ever I can. Best regards, Carl Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone

Re: OpenOffice & LibreOffice

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 7:57 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > Simon Phipps wrote: > > > unless either the Apache project or the LibreOffice project do extremely > > substantial refactoring very fast, both projects will be using the same > > code for a long time. If we all do things right, this will be

RE: A little OOo history

> It seems Apache will have a destination of value in OpenOffice.org. There > should be a way to monetize this, similar to how Mozilla monetized their > default search engine choice with Google. That'll spawn a whole other set of debates. > For example, ASF could take bids and award a contracts

Re: A little OOo history

Leo Simons wrote: You know, there is this large and interesting community of maintainers of mirrors of open source software. A fair share of them are your typical beard stroking [1] uber experienced unix [2] system administrators who maintain a local mirror for their company / campus / ISP mos

RE: OpenOffice & LibreOffice

Simon Phipps wrote: > unless either the Apache project or the LibreOffice project do extremely > substantial refactoring very fast, both projects will be using the same > code for a long time. If we all do things right, this will be in the > context of actual shared repositories. That sounds like

Re: A little OOo history

Leo Simons wrote on 06/07/2011 02:40:01 PM: > > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 6:58 PM, wrote: > > Since this is a large download, I wonder whether the quoted numbers are > > impacted at all by timeouts, abandoned downloads attempts, etc. In other > > words, is it counting the HTTP GET's? Or the s

Re: A little OOo history

Danese Cooper wrote on 06/07/2011 02:19:38 PM: > > Just have to say...I have often been quoted saying the advent of > OpenOffice.org was a rare case of "corporate greed aligning with > human need". Safe to assume a high percentage of downloaders don't > have $.99. I know we're all excited by

Re: [OO.o] updated mailing lists in proposal

Hi, Am 07.06.2011 20:30, schrieb Donald Whytock: On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote: According to Markmail (http://openoffice.markmail.org/) the following 37 openoffice.org mailing lists received more than 365 messages in 2010: Based on the volume here over the last week, ho

Re: A little OOo history

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 6:58 PM, wrote: > Since this is a large download, I wonder whether the quoted numbers are > impacted at all by timeouts, abandoned downloads attempts, etc.  In other > words, is it counting the HTTP GET's?  Or the successful downloads?  That > may influence the load by quit

Re: [OO.o] updated mailing lists in proposal

On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote: > According to Markmail (http://openoffice.markmail.org/) the following > 37 openoffice.org mailing lists received more than 365 messages in > 2010: Based on the volume here over the last week, how many of those lists got all 365 messages in on

Re: Code covered by the Oracle grant

Good to know, many thanks. S. On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Andrew Rist wrote: > We are trying to provide all of the Oracle owned content in the OOo > repositories. > > A. > > > > On 6/7/2011 10:14 AM, Simon Phipps wrote: > >> That's very helpful, thanks Andrew. Will Oracle also be providin

Re: Code covered by the Oracle grant

We are trying to provide all of the Oracle owned content in the OOo repositories. A. On 6/7/2011 10:14 AM, Simon Phipps wrote: That's very helpful, thanks Andrew. Will Oracle also be providing the work-in-progress CWS[1] please? Thanks S. [1] http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1792694/cws.ods On T

OOo mirroring (was: Re: A little OOo history)

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: >> 30 downloads per day or per month? >> >> 52TB per month is still a lot... > > per day. > Look at this chart: > http://marketing.openoffice.org/marketing_bouncer.html TL;DR: these bandwidth numbers are not actually that scary or imp

Re: A little OOo history

Just have to say...I have often been quoted saying the advent of OpenOffice.org was a rare case of "corporate greed aligning with human need". Safe to assume a high percentage of downloaders don't have $.99. I know we're all excited by the commercial potential of an unencumbered codebase, but le

Re: A little OOo history

Hmmm. I'd have thought it a bit difficult to build a developer community for an end user product if theres effectively no way for an end user to get it from that community (or to get direct feedback from users)... while you want downstream distributors as well, I'd expect the podling to want to

Re: A little OOo history

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 6:58 PM, wrote: > > Of course, this is not necessarily a problem for Apache. Think of it this > way. It would be perfectly possible, and actually quite easy for someone > to host the files with a scalable cloud storage provider, e.g., Amazon, > and charge $0.99 for the do

Re: A little OOo history

Hi André, *, Am 7. Juni 2011 19:32 schrieb André Schnabel : > Hi, > > Am 07.06.2011 17:51, schrieb Manfred A. Reiter: >> >> In Switzerland, there is the brand name "Open Office" as well. - So be >> careful. ;-) > > Last time I checked (~2 years ago) it was not registered anymore. > > The name itse

Re: A little OOo history

Hi Phil, IMHO we would have to roll vanilla builds just to make sure it still builds when we declare a version. It used to take some iterations and tweaks per version to get a valid build (imagine that's still true). ASF should at least validate "buildability" as part of servicing the codebase,

Re: A little OOo history

Christian Grobmeier wrote on 06/07/2011 01:35:17 PM: > > > 30 downloads per day or per month? > > > > 52TB per month is still a lot... > > per day. > Look at this chart: > http://marketing.openoffice.org/marketing_bouncer.html > > And please correct me if i am wrong. :-) > Cheers > We sh

Re: A little OOo history

> 30 downloads per day or per month? > > 52TB per month is still a lot... per day. Look at this chart: http://marketing.openoffice.org/marketing_bouncer.html And please correct me if i am wrong. :-) Cheers > > LieGrue, > strub > > --- On Tue, 6/7/11, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > >> From: C

Re: A little OOo history

Hi, Am 07.06.2011 17:51, schrieb Manfred A. Reiter: In Switzerland, there is the brand name "Open Office" as well. - So be careful. ;-) Last time I checked (~2 years ago) it was not registered anymore. The name itself is still in use. The current "BACHER EDV Beratung" (in Liechtenstein) too

Re: Request: Can "proposed committers" introduce themselves?

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:12 PM, wrote: > > I think it would be good if the proposed committers who have not yet done > so, could post a quick note to the list, to introduce yourself and your > interest in this project. Think of this as an opportunity to introduce > yourself to your future colla

Re: Re-Introduction

On 7 June 2011 18:05, Manfred A. Reiter wrote: > Hi Ian, * > > 2011/6/7 Ian Lynch : > >> > >> and another one: > >> Der Klügere gibt nach. > >> > >> > But, please, > >> > everyone, let's not focus on the past, and let's not get personal or > >> > insulting. It simply doesn't help anyone. > >> > >

Re: Code covered by the Oracle grant

That's very helpful, thanks Andrew. Will Oracle also be providing the work-in-progress CWS[1] please? Thanks S. [1] http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1792694/cws.ods On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 6:08 PM, Andrew Rist wrote: > It is Oracle's intent to provide to ASF the files needed to build OOo, > taking in

Re: OpenOffice.org Summit Proposal

Le Tue, 7 Jun 2011 17:59:21 +0100, Simon Phipps a écrit : > I just heard back from the Open World Forum Programme Committee > (Paris, October) and they would be pleased to provide us with space > for a meeting. > > S. Kiss the cook! (/points at himself)... -- Charles-H. Schulz Membre du Comit

Request: Can "proposed committers" introduce themselves?

By my count we have now have over 60 individuals listed on as proposed committers for the Apache OpenOffice project. I think this is a respectable start, though obviously the project will need to have a strong commitment to recruiting additional developers and growing the project further, On

Re: Code covered by the Oracle grant

It is Oracle's intent to provide to ASF the files needed to build OOo, taking into account licensing and ownership issues. This includes binary artifacts such as the OOo artwork and translation databases. I am following the discussions here closely, and I am collected all of the lists that are

Re: A little OOo history

30 downloads per day or per month? 52TB per month is still a lot... LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 6/7/11, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > From: Christian Grobmeier > Subject: Re: A little OOo history > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Date: Tuesday, June 7, 2011, 5:03 PM > > just to check the

Re: Re-Introduction

Hi Ian, * 2011/6/7 Ian Lynch : >> >> and another one: >> Der Klügere gibt nach. >> >> > But, please, >> > everyone, let's not focus on the past, and let's not get personal or >> > insulting. It simply doesn't help anyone. >> > >> > Peace, >> >> Gut gemacht. ;-) >> > > Vorwärts und aufwärts > > (Ho

Re: A little OOo history

> just to check the . there for i18n issues, you mean about 52TB? That > translates to about 1.5PB/month, which is equivalent to the CERN LHC data > rate once it's ramped up to full luminosity and event rate. > > Yes, I can imagine people's concerns. Its 30 downloads with 180 MB each (rounded)

Re: OpenOffice.org Summit Proposal

I just heard back from the Open World Forum Programme Committee (Paris, October) and they would be pleased to provide us with space for a meeting. S.

Re: A little OOo history

On 06/07/2011 05:00 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: Have a look at http://marketing.openoffice.org/marketing_bouncer.html Maybe a bit outdated and actually there is no release date in the displayed time. The old load balancer (bouncer) usually failed totally when a new version was announced, there

Re: A little OOo history

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 5:31 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 6/7/2011 11:11 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 4:52 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. >> wrote: >>> >>> Just to clarify, only source code is "released" by the ASF.  Yes, there may >> >> I don't believe this is true - we h

Re: Re-Introduction

> > and another one: > > Der Klügere gibt nach. > > > But, please, > > everyone, let's not focus on the past, and let's not get personal or > > insulting. It simply doesn't help anyone. > > > > Peace, > > Gut gemacht. ;-) > Vorwärts und aufwärts (Hope that translated ok, if not I'll stick to gute

Re: A little OOo history

On 6/7/11 12:31, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: On 6/7/2011 11:11 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote: On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 4:52 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: Just to clarify, only source code is "released" by the ASF. Yes, there may I don't believe this is true - we have to release the source, but any

Re: Re-Introduction

Hi Flo, 2011/6/7 Florian Effenberger : > Hi Rob, > > robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote on 2011-06-07 18.17: >> [...] > > let's forget about it. > > I'm not made out of sugar, as we have a saying in Germany. an another one: Der Klügere gibt nach. > But, please, > everyone, let's not focus on the past

Re: A little OOo history

On 6/7/2011 11:11 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 4:52 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. > wrote: >> >> Just to clarify, only source code is "released" by the ASF. Yes, there may > > I don't believe this is true - we have to release the source, but > anything we distribute is consider

Re: Re-Introduction

Hi Rob, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote on 2011-06-07 18.17: Florian, I stated a relevant fact to rebut an attempt to dismiss the input from the OOo Community Council. You do not dispute the facts. I apologize if you find this offensive. That was far from my intent. I think our collaboration wi

RE: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...

Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > To put an end to speculation on the "TDF is a bunch of extremists > therefore Oracle did not choose them", here's TDF's official statement: > http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/06/06/publishing-our-recommendation- to-oracle/ I already pulled from that site, and quo

Re: Re-Introduction

Florian Effenberger wrote on 06/07/2011 12:01:55 PM: > > Rob, > > robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote on 2011-06-07 17.56: > > Oh, let's not go down that path again, or else someone could equally point > > out that the TDF Steering Committee has not been elected yet either. I > > see no value from d

Re: Re-Introduction

On 7 June 2011 16:49, Volker Merschmann wrote: > 2011/6/7 Ian Lynch : > > On 7 June 2011 16:27, Volker Merschmann wrote: > > > >> Hi Ian, > >> > >> 2011/6/7 Ian Lynch : > >> > On 7 June 2011 16:08, Volker Merschmann wrote: > >> > > >> >> Hi Robert, > >> >> > >> >> 2011/6/7 Robert Burrell Donkin

Re: OpenOffice: Arguments and facts. Going ahead

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: The only thing I really don't have read anything about is, if we can handle this project from infra-resourcing. >>> >>> Joe Schaefer added himself as a mentor, so we can consider that covered. > > I just have learned OOo delivers

  1   2   >