date:20130415

On 15 April 2013 00:23, Carl Marcum  wrote:

> Hi Jan,
>
>
> On 04/14/2013 02:58 PM, janI wrote:
>
>> On 14 April 2013 20:25, Carl Marcum  wrote:
>>
>>  Hi Juergen,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 04/14/2013 01:32 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
>>>
>>>  Hi Carl,

 Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013 um 19:23 schrieb Carl Marcum:

   On 02/10/2013 04:11 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:

>
>  On 02/10/2013 02:50 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>  Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013 um 19:04 schrieb Carl Marcum:
>>>
>>>  Hi all,

 I would like to branch NB integration plugin for 3.0 and start
 modifying
 trunk for AOO 4.0 compatibility.

 I would like to also tag current version as 3.0.1 at the same time.

 Trunk would become version 4.0 to maintain major version number the
 same
 as AOO.

 If there are no objections to the above proposal within 72-hours
 then
 I
 will invoke Lazy Consensus and proceed to implement the above
 proposal.

  You can if course create a branch but I don't see the demand for
>>> it.
>>> You can continue the development towards 4.0 on trunk. I don't see
>>> many activity here and a branch is not really necessary from my pov.
>>>
>>> Juergen
>>>
>>>
 Best regards,
 Carl

>>>
>>>  I agree. we can always create a branch based on a revision number
>> later if needed.
>>
>>
>>
> I thought about it more and since the next changes will be incompatible
> with AOO 3.4 I tagged a 3.0.2 version and created a 3.0 branch to make
> it easier if someone needs to make changes for 3.4 compatible plugins.
>
>
>
>  I agree now and with my upcoming 3layer removal there will be some
 work
 to do in the plugin. It mainly that places of jars, tools, libs have
 changed.

 Juergen

>
>  Is this something that will be implemented in AOO 4 release?
>>>
>>>
>> How come it is a 3.0 branch ?? that sounds old to me, shouldnt it be
>> 3.4.1x branch ?
>>
>>
> The Netbeans plugin versions didn't historically coincide with the OOo
> version numbers (that I know of).
>
> When the code came to Apache it was version 2.0.7 and I tagged that
> version and started work to make it run on Netbeans 6.9 which was Netbeans
> 7.0 api changes. That's when I changed it to 3.0. Some additional
> localization work took it to 3.0.2.
>
> I'm not sure what the best solution to version numbering other than to do
> a major number change when it's not compatible with AOO or NB and keep a
> compatibility table somewhere.
>

Thanks for clarifying it for me, I am still learning a lot, however I do
have some opinion on the version numbering.

Netbeans is part of main, and released as an integrated part of AOO. As far
as I can see it is not available (for download) independent of AOO. If I
install AOO 4.0, have a problem and see netbeans is 3.0 I would assume that
I missed an upgrade. Therefore I will strongly suggest that all modules in
main get version 4.0.

If I am wrong and netbeans are available independent, it should not be in
main. Because we will (as we did with 3.4.1) vote about releasing 4.0, and
then it would not be correct to silently release a new version of netbeans,
just because it is included.

Please do not read my comments as I am against the work. I solely think
about the version number logistic, which I want to make as simple as
possible.

>
>  I do agree with the principle in having a branch. We have however to make
>> it clear to developers, that when using that branch their code will not
>> avalible with 4.0.
>>
>
> I agree, that's why I hope everyone continues to do work on trunk and we
> only merge changes if needed for some reason. But we have a well
> established break point.
>

To me, branches should be used for work that goes across many modules (like
gbuild and l10n), or work that takes a long time (months) to complete. But
I have no strong opinion if somebody wants to use a branch, and have the
pain of merging it later.

rgds
Jan I.

>
>
>
>> rgds
>> jan I.
>>
>>
> Best regards,
> Carl
>
>
> --**--**-
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

Please remove us from the professional services listing

2013-04-15 Thread Johan Vromans

Hi,

Squirel Consultancy (NL) is mentioned on the list
http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html. We would like to be
removed.

Thanks,


Johan Vromans   jvrom...@squirrel.nl
Squirrel Consultancy  Exloo, the Netherlands
http://www.squirrel.nl  http://johan.vromans.org
PGP Key 1024D/1298C2B4  http://johan.vromans.org/pgpkey.html
--- "Arms are made for hugging" 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: GSOC Idea

2013-04-15 Thread Rajath Shashidhara

Hello,

I searched through the code and found some files which could correspond to
insertion of the image into the textDocument.

 WriterTools(xref/Current (trunk)/qadevOOo/runner/util/WriterTools.java)
Class has a static method called insertTextGraphic() which I think is the
one used to add an image to the text document. So I tried to search files
in which this method is called - Most of the function calls found from
opengrek is in the test folder. I believe that these are components for
testing the code and not the actual program which runs when an image is
inserted.

insertTextGraphic() has a call to a method called insertTextContent() which
is a part of XTextContent(interface in com.sun.star.text) which is in
com.sun.star.text package . Search on XTextContent on opengrek yields
nothing as search result! it has results to xTextDocument which is the
object of XTextContnet class but I haven't been able to find the code of
XTextDocument class. Which class implements the interface XTextContent?

http://www.openoffice.org/api/docs/common/ref/com/sun/star/text/module-ix.html


Also please help me find the methods which do the actual text wrap. Please
help!!!


On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 1:18 AM, Rajath Shashidhara <
rajaths.raja...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello ,
> I'm new to open-source development. I would like to find out in which part
> of the source code text wrapping around the image happens when a new image
> is inserted. This would greatly help me resolve this bug(121546) and
> personally It would help me in learning how to find the right part of the
> source code corresponding to functionalities. I'm sorry for repeatedly
> asking for your help. I want to definitely fix this bug. Please help me
> with this. Also is there an approach that I need to follow generally to
> find out which part of code could correspond to a functionality that I'm
> searching? I searched for insert graphic/text wrap and followed a chain of
> hyperlinks and was not able to exactly figure out where this whole part of
> text wrapping happens. Please help me!!!
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 11:18 PM, Rajath Shashidhara <
> rajaths.raja...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi juergen, thanks. I'm sure I'll be able to understand it when I see the
>> code. I understand that my patch is going to affect the whole software.
>> I'll definitely take care that it will solve the problem of the existing
>> code rather than writing lines of code to delete the extra pages.
>>
>> Rajath S
>> I year
>> M.Sc(Hons.) Physics
>> BITS pilani
>> On Apr 14, 2013 10:56 PM, "Juergen Schmidt" 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Rajath,
>>>
>>>
>>> Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013 um 16:29 schrieb Rajath Shashidhara:
>>>
>>> > Hello,
>>> >
>>> > In continuation to my previous mails:
>>> >
>>> > I found that OpenOffice already has support for csv, xls, xlsx and
>>> other
>>> > formats of tables. So use of other external python modules wouldn't be
>>> > necessary(I suggested the use of python-excel and csv python modules
>>> in my
>>> > previous mails).Now I realize that this import wizard is to convert it
>>> to
>>> > native OpenOffice database format(OpenOffice Base format).
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Also about the bug fixing:
>>> > I found this bug on bugzilla:
>>> > Page count increases if a graphic file is inserted.(Bug 121546)
>>> >
>>> > I tested the problem on OpenOffice and found that there is a problem
>>> with
>>> > positioning of the objects in the writer component. Once an image is
>>> > inserted it adds 4 blank pages in the document. So to solve the
>>> problem we
>>> > should make a patch which checks the number of blank pages added after
>>> > insertion of object/image and re-positioning of other objects in the
>>> > document and remove them from the document. Please help in finding the
>>> > right source files in which object positioning happens. I will be able
>>> to
>>> > fix this bug by controlling the number of white spaces added to fit the
>>> > object into the document. Please help!!!
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> the bug is that too many blank pages are inserted in this case. The fix
>>> is to analyze why this happened and prevent it. It is better to find and
>>> fix the root cause instead of fixing the result of obvious broken code.
>>>
>>> This means try to find the related code, build the code with debug info
>>> and step through the code  to see what's going wrong. I know this is not
>>> easy because the code base is huge and complex. But keep in mind that you
>>> play with code of an enterprise ready office suite. Grown and developed
>>> over years and often code areas are developed by different people with
>>> different knowledge. Code get old and you find bad code and good code.
>>> Often you will find out that it can be improved and can be made better.
>>> Feel free to submit patches to improve code and that fix problems.
>>>
>>> Opengrok helps a lot to search and find specific function in the big
>>> code base. And the good thing is you will become more and more familiar
>>> wit

Re: [DEVTOOLS] [PROPOSAL] branch Netbeans plugin for 3.0 and begin 4.0 trunk

On 4/15/13 9:42 AM, janI wrote:
> On 15 April 2013 00:23, Carl Marcum  wrote:
> 
>> Hi Jan,
>>
>>
>> On 04/14/2013 02:58 PM, janI wrote:
>>
>>> On 14 April 2013 20:25, Carl Marcum  wrote:
>>>
>>>  Hi Juergen,


 On 04/14/2013 01:32 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:

  Hi Carl,
>
>
> Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013 um 19:23 schrieb Carl Marcum:
>
>   On 02/10/2013 04:11 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
>
>>
>>  On 02/10/2013 02:50 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
>>>
>>>  Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013 um 19:04 schrieb Carl Marcum:

  Hi all,
>
> I would like to branch NB integration plugin for 3.0 and start
> modifying
> trunk for AOO 4.0 compatibility.
>
> I would like to also tag current version as 3.0.1 at the same time.
>
> Trunk would become version 4.0 to maintain major version number the
> same
> as AOO.
>
> If there are no objections to the above proposal within 72-hours
> then
> I
> will invoke Lazy Consensus and proceed to implement the above
> proposal.
>
>
>  You can if course create a branch but I don't see the demand for
 it.
 You can continue the development towards 4.0 on trunk. I don't see
 many activity here and a branch is not really necessary from my pov.

 Juergen


> Best regards,
> Carl
>
>
>

  I agree. we can always create a branch based on a revision number
>>> later if needed.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I thought about it more and since the next changes will be incompatible
>> with AOO 3.4 I tagged a 3.0.2 version and created a 3.0 branch to make
>> it easier if someone needs to make changes for 3.4 compatible plugins.
>>
>>
>>
>>  I agree now and with my upcoming 3layer removal there will be some
> work
> to do in the plugin. It mainly that places of jars, tools, libs have
> changed.
>
> Juergen
>
>
>>
>>  Is this something that will be implemented in AOO 4 release?


>>> How come it is a 3.0 branch ?? that sounds old to me, shouldnt it be
>>> 3.4.1x branch ?
>>>
>>>
>> The Netbeans plugin versions didn't historically coincide with the OOo
>> version numbers (that I know of).
>>
>> When the code came to Apache it was version 2.0.7 and I tagged that
>> version and started work to make it run on Netbeans 6.9 which was Netbeans
>> 7.0 api changes. That's when I changed it to 3.0. Some additional
>> localization work took it to 3.0.2.
>>
>> I'm not sure what the best solution to version numbering other than to do
>> a major number change when it's not compatible with AOO or NB and keep a
>> compatibility table somewhere.
>>
> 
> Thanks for clarifying it for me, I am still learning a lot, however I do
> have some opinion on the version numbering.
> 
> Netbeans is part of main, and released as an integrated part of AOO. As far
> as I can see it is not available (for download) independent of AOO. If I
> install AOO 4.0, have a problem and see netbeans is 3.0 I would assume that
> I missed an upgrade. Therefore I will strongly suggest that all modules in
> main get version 4.0.
> 
> If I am wrong and netbeans are available independent, it should not be in
> main. Because we will (as we did with 3.4.1) vote about releasing 4.0, and
> then it would not be correct to silently release a new version of netbeans,
> just because it is included.
> 
> Please do not read my comments as I am against the work. I solely think
> about the version number logistic, which I want to make as simple as
> possible.

The NetBeans plugin is a developer tool that uses OpenOffice and SDK and
depends on a specific version in the future but it can be seen as
independent and ideally we would bring it back in the plugin center of
Netbeans directly.

The plugin don't comes with the office and is not part of the source
release.

Juergen

> 
> 
>>
>>  I do agree with the principle in having a branch. We have however to make
>>> it clear to developers, that when using that branch their code will not
>>> avalible with 4.0.
>>>
>>
>> I agree, that's why I hope everyone continues to do work on trunk and we
>> only merge changes if needed for some reason. But we have a well
>> established break point.
>>
> 
> To me, branches should be used for work that goes across many modules (like
> gbuild and l10n), or work that takes a long time (months) to complete. But
> I have no strong opinion if somebody wants to use a branch, and have the
> pain of merging it later.
> 
> rgds
> Jan I.
> 
>>
>>
>>
>>> rgds
>>> jan I.
>>>
>>>
>> Best regards,
>> Carl
>>
>>
>> --**--**-
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openof

%PRODUCTNAME


Hi at all

I'm a bit comfused. What I get for %PRODUCTNAME? It is "OpenOffice" or 
"Apache OpenOffice"? Thanks for your Feedback.


Greetings Raphael

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: %PRODUCTNAME

On 15 April 2013 11:53, Raphael Bircher  wrote:

> Hi at all
>
> I'm a bit comfused. What I get for %PRODUCTNAME? It is "OpenOffice" or
> "Apache OpenOffice"? Thanks for your Feedback.
>
> On my system I get "Apache OpenOffice", but I am not sure that it is like
in every part of the system (but it should be)

rgds
Jan I.


> Greetings Raphael
>
> --**--**-
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

Re: %PRODUCTNAME


Hi Jan

Am 15.04.13 12:22, schrieb janI:

On 15 April 2013 11:53, Raphael Bircher  wrote:


Hi at all

I'm a bit comfused. What I get for %PRODUCTNAME? It is "OpenOffice" or
"Apache OpenOffice"? Thanks for your Feedback.

On my system I get "Apache OpenOffice", but I am not sure that it is like

in every part of the system (but it should be)
Yes, it sould be... The reason why I ask: In Help is still the emtry 
"About OpenOffice.org" instead of "About Apache OpenOffice" Whoever, i 
found the points in the code (or better, I beleve I found it) and 
changed it.


http://opengrok.adfinis-sygroup.org/source/xref/aoo-trunk/main/scripting/workben/bindings/writermenubar.xml#297

I replaced the "OpenOffice.org" with "%PRODUCTNAME", but my local build 
shows now "About OpenOffice". But the About Dialog is now called "About 
Apache OpenOffice".


How ever, I'm lucky if sameone can explain me this behavior. Thanks!

Greetings Raphael


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: %PRODUCTNAME

On 4/15/13 12:22 PM, janI wrote:
> On 15 April 2013 11:53, Raphael Bircher  wrote:
> 
>> Hi at all
>>
>> I'm a bit comfused. What I get for %PRODUCTNAME? It is "OpenOffice" or
>> "Apache OpenOffice"? Thanks for your Feedback.
>>
>> On my system I get "Apache OpenOffice", but I am not sure that it is like
> in every part of the system (but it should be)

no, it is not so easy and I am sure Oliver can provide more details. We
decided to use OpenOffice in most of the places in the installed product
and use Apache OpenOfifce only in the intro screen or the about dialog.

When we talk about the project and product on public we can of course
use Apache OpenOffice  or the well known short form OpenOffice as many
did in the past.

Juergen

> 
> rgds
> Jan I.
> 
> 
>> Greetings Raphael
>>
>> --**--**-
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: %PRODUCTNAME

On 4/15/13 1:09 PM, Raphael Bircher wrote:
> Hi Jan
> 
> Am 15.04.13 12:22, schrieb janI:
>> On 15 April 2013 11:53, Raphael Bircher  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi at all
>>>
>>> I'm a bit comfused. What I get for %PRODUCTNAME? It is "OpenOffice" or
>>> "Apache OpenOffice"? Thanks for your Feedback.
>>>
>>> On my system I get "Apache OpenOffice", but I am not sure that it is
>>> like
>> in every part of the system (but it should be)
> Yes, it sould be... The reason why I ask: In Help is still the emtry
> "About OpenOffice.org" instead of "About Apache OpenOffice" Whoever, i
> found the points in the code (or better, I beleve I found it) and
> changed it.

no, see my previous mail and answer to Jan

> 
> http://opengrok.adfinis-sygroup.org/source/xref/aoo-trunk/main/scripting/workben/bindings/writermenubar.xml#297
> 
> 
> I replaced the "OpenOffice.org" with "%PRODUCTNAME", but my local build
> shows now "About OpenOffice". But the About Dialog is now called "About
> Apache OpenOffice".

yes this is correct at the moment

> 
> How ever, I'm lucky if sameone can explain me this behavior. Thanks!

because it is "OpneOffice" but %PRODUCTNAME is not only defined in one
place and is used differently. Please be careful and don't change things
where you don't know for what they are good for. Or better don't check
such changes in without discussing it in advance.

You can break things quite easy here.

Juergen

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: %PRODUCTNAME

Am 15.04.13 13:15, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:

On 4/15/13 1:09 PM, Raphael Bircher wrote:

Hi Jan

Am 15.04.13 12:22, schrieb janI:

On 15 April 2013 11:53, Raphael Bircher wrote:

Hi at all

I'm a bit comfused. What I get for %PRODUCTNAME? It is "OpenOffice" or
"Apache OpenOffice"? Thanks for your Feedback.

On my system I get "Apache OpenOffice", but I am not sure that it is
like

in every part of the system (but it should be)

Yes, it sould be... The reason why I ask: In Help is still the emtry
"About OpenOffice.org" instead of "About Apache OpenOffice" Whoever, i
found the points in the code (or better, I beleve I found it) and
changed it.

no, see my previous mail and answer to Jan

http://opengrok.adfinis-sygroup.org/source/xref/aoo-trunk/main/scripting/workben/bindings/writermenubar.xml#297

I replaced the "OpenOffice.org" with "%PRODUCTNAME", but my local build
shows now "About OpenOffice". But the About Dialog is now called "About
Apache OpenOffice".

yes this is correct at the moment

Now I understand why, so we redefine %PRODUCTNAME during the build process?

How ever, I'm lucky if sameone can explain me this behavior. Thanks!

because it is "OpneOffice" but %PRODUCTNAME is not only defined in one
place and is used differently. Please be careful and don't change things
where you don't know for what they are good for. Or better don't check
such changes in without discussing it in advance.

You can break things quite easy here.
No panic, I would not check in the code without discousing here. For
this I have too less experiance util now. But It looks that the source
works. The Question is if I should use %PRODUCTNAME or not.

Greetings Raphael

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: %PRODUCTNAME

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

> On 4/15/13 12:22 PM, janI wrote:
> > On 15 April 2013 11:53, Raphael Bircher  wrote:
> >
> >> Hi at all
> >>
> >> I'm a bit comfused. What I get for %PRODUCTNAME? It is "OpenOffice" or
> >> "Apache OpenOffice"? Thanks for your Feedback.
> >>
> >> On my system I get "Apache OpenOffice", but I am not sure that it is
> like
> > in every part of the system (but it should be)
>
> no, it is not so easy and I am sure Oliver can provide more details. We
> decided to use OpenOffice in most of the places in the installed product
> and use Apache OpenOfifce only in the intro screen or the about dialog.
>
>
The About Box is where we claim the copyright and give the license, so that
is one place where it will be important to use the full formal name of the
product.

Maybe we should have %PRODUCTNAMESHORT and %PRODUCTNAMEFULL

-Rob



> When we talk about the project and product on public we can of course
> use Apache OpenOffice  or the well known short form OpenOffice as many
> did in the past.
>
> Juergen
>
>
> >
> > rgds
> > Jan I.
> >
> >
> >> Greetings Raphael
> >>
> >>
> --**--**-
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
> dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

Re: %PRODUCTNAME

On 4/15/13 1:34 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> 
>> On 4/15/13 12:22 PM, janI wrote:
>>> On 15 April 2013 11:53, Raphael Bircher  wrote:
>>>
 Hi at all

 I'm a bit comfused. What I get for %PRODUCTNAME? It is "OpenOffice" or
 "Apache OpenOffice"? Thanks for your Feedback.

 On my system I get "Apache OpenOffice", but I am not sure that it is
>> like
>>> in every part of the system (but it should be)
>>
>> no, it is not so easy and I am sure Oliver can provide more details. We
>> decided to use OpenOffice in most of the places in the installed product
>> and use Apache OpenOfifce only in the intro screen or the about dialog.
>>
>>
> The About Box is where we claim the copyright and give the license, so that
> is one place where it will be important to use the full formal name of the
> product.
> 
> Maybe we should have %PRODUCTNAMESHORT and %PRODUCTNAMEFULL

or we simply drop the variables completely ;-)

Juergen


> 
> -Rob
> 
> 
> 
>> When we talk about the project and product on public we can of course
>> use Apache OpenOffice  or the well known short form OpenOffice as many
>> did in the past.
>>
>> Juergen
>>
>>
>>>
>>> rgds
>>> Jan I.
>>>
>>>
 Greetings Raphael


>> --**--**-
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
>> dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org


>>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: %PRODUCTNAME


Am 15.04.13 13:34, schrieb Rob Weir:

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:


On 4/15/13 12:22 PM, janI wrote:

On 15 April 2013 11:53, Raphael Bircher  wrote:


Hi at all

I'm a bit comfused. What I get for %PRODUCTNAME? It is "OpenOffice" or
"Apache OpenOffice"? Thanks for your Feedback.

On my system I get "Apache OpenOffice", but I am not sure that it is

like

in every part of the system (but it should be)

no, it is not so easy and I am sure Oliver can provide more details. We
decided to use OpenOffice in most of the places in the installed product
and use Apache OpenOfifce only in the intro screen or the about dialog.



The About Box is where we claim the copyright and give the license, so that
is one place where it will be important to use the full formal name of the
product.

Maybe we should have %PRODUCTNAMESHORT and %PRODUCTNAMEFULL
The question is, if this makes sense for downstream products. Well, it's 
anyway better then hard coded productnames.


Greetings Raphael


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: %PRODUCTNAME

On 4/15/13 1:42 PM, Raphael Bircher wrote:
> Am 15.04.13 13:34, schrieb Rob Weir:
>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Jürgen Schmidt
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/15/13 12:22 PM, janI wrote:
 On 15 April 2013 11:53, Raphael Bircher  wrote:

> Hi at all
>
> I'm a bit comfused. What I get for %PRODUCTNAME? It is "OpenOffice" or
> "Apache OpenOffice"? Thanks for your Feedback.
>
> On my system I get "Apache OpenOffice", but I am not sure that it is
>>> like
 in every part of the system (but it should be)
>>> no, it is not so easy and I am sure Oliver can provide more details. We
>>> decided to use OpenOffice in most of the places in the installed product
>>> and use Apache OpenOfifce only in the intro screen or the about dialog.
>>>
>>>
>> The About Box is where we claim the copyright and give the license, so
>> that
>> is one place where it will be important to use the full formal name of
>> the
>> product.
>>
>> Maybe we should have %PRODUCTNAMESHORT and %PRODUCTNAMEFULL
> The question is, if this makes sense for downstream products. Well, it's
> anyway better then hard coded productnames.

I see no problem here because both can be defined on the same or
whatever you want.

But to be serious I am tending to drop the flexibility here, as long as
I don't see that downstream products contribute back.

Juergen

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Build breaker and clean build

I have updated the buildbot wiki page [1] to reflect all I know about 
it.  Maybe those of you, who know more, can add your knowledge.


One of the more important missing parts is how to trigger a clean build 
on Windows.


-Andre

[1] http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Buildbot



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Build breaker and clean build

On 15 April 2013 14:00, Andre Fischer  wrote:

> I have updated the buildbot wiki page [1] to reflect all I know about it.
>  Maybe those of you, who know more, can add your knowledge.
>
> One of the more important missing parts is how to trigger a clean build on
> Windows.
>
> -Andre
>
> [1] 
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Buildbot
>

very informative, thanks. I think this is something we should reference in
the notes for newcomers.

rgds
jan I

>
>
>
> --**--**-
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

Re: %PRODUCTNAME

On 15 April 2013 13:50, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:

> On 4/15/13 1:42 PM, Raphael Bircher wrote:
> > Am 15.04.13 13:34, schrieb Rob Weir:
> >> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Jürgen Schmidt
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 4/15/13 12:22 PM, janI wrote:
>  On 15 April 2013 11:53, Raphael Bircher  wrote:
> 
> > Hi at all
> >
> > I'm a bit comfused. What I get for %PRODUCTNAME? It is "OpenOffice"
> or
> > "Apache OpenOffice"? Thanks for your Feedback.
> >
> > On my system I get "Apache OpenOffice", but I am not sure that it is
> >>> like
>  in every part of the system (but it should be)
> >>> no, it is not so easy and I am sure Oliver can provide more details. We
> >>> decided to use OpenOffice in most of the places in the installed
> product
> >>> and use Apache OpenOfifce only in the intro screen or the about dialog.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> The About Box is where we claim the copyright and give the license, so
> >> that
> >> is one place where it will be important to use the full formal name of
> >> the
> >> product.
> >>
> >> Maybe we should have %PRODUCTNAMESHORT and %PRODUCTNAMEFULL
> > The question is, if this makes sense for downstream products. Well, it's
> > anyway better then hard coded productnames.
>
> I see no problem here because both can be defined on the same or
> whatever you want.
>
I find the idea good (to have %PRODUCTNAMESHORT and %PRODUCTNAMEFULL)

>
> But to be serious I am tending to drop the flexibility here, as long as
> I don't see that downstream products contribute back.
>
I dont agree with this, even if downstream products dont contribute back
directly, they broaden the use of openoffice.

I would really think twice before dropping this flexibility, since we can
have at without extra resource usage.

rgds
Jan I

>
> Juergen
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

Re: [DEVTOOLS] [PROPOSAL] branch Netbeans plugin for 3.0 and begin 4.0 trunk

On 15 April 2013 11:22, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:

> On 4/15/13 9:42 AM, janI wrote:
> > On 15 April 2013 00:23, Carl Marcum  wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Jan,
> >>
> >>
> >> On 04/14/2013 02:58 PM, janI wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 14 April 2013 20:25, Carl Marcum  wrote:
> >>>
> >>>  Hi Juergen,
> 
> 
>  On 04/14/2013 01:32 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
> 
>   Hi Carl,
> >
> >
> > Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013 um 19:23 schrieb Carl Marcum:
> >
> >   On 02/10/2013 04:11 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>  On 02/10/2013 02:50 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
> >>>
> >>>  Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013 um 19:04 schrieb Carl Marcum:
> 
>   Hi all,
> >
> > I would like to branch NB integration plugin for 3.0 and start
> > modifying
> > trunk for AOO 4.0 compatibility.
> >
> > I would like to also tag current version as 3.0.1 at the same
> time.
> >
> > Trunk would become version 4.0 to maintain major version number
> the
> > same
> > as AOO.
> >
> > If there are no objections to the above proposal within 72-hours
> > then
> > I
> > will invoke Lazy Consensus and proceed to implement the above
> > proposal.
> >
> >
> >  You can if course create a branch but I don't see the demand for
>  it.
>  You can continue the development towards 4.0 on trunk. I don't see
>  many activity here and a branch is not really necessary from my
> pov.
> 
>  Juergen
> 
> 
> > Best regards,
> > Carl
> >
> >
> >
> 
>   I agree. we can always create a branch based on a revision number
> >>> later if needed.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> I thought about it more and since the next changes will be
> incompatible
> >> with AOO 3.4 I tagged a 3.0.2 version and created a 3.0 branch to
> make
> >> it easier if someone needs to make changes for 3.4 compatible
> plugins.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  I agree now and with my upcoming 3layer removal there will be some
> > work
> > to do in the plugin. It mainly that places of jars, tools, libs have
> > changed.
> >
> > Juergen
> >
> >
> >>
> >>  Is this something that will be implemented in AOO 4 release?
> 
> 
> >>> How come it is a 3.0 branch ?? that sounds old to me, shouldnt it be
> >>> 3.4.1x branch ?
> >>>
> >>>
> >> The Netbeans plugin versions didn't historically coincide with the OOo
> >> version numbers (that I know of).
> >>
> >> When the code came to Apache it was version 2.0.7 and I tagged that
> >> version and started work to make it run on Netbeans 6.9 which was
> Netbeans
> >> 7.0 api changes. That's when I changed it to 3.0. Some additional
> >> localization work took it to 3.0.2.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure what the best solution to version numbering other than to
> do
> >> a major number change when it's not compatible with AOO or NB and keep a
> >> compatibility table somewhere.
> >>
> >
> > Thanks for clarifying it for me, I am still learning a lot, however I do
> > have some opinion on the version numbering.
> >
> > Netbeans is part of main, and released as an integrated part of AOO. As
> far
> > as I can see it is not available (for download) independent of AOO. If I
> > install AOO 4.0, have a problem and see netbeans is 3.0 I would assume
> that
> > I missed an upgrade. Therefore I will strongly suggest that all modules
> in
> > main get version 4.0.
> >
> > If I am wrong and netbeans are available independent, it should not be in
> > main. Because we will (as we did with 3.4.1) vote about releasing 4.0,
> and
> > then it would not be correct to silently release a new version of
> netbeans,
> > just because it is included.
> >
> > Please do not read my comments as I am against the work. I solely think
> > about the version number logistic, which I want to make as simple as
> > possible.
>
> The NetBeans plugin is a developer tool that uses OpenOffice and SDK and
> depends on a specific version in the future but it can be seen as
> independent and ideally we would bring it back in the plugin center of
> Netbeans directly.
>
> The plugin don't comes with the office and is not part of the source
> release.
>

I thought the source release was the full main ??

Where can I find the script that  generates the source release ?

rgds
jan i.


>
> Juergen
>
> >
> >
> >>
> >>  I do agree with the principle in having a branch. We have however to
> make
> >>> it clear to developers, that when using that branch their code will not
> >>> avalible with 4.0.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I agree, that's why I hope everyone continues to do work on trunk and we
> >> only merge changes if needed for some reason. But we have a well
> >> established break point.
> >>
> >
> > To me, branches should be used for work that goes across many m

Re: %PRODUCTNAME


Hi,

On 15.04.2013 11:53, Raphael Bircher wrote:

Hi at all

I'm a bit comfused. What I get for %PRODUCTNAME? It is "OpenOffice" or
"Apache OpenOffice"? Thanks for your Feedback.



As Jürgen already pointed out it is not that easy. There exist certain 
source code snippets defining the one or the other 'product name' variable.


Due to the discussion regarding the 'renaming' issue 121388 [1] - see 
mail thread 'Adapt the naming of our project deliverables - 
"OpenOffice.org" --> "Apache OpenOffice"' - we decided to have mainly 
'OpenOffice' as our product name inside the application. But 'Apache 
OpenOffice' is also available.


Have a look at main/instsetoo_native/util/openoffice.lst - you will find 
%PRODUCTNAME and %FULLPRODUCTNAME


[1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121388


Best regards, Oliver.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Blog account


On 10.04.2013 14:17, Rob Weir wrote:

On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Andre Fischer  wrote:


Hi,

I would like to blog about the sidebar but do not yet have an account.
  What should be my next steps?  Is there any documentation?



First need to get an account through Infra, and then have an AOO blog admin
add you as an editor:


I got the account, now I would need an invitation from one of the local 
blog admins.

Please?

-Andre



http://openoffice.apache.org/pmc-faqs.html#blog

Regards,

-Rob



Regards,
Andre

--**--**-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org





-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: %PRODUCTNAME


Hi,

On 15.04.2013 13:09, Raphael Bircher wrote:

Hi Jan

Am 15.04.13 12:22, schrieb janI:

On 15 April 2013 11:53, Raphael Bircher  wrote:


Hi at all

I'm a bit comfused. What I get for %PRODUCTNAME? It is "OpenOffice" or
"Apache OpenOffice"? Thanks for your Feedback.

On my system I get "Apache OpenOffice", but I am not sure that it is
like

in every part of the system (but it should be)

Yes, it sould be... The reason why I ask: In Help is still the emtry
"About OpenOffice.org" instead of "About Apache OpenOffice" Whoever, i
found the points in the code (or better, I beleve I found it) and
changed it.

http://opengrok.adfinis-sygroup.org/source/xref/aoo-trunk/main/scripting/workben/bindings/writermenubar.xml#297


I replaced the "OpenOffice.org" with "%PRODUCTNAME", but my local build
shows now "About OpenOffice". But the About Dialog is now called "About
Apache OpenOffice".



"About OpenOffice" in the Help menu is correct from my point of view.
Have a look at the Help menus of our applications Writer, Calc, Impress, ...

Best regards, Oliver.


How ever, I'm lucky if sameone can explain me this behavior. Thanks!

Greetings Raphael


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: %PRODUCTNAME


Hi

On 15.04.2013 13:09, Raphael Bircher wrote:

Hi Jan

Am 15.04.13 12:22, schrieb janI:

On 15 April 2013 11:53, Raphael Bircher  wrote:


Hi at all

I'm a bit comfused. What I get for %PRODUCTNAME? It is "OpenOffice" or
"Apache OpenOffice"? Thanks for your Feedback.

On my system I get "Apache OpenOffice", but I am not sure that it is
like

in every part of the system (but it should be)

Yes, it sould be... The reason why I ask: In Help is still the emtry
"About OpenOffice.org" instead of "About Apache OpenOffice" Whoever, i
found the points in the code (or better, I beleve I found it) and
changed it.

http://opengrok.adfinis-sygroup.org/source/xref/aoo-trunk/main/scripting/workben/bindings/writermenubar.xml#297



This seems to be a menu definition file, but not a help content file.

Where in the Help did you find "OpenOffice.org"?
There are some "OpenOffice.org" in the Help when former OpenOffice 
versions are referenced.

Anything else?



I replaced the "OpenOffice.org" with "%PRODUCTNAME", but my local build
shows now "About OpenOffice". But the About Dialog is now called "About
Apache OpenOffice".


Look at the general menu bar definition files in the applications - e.g. 
main/sc/uiconfig/scalc/menubar/menubar.xml. Here you do not find 
hard-coded string, but UNO commands.

I am not sure, if this is also possible for module scripting.

Best regards, Oliver.



How ever, I'm lucky if sameone can explain me this behavior. Thanks!

Greetings Raphael


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Sidebar merged into trunk


On 14.04.2013 17:08, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:

On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 12:02:40PM -0300, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:

Hi Ricardo,

On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 03:15:01AM +0200, RGB ES wrote:

The sidebar is just gorgeous! The Properties deck on Draw is a blessing!
I'm trying the dev builds and the sidebar works almost perfectly. I filled
two reports and one request for small problems I found, (bugs 122047,
122048 and 122049), but overall it is a huge step forward on the UI.
Congratulations!

I cannot reproduce https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122047
nor https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122048 (see
http://people.apache.org/~arielch/images/sidebar/paraprops.png)
May be you got an incremental build from the build bot that screwed things
up.


When I see the screenshot then I think that we (I) still have some work 
to do to improve the look of the sidebar.


-Andre


I've just seen https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122052
Not reproducible by Regina, nor with my build from current trunk. That
build bot's builds are indeed screwed up. May be we should coordinate
a weekly Developer Snapshot from now on, this will also make things
easier for QA people.


Regards



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: %PRODUCTNAME

On 4/15/13 2:10 PM, janI wrote:
> On 15 April 2013 13:50, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:
> 
>> On 4/15/13 1:42 PM, Raphael Bircher wrote:
>>> Am 15.04.13 13:34, schrieb Rob Weir:
 On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Jürgen Schmidt
 wrote:

> On 4/15/13 12:22 PM, janI wrote:
>> On 15 April 2013 11:53, Raphael Bircher  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi at all
>>>
>>> I'm a bit comfused. What I get for %PRODUCTNAME? It is "OpenOffice"
>> or
>>> "Apache OpenOffice"? Thanks for your Feedback.
>>>
>>> On my system I get "Apache OpenOffice", but I am not sure that it is
> like
>> in every part of the system (but it should be)
> no, it is not so easy and I am sure Oliver can provide more details. We
> decided to use OpenOffice in most of the places in the installed
>> product
> and use Apache OpenOfifce only in the intro screen or the about dialog.
>
>
 The About Box is where we claim the copyright and give the license, so
 that
 is one place where it will be important to use the full formal name of
 the
 product.

 Maybe we should have %PRODUCTNAMESHORT and %PRODUCTNAMEFULL
>>> The question is, if this makes sense for downstream products. Well, it's
>>> anyway better then hard coded productnames.
>>
>> I see no problem here because both can be defined on the same or
>> whatever you want.
>>
> I find the idea good (to have %PRODUCTNAMESHORT and %PRODUCTNAMEFULL)
> 
>>
>> But to be serious I am tending to drop the flexibility here, as long as
>> I don't see that downstream products contribute back.
>>
> I dont agree with this, even if downstream products dont contribute back
> directly, they broaden the use of openoffice.
> 
> I would really think twice before dropping this flexibility, since we can
> have at without extra resource usage.

well before I would put any energy in this I would solve other more
important issues.

But I even don't like the the take only approach ;-) And that the take
only fraction is doing anything good for the OpenOffice eco system is
questionable from my point of view.

Juergen

> 
> rgds
> Jan I
> 
>>
>> Juergen
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: "Easy hack" for website

2013-04-15 Thread Michal Hriň


Dňa Mon, 15 Apr 2013 00:29:09 +0200 Rob Weir  napísal:


On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Michal Hriň  wrote:


Hi Rob,

I started work on this bug 122003, because I'm not familiar with
Subversion,
I need little help.

I'd like to create a "big patch" as mentioned in bug description but I
don't know how
to do it through svn.

- I made "svn co ..." for downloading whole ooo-site
- I'm edited some files and some I removed

and what is the next step ?
"svn diff  something" ?



Yes.  Details here:
http://openoffice.apache.org/svn-basics.html#creating_and_submitting_patches


Be sure to do this from the root of the ooo-site directory.

You can then zip this and attach it to the BZ issue.  I'll then review  
and

commit.


I added little patch to BZ, can you check it ?
If everything will be all right, I'll continue with this work.

Regards, Michal Hriň.





Thanks,

-Rob




Regards,
Michal Hriň

Dňa Fri, 05 Apr 2013 00:49:07 +0200 Rob Weir   
napísal:



 I just entered a BZ issue :


https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=122003

"Missing  tag on many webpages"

If there are any new volunteers looking for how to get started, this is
one
easy way that does not require any programming.  We need someone to  
review
a bunch of HTML pages and add titles to them.  It should help these  
pages

be listed more appropriately in Google, Bing and other search engines.

There are 874 pages missing titles, so this is something where we can
divide up the work as well.

Regards,

-Rob



--**--**-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:  
dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org

For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org





--
Táto správa bola vytvorená poštovým klientom v prehliadači Opera:  
http://www.opera.com/mail/


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DEVTOOLS] [PROPOSAL] branch Netbeans plugin for 3.0 and begin 4.0 trunk

On 4/15/13 2:12 PM, janI wrote:
> On 15 April 2013 11:22, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:
> 
>> On 4/15/13 9:42 AM, janI wrote:
>>> On 15 April 2013 00:23, Carl Marcum  wrote:
>>>
 Hi Jan,


 On 04/14/2013 02:58 PM, janI wrote:

> On 14 April 2013 20:25, Carl Marcum  wrote:
>
>  Hi Juergen,
>>
>>
>> On 04/14/2013 01:32 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>  Hi Carl,
>>>
>>>
>>> Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013 um 19:23 schrieb Carl Marcum:
>>>
>>>   On 02/10/2013 04:11 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
>>>

  On 02/10/2013 02:50 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
>
>  Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013 um 19:04 schrieb Carl Marcum:
>>
>>  Hi all,
>>>
>>> I would like to branch NB integration plugin for 3.0 and start
>>> modifying
>>> trunk for AOO 4.0 compatibility.
>>>
>>> I would like to also tag current version as 3.0.1 at the same
>> time.
>>>
>>> Trunk would become version 4.0 to maintain major version number
>> the
>>> same
>>> as AOO.
>>>
>>> If there are no objections to the above proposal within 72-hours
>>> then
>>> I
>>> will invoke Lazy Consensus and proceed to implement the above
>>> proposal.
>>>
>>>
>>>  You can if course create a branch but I don't see the demand for
>> it.
>> You can continue the development towards 4.0 on trunk. I don't see
>> many activity here and a branch is not really necessary from my
>> pov.
>>
>> Juergen
>>
>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Carl
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>  I agree. we can always create a branch based on a revision number
> later if needed.
>
>
>
 I thought about it more and since the next changes will be
>> incompatible
 with AOO 3.4 I tagged a 3.0.2 version and created a 3.0 branch to
>> make
 it easier if someone needs to make changes for 3.4 compatible
>> plugins.



  I agree now and with my upcoming 3layer removal there will be some
>>> work
>>> to do in the plugin. It mainly that places of jars, tools, libs have
>>> changed.
>>>
>>> Juergen
>>>
>>>

  Is this something that will be implemented in AOO 4 release?
>>
>>
> How come it is a 3.0 branch ?? that sounds old to me, shouldnt it be
> 3.4.1x branch ?
>
>
 The Netbeans plugin versions didn't historically coincide with the OOo
 version numbers (that I know of).

 When the code came to Apache it was version 2.0.7 and I tagged that
 version and started work to make it run on Netbeans 6.9 which was
>> Netbeans
 7.0 api changes. That's when I changed it to 3.0. Some additional
 localization work took it to 3.0.2.

 I'm not sure what the best solution to version numbering other than to
>> do
 a major number change when it's not compatible with AOO or NB and keep a
 compatibility table somewhere.

>>>
>>> Thanks for clarifying it for me, I am still learning a lot, however I do
>>> have some opinion on the version numbering.
>>>
>>> Netbeans is part of main, and released as an integrated part of AOO. As
>> far
>>> as I can see it is not available (for download) independent of AOO. If I
>>> install AOO 4.0, have a problem and see netbeans is 3.0 I would assume
>> that
>>> I missed an upgrade. Therefore I will strongly suggest that all modules
>> in
>>> main get version 4.0.
>>>
>>> If I am wrong and netbeans are available independent, it should not be in
>>> main. Because we will (as we did with 3.4.1) vote about releasing 4.0,
>> and
>>> then it would not be correct to silently release a new version of
>> netbeans,
>>> just because it is included.
>>>
>>> Please do not read my comments as I am against the work. I solely think
>>> about the version number logistic, which I want to make as simple as
>>> possible.
>>
>> The NetBeans plugin is a developer tool that uses OpenOffice and SDK and
>> depends on a specific version in the future but it can be seen as
>> independent and ideally we would bring it back in the plugin center of
>> Netbeans directly.
>>
>> The plugin don't comes with the office and is not part of the source
>> release.
>>
> 
> I thought the source release was the full main ??

yes, it is but the NetBeans plugin is not in main ;-)

http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/devtools/netbeansintegration/


> 
> Where can I find the script that  generates the source release ?

solenv/bin/srcrelease.xml triggered in instset_native/util on demand, no
default target

Juergen


> 
> rgds
> jan i.
> 
> 
>>
>> Juergen
>>
>>>
>>>

  I do agree with the principle in having a branch. We have however to
>> make
> it clear to developers, that when using that branch t

Re: [DEVTOOLS] [PROPOSAL] branch Netbeans plugin for 3.0 and begin 4.0 trunk

On 15 April 2013 15:31, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:

> On 4/15/13 2:12 PM, janI wrote:
> > On 15 April 2013 11:22, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:
> >
> >> On 4/15/13 9:42 AM, janI wrote:
> >>> On 15 April 2013 00:23, Carl Marcum  wrote:
> >>>
>  Hi Jan,
> 
> 
>  On 04/14/2013 02:58 PM, janI wrote:
> 
> > On 14 April 2013 20:25, Carl Marcum  wrote:
> >
> >  Hi Juergen,
> >>
> >>
> >> On 04/14/2013 01:32 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
> >>
> >>  Hi Carl,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013 um 19:23 schrieb Carl Marcum:
> >>>
> >>>   On 02/10/2013 04:11 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
> >>>
> 
>   On 02/10/2013 02:50 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
> >
> >  Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013 um 19:04 schrieb Carl Marcum:
> >>
> >>  Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> I would like to branch NB integration plugin for 3.0 and start
> >>> modifying
> >>> trunk for AOO 4.0 compatibility.
> >>>
> >>> I would like to also tag current version as 3.0.1 at the same
> >> time.
> >>>
> >>> Trunk would become version 4.0 to maintain major version number
> >> the
> >>> same
> >>> as AOO.
> >>>
> >>> If there are no objections to the above proposal within
> 72-hours
> >>> then
> >>> I
> >>> will invoke Lazy Consensus and proceed to implement the above
> >>> proposal.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>  You can if course create a branch but I don't see the demand
> for
> >> it.
> >> You can continue the development towards 4.0 on trunk. I don't
> see
> >> many activity here and a branch is not really necessary from my
> >> pov.
> >>
> >> Juergen
> >>
> >>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>> Carl
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>  I agree. we can always create a branch based on a revision
> number
> > later if needed.
> >
> >
> >
>  I thought about it more and since the next changes will be
> >> incompatible
>  with AOO 3.4 I tagged a 3.0.2 version and created a 3.0 branch to
> >> make
>  it easier if someone needs to make changes for 3.4 compatible
> >> plugins.
> 
> 
> 
>   I agree now and with my upcoming 3layer removal there will be
> some
> >>> work
> >>> to do in the plugin. It mainly that places of jars, tools, libs
> have
> >>> changed.
> >>>
> >>> Juergen
> >>>
> >>>
> 
>   Is this something that will be implemented in AOO 4 release?
> >>
> >>
> > How come it is a 3.0 branch ?? that sounds old to me, shouldnt it be
> > 3.4.1x branch ?
> >
> >
>  The Netbeans plugin versions didn't historically coincide with the OOo
>  version numbers (that I know of).
> 
>  When the code came to Apache it was version 2.0.7 and I tagged that
>  version and started work to make it run on Netbeans 6.9 which was
> >> Netbeans
>  7.0 api changes. That's when I changed it to 3.0. Some additional
>  localization work took it to 3.0.2.
> 
>  I'm not sure what the best solution to version numbering other than to
> >> do
>  a major number change when it's not compatible with AOO or NB and
> keep a
>  compatibility table somewhere.
> 
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for clarifying it for me, I am still learning a lot, however I
> do
> >>> have some opinion on the version numbering.
> >>>
> >>> Netbeans is part of main, and released as an integrated part of AOO. As
> >> far
> >>> as I can see it is not available (for download) independent of AOO. If
> I
> >>> install AOO 4.0, have a problem and see netbeans is 3.0 I would assume
> >> that
> >>> I missed an upgrade. Therefore I will strongly suggest that all modules
> >> in
> >>> main get version 4.0.
> >>>
> >>> If I am wrong and netbeans are available independent, it should not be
> in
> >>> main. Because we will (as we did with 3.4.1) vote about releasing 4.0,
> >> and
> >>> then it would not be correct to silently release a new version of
> >> netbeans,
> >>> just because it is included.
> >>>
> >>> Please do not read my comments as I am against the work. I solely think
> >>> about the version number logistic, which I want to make as simple as
> >>> possible.
> >>
> >> The NetBeans plugin is a developer tool that uses OpenOffice and SDK and
> >> depends on a specific version in the future but it can be seen as
> >> independent and ideally we would bring it back in the plugin center of
> >> Netbeans directly.
> >>
> >> The plugin don't comes with the office and is not part of the source
> >> release.
> >>
> >
> > I thought the source release was the full main ??
>
> yes, it is but the NetBeans plugin is not in main ;-)
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/devtools/netbeansintegration/
>
hmmm, w

[RELEASE]: weekly developer snapshots

Hi,

I noticed feedback regarding sidebar problems that can't be reproduced.
It seems that the result of the build bots are not reliable.

Based on this and the fact that we don't have build bots for MacOS and
currently not for Linunx 32 bit, I propose a weekly developer snapshot
based on the SNAPSHOT tag.

I have switched the snapshot tag now to trunk revision 1467923 and will
start building Windows and MacOS

@Ariel, maybe you can provide the Linux builds as in the past. Please
let me know if not.


For the future we really have to work on a reliable build bot
environment that can produce usable output. Currently it seems more a
compile check. This means we have to fix the build problems for clean
builds, improve the build performance and/or improve the system for
incremental builds.


Juergen

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [DEVTOOLS] [PROPOSAL] branch Netbeans plugin for 3.0 and begin 4.0 trunk

On 4/15/13 3:36 PM, janI wrote:
> On 15 April 2013 15:31, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:
> 
>> On 4/15/13 2:12 PM, janI wrote:
>>> On 15 April 2013 11:22, Jürgen Schmidt  wrote:
>>>
 On 4/15/13 9:42 AM, janI wrote:
> On 15 April 2013 00:23, Carl Marcum  wrote:
>
>> Hi Jan,
>>
>>
>> On 04/14/2013 02:58 PM, janI wrote:
>>
>>> On 14 April 2013 20:25, Carl Marcum  wrote:
>>>
>>>  Hi Juergen,


 On 04/14/2013 01:32 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:

  Hi Carl,
>
>
> Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013 um 19:23 schrieb Carl Marcum:
>
>   On 02/10/2013 04:11 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
>
>>
>>  On 02/10/2013 02:50 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
>>>
>>>  Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013 um 19:04 schrieb Carl Marcum:

  Hi all,
>
> I would like to branch NB integration plugin for 3.0 and start
> modifying
> trunk for AOO 4.0 compatibility.
>
> I would like to also tag current version as 3.0.1 at the same
 time.
>
> Trunk would become version 4.0 to maintain major version number
 the
> same
> as AOO.
>
> If there are no objections to the above proposal within
>> 72-hours
> then
> I
> will invoke Lazy Consensus and proceed to implement the above
> proposal.
>
>
>  You can if course create a branch but I don't see the demand
>> for
 it.
 You can continue the development towards 4.0 on trunk. I don't
>> see
 many activity here and a branch is not really necessary from my
 pov.

 Juergen


> Best regards,
> Carl
>
>
>

  I agree. we can always create a branch based on a revision
>> number
>>> later if needed.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I thought about it more and since the next changes will be
 incompatible
>> with AOO 3.4 I tagged a 3.0.2 version and created a 3.0 branch to
 make
>> it easier if someone needs to make changes for 3.4 compatible
 plugins.
>>
>>
>>
>>  I agree now and with my upcoming 3layer removal there will be
>> some
> work
> to do in the plugin. It mainly that places of jars, tools, libs
>> have
> changed.
>
> Juergen
>
>
>>
>>  Is this something that will be implemented in AOO 4 release?


>>> How come it is a 3.0 branch ?? that sounds old to me, shouldnt it be
>>> 3.4.1x branch ?
>>>
>>>
>> The Netbeans plugin versions didn't historically coincide with the OOo
>> version numbers (that I know of).
>>
>> When the code came to Apache it was version 2.0.7 and I tagged that
>> version and started work to make it run on Netbeans 6.9 which was
 Netbeans
>> 7.0 api changes. That's when I changed it to 3.0. Some additional
>> localization work took it to 3.0.2.
>>
>> I'm not sure what the best solution to version numbering other than to
 do
>> a major number change when it's not compatible with AOO or NB and
>> keep a
>> compatibility table somewhere.
>>
>
> Thanks for clarifying it for me, I am still learning a lot, however I
>> do
> have some opinion on the version numbering.
>
> Netbeans is part of main, and released as an integrated part of AOO. As
 far
> as I can see it is not available (for download) independent of AOO. If
>> I
> install AOO 4.0, have a problem and see netbeans is 3.0 I would assume
 that
> I missed an upgrade. Therefore I will strongly suggest that all modules
 in
> main get version 4.0.
>
> If I am wrong and netbeans are available independent, it should not be
>> in
> main. Because we will (as we did with 3.4.1) vote about releasing 4.0,
 and
> then it would not be correct to silently release a new version of
 netbeans,
> just because it is included.
>
> Please do not read my comments as I am against the work. I solely think
> about the version number logistic, which I want to make as simple as
> possible.

 The NetBeans plugin is a developer tool that uses OpenOffice and SDK and
 depends on a specific version in the future but it can be seen as
 independent and ideally we would bring it back in the plugin center of
 Netbeans directly.

 The plugin don't comes with the office and is not part of the source
 release.

>>>
>>> I thought the source release was the full main ??
>>
>> yes, it is but the NetBeans plugin is not in main ;-)
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc

Clean build proposal


Hi,

I would like to change the build type of the Windows7 nightly build from 
incremental to clean.


Reasons in favor of a clean build are:

- Developers don't have to know if a change is incompatible and thus 
have to (somehow) trigger a clean build.


- Developers don't have to learn how to trigger a clean build.

- We avoid very subtle bugs that are introduced when an incremental 
build is made on incompatible changes.
  Issues 122047 and 122048 may be caused by such a broken build: the 
office works in general, only commands are mapped to the wrong ids.

  It is not acceptable to have builds that we can not rely on.

If no one objects in the coming 72 hours then I will change the buildbot 
configuration file to make clean Windows7 nightly builds. I will then 
try to pinpoint and fix any build errors.  Any help is appreciated.


I have started to collect the available documentation on the buildbots 
[1] but many parts are missing.  For example I have not yet found much 
on the buildbot configuration file.  Anyone who knows more, please 
update the wiki page.


Regards,
Andre

[1] http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Buildbot


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: [RELEASE]: weekly developer snapshots

2013-04-15 Thread Ariel Constenla-Haile

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 03:56:50PM +0200, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I noticed feedback regarding sidebar problems that can't be reproduced.
> It seems that the result of the build bots are not reliable.
> 
> Based on this and the fact that we don't have build bots for MacOS and
> currently not for Linunx 32 bit, I propose a weekly developer snapshot
> based on the SNAPSHOT tag.
> 
> I have switched the snapshot tag now to trunk revision 1467923 and will
> start building Windows and MacOS
> 
> @Ariel, maybe you can provide the Linux builds as in the past. Please
> let me know if not.

Yes. What are you planning to build (normal install sets, languages,
langpacks, etc.)?

May be it doesn't make sense to provide localized full install sets, in
the current localization state (we will only get the feedback that
translation is "corrupted" and previous work lost - none of which is
true).


Regards
-- 
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina


pgp8BLRYvKvjn.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [RELEASE]: weekly developer snapshots

On 4/15/13 4:14 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 03:56:50PM +0200, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I noticed feedback regarding sidebar problems that can't be
>> reproduced. It seems that the result of the build bots are not
>> reliable.
>> 
>> Based on this and the fact that we don't have build bots for
>> MacOS and currently not for Linunx 32 bit, I propose a weekly
>> developer snapshot based on the SNAPSHOT tag.
>> 
>> I have switched the snapshot tag now to trunk revision 1467923
>> and will start building Windows and MacOS
>> 
>> @Ariel, maybe you can provide the Linux builds as in the past.
>> Please let me know if not.
> 
> Yes. What are you planning to build (normal install sets,
> languages, langpacks, etc.)?
> 
> May be it doesn't make sense to provide localized full install
> sets, in the current localization state (we will only get the
> feedback that translation is "corrupted" and previous work lost -
> none of which is true).

I agree, at the moment I would plan en-US only. And as soon as we have
the localization for a language in place we can add the language.

I think at the moment we should provide normal install sets with
system integration, means no dev builds. QA volunteers know hopefully
how to handle these builds.

Juergen



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: GSOC Idea


Hi Rajath,

On 14.04.2013 21:48, Rajath Shashidhara wrote:

Hello ,
I'm new to open-source development. I would like to find out in which part
of the source code text wrapping around the image happens when a new image
is inserted. This would greatly help me resolve this bug(121546) and
personally It would help me in learning how to find the right part of the
source code corresponding to functionalities. I'm sorry for repeatedly
asking for your help. I want to definitely fix this bug. Please help me
with this. Also is there an approach that I need to follow generally to
find out which part of code could correspond to a functionality that I'm
searching? I searched for insert graphic/text wrap and followed a chain of
hyperlinks and was not able to exactly figure out where this whole part of
text wrapping happens. Please help me!!!

[snip]



First, welcome to the project.

Second, no excuse for asking questions. From my point of view this is 
the way how to learn from others.


Now, I will try to give some help to give you the 'entry point' to fix 
issue 121546:
- The code for the text formatting of text documents in Writer is found 
in main/sw/source/core/text/. Here you will found some code which looks 
for objects when formatting a certain text line.
- The text formatting is only one part of the whole formatting algorithm 
in Writer. Further layout/formatting code for text documents in Writer 
is found in main/sw/source/core/layout
- A look at Wiki page [1] will give you some basic idea of the used data 
structures for the layout and the model of the text document in Writer.


Please feel free to ask further questions.


[1] http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer/Core_And_Layout


Best regards, Oliver.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: GSOC Idea

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
orwittm...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Hi Rajath,
>
>
> On 14.04.2013 21:48, Rajath Shashidhara wrote:
>
>> Hello ,
>> I'm new to open-source development. I would like to find out in which part
>> of the source code text wrapping around the image happens when a new image
>> is inserted. This would greatly help me resolve this bug(121546) and
>> personally It would help me in learning how to find the right part of the
>> source code corresponding to functionalities. I'm sorry for repeatedly
>> asking for your help. I want to definitely fix this bug. Please help me
>> with this. Also is there an approach that I need to follow generally to
>> find out which part of code could correspond to a functionality that I'm
>> searching? I searched for insert graphic/text wrap and followed a chain of
>> hyperlinks and was not able to exactly figure out where this whole part of
>> text wrapping happens. Please help me!!!
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>
> First, welcome to the project.
>
> Second, no excuse for asking questions. From my point of view this is the
> way how to learn from others.
>
> Now, I will try to give some help to give you the 'entry point' to fix
> issue 121546:
> - The code for the text formatting of text documents in Writer is found in
> main/sw/source/core/text/. Here you will found some code which looks for
> objects when formatting a certain text line.
> - The text formatting is only one part of the whole formatting algorithm
> in Writer. Further layout/formatting code for text documents in Writer is
> found in main/sw/source/core/layout
> - A look at Wiki page [1] will give you some basic idea of the used data
> structures for the layout and the model of the text document in Writer.
>
>
Any idea why this was marked as a "simple" bug?  I'm surprised that
layout-related issues would be proposed for someone's first bug fix.

-Rob



> Please feel free to ask further questions.
>
>
> [1] 
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Writer/Core_And_Layout
>
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
>
> --**--**-
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

Re: "Easy hack" for website

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Michal Hriň  wrote:

> Dňa Mon, 15 Apr 2013 00:29:09 +0200 Rob Weir  napísal:
>
>
>  On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Michal Hriň  wrote:
>>
>>  Hi Rob,
>>>
>>> I started work on this bug 122003, because I'm not familiar with
>>> Subversion,
>>> I need little help.
>>>
>>> I'd like to create a "big patch" as mentioned in bug description but I
>>> don't know how
>>> to do it through svn.
>>>
>>> - I made "svn co ..." for downloading whole ooo-site
>>> - I'm edited some files and some I removed
>>>
>>> and what is the next step ?
>>> "svn diff  something" ?
>>>
>>>
>>>  Yes.  Details here:
>> http://openoffice.apache.org/**svn-basics.html#creating_and_**
>> submitting_patches
>>
>>
>> Be sure to do this from the root of the ooo-site directory.
>>
>> You can then zip this and attach it to the BZ issue.  I'll then review and
>> commit.
>>
>
> I added little patch to BZ, can you check it ?
> If everything will be all right, I'll continue with this work.
>
>
Thanks for the patch.  I applied it with no problems and then checked it
in.

Regards,

-Rob



> Regards, Michal Hriň.
>
>
>
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>>
>>  Regards,
>>> Michal Hriň
>>>
>>> Dňa Fri, 05 Apr 2013 00:49:07 +0200 Rob Weir 
>>> napísal:
>>>
>>>
>>>  I just entered a BZ issue :
>>>

 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122003
 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122003>
 >


 "Missing  tag on many webpages"

 If there are any new volunteers looking for how to get started, this is
 one
 easy way that does not require any programming.  We need someone to
 review
 a bunch of HTML pages and add titles to them.  It should help these
 pages
 be listed more appropriately in Google, Bing and other search engines.

 There are 874 pages missing titles, so this is something where we can
 divide up the work as well.

 Regards,

 -Rob


>>> --**
>>> --**-
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>>> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**a**pache.org
>>> 
>>> >
>>>
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> Táto správa bola vytvorená poštovým klientom v prehliadači Opera:
> http://www.opera.com/mail/
>
>
> --**--**-
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

Re: GSOC Idea

2013-04-15 Thread Rajath Shashidhara

Is there a mentor alloted to the import extension gsoc idea? I would be
happy to contact him.

Rajath S
I year
M.Sc(Hons.) Physics
BITS pilani
On Apr 15, 2013 9:04 PM, "Rob Weir"  wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
> orwittm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Rajath,
> >
> >
> > On 14.04.2013 21:48, Rajath Shashidhara wrote:
> >
> >> Hello ,
> >> I'm new to open-source development. I would like to find out in which
> part
> >> of the source code text wrapping around the image happens when a new
> image
> >> is inserted. This would greatly help me resolve this bug(121546) and
> >> personally It would help me in learning how to find the right part of
> the
> >> source code corresponding to functionalities. I'm sorry for repeatedly
> >> asking for your help. I want to definitely fix this bug. Please help me
> >> with this. Also is there an approach that I need to follow generally to
> >> find out which part of code could correspond to a functionality that I'm
> >> searching? I searched for insert graphic/text wrap and followed a chain
> of
> >> hyperlinks and was not able to exactly figure out where this whole part
> of
> >> text wrapping happens. Please help me!!!
> >>
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >>
> > First, welcome to the project.
> >
> > Second, no excuse for asking questions. From my point of view this is the
> > way how to learn from others.
> >
> > Now, I will try to give some help to give you the 'entry point' to fix
> > issue 121546:
> > - The code for the text formatting of text documents in Writer is found
> in
> > main/sw/source/core/text/. Here you will found some code which looks for
> > objects when formatting a certain text line.
> > - The text formatting is only one part of the whole formatting algorithm
> > in Writer. Further layout/formatting code for text documents in Writer is
> > found in main/sw/source/core/layout
> > - A look at Wiki page [1] will give you some basic idea of the used data
> > structures for the layout and the model of the text document in Writer.
> >
> >
> Any idea why this was marked as a "simple" bug?  I'm surprised that
> layout-related issues would be proposed for someone's first bug fix.
>
> -Rob
>
>
>
> > Please feel free to ask further questions.
> >
> >
> > [1] http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Writer/Core_And_Layout<
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer/Core_And_Layout>
> >
> >
> > Best regards, Oliver.
> >
> >
> > --**--**-
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
> dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
>

Re: Clean build proposal

2013-04-15 Thread Herbert Dürr

On 2013/04/15 4:00 PM, Andre Fischer wrote:

I would like to change the build type of the Windows7 nightly build from
incremental to clean.

Reasons in favor of a clean build are:

- Developers don't have to know if a change is incompatible and thus
have to (somehow) trigger a clean build.

- Developers don't have to learn how to trigger a clean build.

- We avoid very subtle bugs that are introduced when an incremental
build is made on incompatible changes.
Issues 122047 and 122048 may be caused by such a broken build: the
office works in general, only commands are mapped to the wrong ids.
It is not acceptable to have builds that we can not rely on.

I'm having a deja vue moment ;-)
[1] http://markmail.org/message/lpprmeahwurvepx5

If no one objects in the coming 72 hours then I will change the buildbot
configuration file to make clean Windows7 nightly builds. I will then
try to pinpoint and fix any build errors. Any help is appreciated.

As Andrew pointed out in his mail he prefers an incremental build on the
w7bot for several reasons such as problems with hung processes and wrong
dependencies that currently have to be cleaned out manually by him, as
he is the only one with machine level access. So forcing a clean build
would add additional work on him as volunteer. I trust Andrew's assessment.

Server load was a another serious concern.

Regarding the argument that a buildbot should always do a clean build
whereas builds outside of that system should default to be incremental:
There is some merit to the concept that the buildbot shouldn't always
have to use some extra steps that the default build does not do.

I have started to collect the available documentation on the buildbots
[1] but many parts are missing. For example I have not yet found much
on the buildbot configuration file. Anyone who knows more, please
update the wiki page.

Anyone considering a change to the configuration file [2] is well
advised to get familiar with its extensive documentation [3] provided by
the buildbot project first. Every slave-bot only has about a dozen steps...

[2]
https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/infrastructure/buildbot/aegis/buildmaster/master1/projects/openofficeorg.conf

[3] http://docs.buildbot.net/current/manual/configuration.html

Herbert

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Moderated messages not reaching the original poster

2013-04-15 Thread Andrea Pescetti


On 14/04/2013 Peter Junge wrote:

I know we had discussions like this before but I'm not able to find them
in the archives.


http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openoffice-dev/201301.mbox/%3C896645663.148630.1358320486313.JavaMail.www@wwinf8211%3E


Senders of moderated messages are often missing replies because they go
to mailing list only. AFAIR, technical solutions proposed so far weren't
accepted. Did we already consider to ask infra to change the 'Reply-To'
header form '{MAILING_LIST}' to '{MAILING_LIST}; {ORIGINAL_POSTER}'?
This would force mail clients to include the OP as recipient.


It is one of the options already discussed there and not considered 
feasible by Infra.


Regards,
  Andrea.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: GSOC Idea

2013-04-15 Thread Rajath Shashidhara

Hello,

I would like to thank Oliver-Rainer and Rob for their help. I have a few
more doubts.
Once the changes are made to source files the make and build commands have
to be run on terminal to produce the modified openOffice. Some commands
especially "build" takes a lot of time to run. Is there a workaround for
this? Something like which would compile only the changed files and append
the changes to installed openoffice?

Also, I would like to know how to use breakpoints and other debugging tools
during execution?
I thank you for your support. Please help!


On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Rajath Shashidhara <
rajaths.raja...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is there a mentor alloted to the import extension gsoc idea? I would be
> happy to contact him.
>
> Rajath S
> I year
> M.Sc(Hons.) Physics
> BITS pilani
> On Apr 15, 2013 9:04 PM, "Rob Weir"  wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
>> orwittm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Rajath,
>> >
>> >
>> > On 14.04.2013 21:48, Rajath Shashidhara wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hello ,
>> >> I'm new to open-source development. I would like to find out in which
>> part
>> >> of the source code text wrapping around the image happens when a new
>> image
>> >> is inserted. This would greatly help me resolve this bug(121546) and
>> >> personally It would help me in learning how to find the right part of
>> the
>> >> source code corresponding to functionalities. I'm sorry for repeatedly
>> >> asking for your help. I want to definitely fix this bug. Please help me
>> >> with this. Also is there an approach that I need to follow generally to
>> >> find out which part of code could correspond to a functionality that
>> I'm
>> >> searching? I searched for insert graphic/text wrap and followed a
>> chain of
>> >> hyperlinks and was not able to exactly figure out where this whole
>> part of
>> >> text wrapping happens. Please help me!!!
>> >>
>> >> [snip]
>> >>
>> >>
>> > First, welcome to the project.
>> >
>> > Second, no excuse for asking questions. From my point of view this is
>> the
>> > way how to learn from others.
>> >
>> > Now, I will try to give some help to give you the 'entry point' to fix
>> > issue 121546:
>> > - The code for the text formatting of text documents in Writer is found
>> in
>> > main/sw/source/core/text/. Here you will found some code which looks for
>> > objects when formatting a certain text line.
>> > - The text formatting is only one part of the whole formatting algorithm
>> > in Writer. Further layout/formatting code for text documents in Writer
>> is
>> > found in main/sw/source/core/layout
>> > - A look at Wiki page [1] will give you some basic idea of the used data
>> > structures for the layout and the model of the text document in Writer.
>> >
>> >
>> Any idea why this was marked as a "simple" bug?  I'm surprised that
>> layout-related issues would be proposed for someone's first bug fix.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>>
>> > Please feel free to ask further questions.
>> >
>> >
>> > [1] http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Writer/Core_And_Layout<
>> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer/Core_And_Layout>
>> >
>> >
>> > Best regards, Oliver.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> --**--**-
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
>> dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>


-- 
Rajath S,
M.Sc(Hons.) Physics,
Birla Institute of Technology and Science - Pilani,
Pilani

Starting Introduction to Contributing to Apache OpenOffice Module

2013-04-15 Thread Brad Fallon

Hi All,

My name is Brad Fallon. I am based in Cambridge, UK, where I work as a 
Publishing Editor for a scientific society. My interests are science and 
literature, and I am hoping to gain some insight into documentation writing by 
familiarising myself with OpenOffice. Hopefully, I will be able to contribute 
something. 

Best wishes,
Brad
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Moderated messages not reaching the original poster

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

> On 14/04/2013 Peter Junge wrote:
>
>> I know we had discussions like this before but I'm not able to find them
>> in the archives.
>>
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.**org/mod_mbox/openoffice-dev/**
> 201301.mbox/%3C896645663.**148630.1358320486313.JavaMail.**
> www@wwinf8211%3E
>
>
>  Senders of moderated messages are often missing replies because they go
>> to mailing list only. AFAIR, technical solutions proposed so far weren't
>> accepted. Did we already consider to ask infra to change the 'Reply-To'
>> header form '{MAILING_LIST}' to '{MAILING_LIST}; {ORIGINAL_POSTER}'?
>> This would force mail clients to include the OP as recipient.
>>
>
> It is one of the options already discussed there and not considered
> feasible by Infra.
>
>
The easiest option:  If you are responding to someone who is not a
"regular" on the list, then just copy their name into the To or CC fields.
Worst case they get two copies of the email.  But if you fail to do this,
then one of two worse things happen:

a) they never see your response and you've just wasted your time responding

b) someone else notices that you did not include the poster in the response
and forwards your response, so now 420 people on the list have two copies
of your note.

-Rob



> Regards,
>   Andrea.
>
>
> --**--**-
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

Re: Sidebar merged into trunk

2013-04-15 Thread RGB ES

2013/4/14 RGB ES 

> 2013/4/14 Ariel Constenla-Haile 
>
>> On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 12:02:40PM -0300, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
>> > Hi Ricardo,
>> >
>> > On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 03:15:01AM +0200, RGB ES wrote:
>> > > The sidebar is just gorgeous! The Properties deck on Draw is a
>> blessing!
>> > > I'm trying the dev builds and the sidebar works almost perfectly. I
>> filled
>> > > two reports and one request for small problems I found, (bugs 122047,
>> > > 122048 and 122049), but overall it is a huge step forward on the UI.
>> > > Congratulations!
>> >
>> > I cannot reproduce https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122047
>> > nor https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122048 (see
>> > http://people.apache.org/~arielch/images/sidebar/paraprops.png)
>> > May be you got an incremental build from the build bot that screwed
>> things
>> > up.
>>
>> I've just seen https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122052
>> Not reproducible by Regina, nor with my build from current trunk. That
>> build bot's builds are indeed screwed up.
>
>
> OK, I just asked some friends to test the builds from the build bot on
> other systems to confirm that it's a problem from the build bot and not
> some gremlin on my system.
>

Without surprise, my friend confirmed the problem with the Linux binary
from the build bot. Do I need to close the issues?

Regards
Ricardo


>
>
>
>> May be we should coordinate
>> a weekly Developer Snapshot from now on, this will also make things
>> easier for QA people.
>>
>
> +1!!
>
> Regards
> Ricardo
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> Regards
>> --
>> Ariel Constenla-Haile
>> La Plata, Argentina
>>
>
>

Re: Moderated messages not reaching the original poster

2013-04-15 Thread Donald Whytock

When non-subscribers email the list, do they at least get an autoresponse
that says, "You're not a subscriber to this email list, so you might not
see responses to your email.  Subscribe by clicking here!"?

Don


On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Andrea Pescetti  >wrote:
>
> > On 14/04/2013 Peter Junge wrote:
> >
> >> I know we had discussions like this before but I'm not able to find them
> >> in the archives.
> >>
> >
> > http://mail-archives.apache.**org/mod_mbox/openoffice-dev/**
> > 201301.mbox/%3C896645663.**148630.1358320486313.JavaMail.**
> > www@wwinf8211%3E<
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openoffice-dev/201301.mbox/%3C896645663.148630.1358320486313.JavaMail.www@wwinf8211%3E
> >
> >
> >
> >  Senders of moderated messages are often missing replies because they go
> >> to mailing list only. AFAIR, technical solutions proposed so far weren't
> >> accepted. Did we already consider to ask infra to change the 'Reply-To'
> >> header form '{MAILING_LIST}' to '{MAILING_LIST}; {ORIGINAL_POSTER}'?
> >> This would force mail clients to include the OP as recipient.
> >>
> >
> > It is one of the options already discussed there and not considered
> > feasible by Infra.
> >
> >
> The easiest option:  If you are responding to someone who is not a
> "regular" on the list, then just copy their name into the To or CC fields.
> Worst case they get two copies of the email.  But if you fail to do this,
> then one of two worse things happen:
>
> a) they never see your response and you've just wasted your time responding
>
> b) someone else notices that you did not include the poster in the response
> and forwards your response, so now 420 people on the list have two copies
> of your note.
>
> -Rob
>
>
>
> > Regards,
> >   Andrea.
> >
> >
> > --**--**-
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
> dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
>

Re: Moderated messages not reaching the original poster

2013-04-15 Thread Donald Whytock

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Donald Whytock  wrote:

> When non-subscribers email the list, do they at least get an autoresponse
> that says, "You're not a subscriber to this email list, so you might not
> see responses to your email.  Subscribe by clicking here!"?
>
>
Far as I can tell, the answer is no.  Is this something that can be done?

Re: Moderated messages not reaching the original poster

2013-04-15 Thread RGB ES

2013/4/16 Donald Whytock 

> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Donald Whytock 
> wrote:
>
> > When non-subscribers email the list, do they at least get an autoresponse
> > that says, "You're not a subscriber to this email list, so you might not
> > see responses to your email.  Subscribe by clicking here!"?
> >
> >
> Far as I can tell, the answer is no.  Is this something that can be done?
>

I don't think that, in case something like this is possible, all people
will be willing of subscribing the dev mailing lists, so a better message
could be "You're not a subscriber to this email list, so you might not see
responses to your email.  Read all the messages sent to the list here
 or subscribe by clicking here".

Regards
Ricardo

Re: GSOC Idea

2013-04-15 Thread Ariel Constenla-Haile

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
> Any idea why this was marked as a "simple" bug?  I'm surprised that
> layout-related issues would be proposed for someone's first bug fix.

the bug activity tells you
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_activity.cgi?id=121546

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Moderated messages not reaching the original poster

2013-04-15 Thread Donald Whytock

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:19 PM, RGB ES  wrote:

> 2013/4/16 Donald Whytock 
>
> > On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Donald Whytock 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > When non-subscribers email the list, do they at least get an
> autoresponse
> > > that says, "You're not a subscriber to this email list, so you might
> not
> > > see responses to your email.  Subscribe by clicking here!"?
> > >
> > >
> > Far as I can tell, the answer is no.  Is this something that can be done?
> >
>
> I don't think that, in case something like this is possible, all people
> will be willing of subscribing the dev mailing lists, so a better message
> could be "You're not a subscriber to this email list, so you might not see
> responses to your email.  Read all the messages sent to the list here
>  or subscribe by clicking here".
>
> Regards
> Ricardo
>

Okay, I got back the rejected-by-moderator message.  Is there an
accepted-by-moderator message?  If so, I'd guess that'd be the place for
Ricardo's text.

Don

Re: GSOC Idea

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:30 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Rob Weir  wrote:
> > Any idea why this was marked as a "simple" bug?  I'm surprised that
> > layout-related issues would be proposed for someone's first bug fix.
>
> the bug activity tells you
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_activity.cgi?id=121546
>

OK.   By one of the new testers.  Perhaps they thought it referred to how
easy it was to verify the bug or something?

I'll send a note to the QA list reminding them what this field means.  It
should typically only be set by a more experienced developer who knows
already what would be required to fix it.

Of course, if someone wants to take this as their first bug fix, and enjoys
the challenge, then that is OK as well ;-)

-Rob

> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>

Re: Please remove us from the professional services listing