Re: About Me (New Volunteer)

[Andrea Pescetti]

Zim, welcome to the project and again your starting point is to get 
OpenOffice to build. Follow 
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO and 
let us know if you need assistance. You complain you are not receiving 
any answers, but you are missing some (see the one from Alexandro below) 
since you are not subscribed to the list. Read 
http://openoffice.apache.org/mailing-lists.html to know how to fix this.

Regards,
  Andrea.

On 26/05/2014 Alexandro Colorado wrote:

That's excellent there are some guides for PyUNO and good tutorials and
sample code here:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Python


On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 2:38 AM, zimuzo ezeozue wrote:


Im interested in the OpenOffice PyUno bridge


On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 8:21 AM, zimuzo ezeozue 
wrote:



Hi, My name is Zim. I'm a Nigerian software developer. Currently an
undergraduate student studying Mechanical Engineering. I'm interested in
building for AOO for the following reasons:
 1. To improve my skills as a developer.
 2. Im passionate about the open source community and I would love to
be a contributor

This is my first attempt at an open source project. I currently work with
a startup https://callbase.co/ . I have a personal project i worked on

at

some time with my brother http://www.nepasituation.com/ . Im proficient
in Java. I know a some Python and Javascript. With a little C++.

Im eager to hear from someone. Thanks









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

Re: Tracking bugs like Issue 124985 - [Meta] Meta Bug for collecting bugs which appeal for AOO 4.1.x

[Jürgen Schmidt]

On 26/05/14 20:13, Rainer Bielefeld wrote:
> Hi Herbert,
> 
> I think we have some misunderstanding here.
> 
> It's an essential that information should be consistent at any place for
> Bugzilla.
> 
> Here an overview concerning priority /severity of the issues listed in
> the meta-issue;
> 
> 
>!  Critical  major normaltrivial  ! Total
> ---!-!--
> P1 !1 . . .  !   1
> P2 !. . . 1  !   1
> P3 !. 4 5 .  !   9
> ---!-!--
> Tot!1 4 5 1  !  11
> 
> So my question is why Issue 114361 with severity "trivial" has been
> considered by godlike decision (there is no reasoning, neither in Issue
> 124985 nor in Issue 114361) so serious that it has been added added to
> the meta bug? With some minimum carefulness the severity would have been
> rised to "major" or more, the dataloss keyword would have been added, so
> that the decision will be comprehensible. I did that now in Issue 114361
> 
> Common known characteristics of unresolved Issue 124985 blocking Bug
> reports you find in Report [1] (More than 3400). So the question is why
> have 11 been picked as blocker for the meta issue, but more of 3400 not
> [2]?

The answer is quite simple because developers took care of these issues
and provided a fix or have a fix in place.

We don't fix issues in the order they are detected or reported.

> 
> With some minimum corrections for the criteria of possible Meta bug
> blockers I can reduce the number by 90% [3]
> 
> [4] Sorts these issues by priority /severity, the 12 with "critical +
> P2" need some urgent review as I did for "Issue 118725 - images dropped
> by random"
>  
> "Issue 122780"
>   and others
> 
> And so on.
> 
> Such systematic working is the only way for real progress.

it is indeed useful but again anybody can focus on the issues they are
interested in. And a closer look on the issues in the meta issue will
show that they are all valid and serious enough.

And in general we have so many bug reports that it is nearly impossible
to to address them all, at least from a developer perspective. And if
issues are not reproduceable or bug docs are missing etc. they got easy
ignored because we have many others with better descriptions etc.

But I agree 100% that we should add as much as possible meta info in the
issue to make the selection or review as easy as possible. In case of
114361 the data loss keyword is of course very useful to make clear that
this issue is a good candidate. We received some reports regarding this
or similar behaviour and Oliver did a more careful analysis and found
the root cause. The good thing is that he searched for similar older
issues and found one.

> 
> If after some work we have valid data in the bug reports Meta Bugs
> indeed can be useful to show up dependencies and relations what are not
> simply visible in the bug reports.
> 
> For anything else queries like
> 
> (shared with registered users) are much more powerful, especially in
> projects with bigger community than AOO and much bug tracker activity
> (20 reports per day, not only 2).
> 

I think we are all in the same boat and have a common understanding but
we are not yet in the situation where we have a cleaned bugtracker. And
we have too less volunteers to help either in reviewing the issues or
fix them.

And of course you drove an active volunteer (maybe over motivated) away
with a somewhat strict and of course your personal opinion how QA work
should be done.

You can now disagree and can move away as well (I hope you do not) but
it is as it is. And we have no ideal world in such a huge open source
project. We can learn from each other and can improve over time. But it
is always important how we collaborate and work together.

For now I am in favor to address the most recent issues first and keep
an eye on the priority and incoming issues in general where possible.

Kind regards

Juergen


> Best regards
> 
> Rainer
> 
> -
> 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: Tracking bugs like Issue 124985 - [Meta] Meta Bug for collecting bugs which appeal for AOO 4.1.x

[Herbert Duerr]

Hi Rainer,

On 26.05.2014 20:13, Rainer Bielefeld wrote:

It's an essential that information should be consistent at any place for
Bugzilla.


+1


Here an overview concerning priority /severity of the issues listed in
the meta-issue;


!  Critical  major normaltrivial  ! Total
---!-!--
P1 !1 . . .  !   1
P2 !. . . 1  !   1
P3 !. 4 5 .  !   9
---!-!--
Tot!1 4 5 1  !  11


Regressions are also an important consideration.


So my question is why Issue 114361 with severity "trivial" has been
considered by godlike decision (there is no reasoning, neither in Issue
124985 nor in Issue 114361) so serious that it has been added added to
the meta bug? With some minimum carefulness the severity would have been
rised to "major" or more, the dataloss keyword would have been added, so
that the decision will be comprehensible. I did that now in Issue 114361


A higher severity was very much warranted for this data loss. Data loss 
sounds a bit like an abstract concept but in this case it was "I had a 
perfectly fine presentation, saved it and some pics are gone!!!".


So the meta-issue helped to identify that this important issue was not 
properly flagged and would have been overlooked if we had only used the 
query as suggested. +1 for the meta-issue then.



Common known characteristics of unresolved Issue 124985 blocking Bug
reports you find in Report [1] (More than 3400). So the question is why
have 11 been picked as blocker for the meta issue, but more of 3400 not
[2]?


For the references [1], [2] or [3] in your mail I cannot find their 
actual links, but I think I know what you mean. As said the meta-issue 
is only intended as a publicly visible reminder and best-effort overview 
what should eventually get into an eventual bugfix release if we decide 
whether we'll need one. The meta-issue helps with this discussion. +1 
for the meta-issue.


Whether they really should get into an eventual bugfix release would be 
decided later by requesting the blocker flag.


I'd say good criteria for such issues are:
- regressions
- crashes
- data losses
* risk of new regressions

So even if a bug is only minor; if it is a regression, a fix is 
available and low risk it should get into a bugfix release. Such a bug 
would not be caught by a query for major issues, but IMHO they are great 
candidates anyway.


Should we decide that our bugfix releases must only contain fixes for 
bugs with major severity then this is fine as well. The bugs below this 
level would be removed from nomination. I'd advise against ignoring such 
fixes though.



With some minimum corrections for the criteria of possible Meta bug
blockers I can reduce the number by 90% [3]
[...]
Such systematic working is the only way for real progress.


This systematic work is very important indeed and I appreciate and have 
the deepest respect for our QA volunteer who work on it.



If after some work we have valid data in the bug reports Meta Bugs
indeed can be useful to show up dependencies and relations what are not
simply visible in the bug reports.

For anything else queries like

(shared with registered users) are much more powerful, especially in
projects with bigger community than AOO and much bug tracker activity
(20 reports per day, not only 2).


I'm logged in and have all the rights needed but I can't see that query. 
On the other hand the meta-issue is visible to everyone without any 
trouble...


Best regards,
Herbert

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

"weekly news" or "monthly news "?

[Jörg Schmidt]

Hello,

we see that unfortunately the "weekly news" [1] are been some time no longer 
published.

I am worried that the good approach of "weekly news" thereby is lost and the 
"weekly news" disappear.

Would it not be a better way to accept it not enough new going on every week 
and therefore publish the same "monthly news", _but that really consistent_?


Greetings,
Jörg

[1]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=40508638


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

Re: [Lazy Consensus] link to a german forum

[Herbert Duerr]

On 26.05.2014 23:08, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

Hagar Delest wrote:

I agree, we should add the link on the landing page (which has still an
old logo BTW). Adding something like "(3rd party)" would be fine.


OK. So can someone tell us the best way to write
"Third party forums in German"
in German?


"Unabhängige befreundete deutsch-sprachige Foren"
would be a good translation IMHO. It means
"Friendly but independent German-speaking forums".

Herbert

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

Local marketing and resources (Re: Native Language and Localization pages on cwiki might benefit from some organization)

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 26/05/2014 Jörg Schmidt wrote:

Yes, a local community must grow themselves, but they need structures within the
overall international project. ...
I think we need to ask ourselves these questions of local structures and
_long-term_ need to create such structures.


We don't need to create them in a formal way. At least, Apache tries to 
be as flat as possible here. For a number of reasons, for example, 
Apache has a policy that all project decisions are community decisions, 
and do not depend on an individual.


So personal responsibilities (like: being the "press contact" for 
Germany) are generally not officially granted: rather than having a 
press contact for Germany, we have a generic press alias see 
http://openoffice.apache.org/press.html that is used to route requests 
to the appropriate person depending on the request.


This doesn't forbid that, informally, a person takes responsibility for 
a certain activity. But we don't officially grant the many roles we used 
to grant in the past.



"common" part (English original, replicate for other languages; this
includes the layout) and a "specific" part where materials in native
language will be shown, specific to each language (documentation in
native language, announces about "local" events...)

That's clear, but please look practice.
It is to say, a difference that _should be_ a English original there or it _must
be_ a English original there.


There must be some pages common to all languages (translated from the 
English site); and there can be content in German only, or French only, 
that only appears on the German/French website, like the 10-page article 
in German you imagine; then, if this content is good to have in other 
languages, someone can translate it to English and put it on the English 
site; but it is fine, and consistent with what we have now, to host 
language-specific content.



I am, for example, believe that we could get enough donations for Open Office in
Germany to fund our local work and that could be used for general purposes of
Apache at the same time still have money left over. But we need clear agreements
for it, because of course the donors want their donation is tax deductible, and
that's a question of local law.


Jan wrote a couple good points, and I'll add that I'm not sure how 
tax-deductible donations work with foreign organizations. At the moment, 
the biggest obstacle is that Apache never collects money to some 
specific purpose (and here I'm not talking about paying for developers: 
Apache doesn't pay for developers directly and this won't change). A 
massive redesign of the fundraising policy, better suited to OpenOffice 
and in general to those projects that could use many small donations and 
spend them for specific purposes, is coming and it will be one of the 
initial tasks for next year's Apache Board.


Regards,
  Andrea.

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

Re: [Lazy Consensus] link to a german forum

[Jörg Schmidt]

> From: Herbert Duerr [mailto:h...@apache.org] 

> > OK. So can someone tell us the best way to write
> > "Third party forums in German"
> > in German?
> 
> "Unabhängige befreundete deutsch-sprachige Foren"
> would be a good translation IMHO. It means
> "Friendly but independent German-speaking forums".

Sorry, I would not say that my suggested translation: 

"DE - deutschsprachige Foren von Drittanbietern"

the best option is, but I think "befreundete" factually wrong, because we will
linking to:
http://www.openoffice.org/de/foren.html

should take place and we should call there as possible all content relevant
forums, but have not at all direct contacts, likewise, it is not certain that 
all
of these forums are independent.


Jörg


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

Re: Local marketing and resources (Re: Native Language and Localization pages on cwiki might benefit from some organization)

[Alexandro Colorado]

On 5/27/14, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
> On 26/05/2014 Jörg Schmidt wrote:
>> Yes, a local community must grow themselves, but they need structures
>> within the
>> overall international project. ...
>> I think we need to ask ourselves these questions of local structures and
>> _long-term_ need to create such structures.
>
> We don't need to create them in a formal way. At least, Apache tries to
> be as flat as possible here. For a number of reasons, for example,
> Apache has a policy that all project decisions are community decisions,
> and do not depend on an individual.
>
> So personal responsibilities (like: being the "press contact" for
> Germany) are generally not officially granted: rather than having a
> press contact for Germany, we have a generic press alias see
> http://openoffice.apache.org/press.html that is used to route requests
> to the appropriate person depending on the request.

Who decides who is the appropriate person? If someone send an email in
chineese requesting a contact, would it be routed to the chineese
community or to a specific person? Who will that person be? If an
event is looking for available speakers, how will press find the
correct speaker closest to the location and available to give a talk?
Has this situation happened before, how was it handled?

>
> This doesn't forbid that, informally, a person takes responsibility for
> a certain activity. But we don't officially grant the many roles we used
> to grant in the past.
>
>>> "common" part (English original, replicate for other languages; this
>>> includes the layout) and a "specific" part where materials in native
>>> language will be shown, specific to each language (documentation in
>>> native language, announces about "local" events...)
>> That's clear, but please look practice.
>> It is to say, a difference that _should be_ a English original there or it
>> _must
>> be_ a English original there.
>
> There must be some pages common to all languages (translated from the
> English site); and there can be content in German only, or French only,
> that only appears on the German/French website, like the 10-page article
> in German you imagine; then, if this content is good to have in other
> languages, someone can translate it to English and put it on the English
> site; but it is fine, and consistent with what we have now, to host
> language-specific content.
>
>> I am, for example, believe that we could get enough donations for Open
>> Office in
>> Germany to fund our local work and that could be used for general purposes
>> of
>> Apache at the same time still have money left over. But we need clear
>> agreements
>> for it, because of course the donors want their donation is tax
>> deductible, and
>> that's a question of local law.
>
> Jan wrote a couple good points, and I'll add that I'm not sure how
> tax-deductible donations work with foreign organizations. At the moment,
> the biggest obstacle is that Apache never collects money to some
> specific purpose (and here I'm not talking about paying for developers:
> Apache doesn't pay for developers directly and this won't change). A
> massive redesign of the fundraising policy, better suited to OpenOffice
> and in general to those projects that could use many small donations and
> spend them for specific purposes, is coming and it will be one of the
> initial tasks for next year's Apache Board.
>
> Regards,
>Andrea.
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Alexandro Colorado
Apache OpenOffice Contributor
882C 4389 3C27 E8DF 41B9  5C4C 1DB7 9D1C 7F4C 2614

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

cleaning up our sourceforge top-level directory

[Herbert Duerr]

I just noticed that many people seem to download AOO directly from 
sourceforge and that the directory structure obviously misleads them to 
download obsolete binaries. Here is the top-level layout and its weekly 
download count:


4.1.0:843,483 weekly downloads
localized: 25,891 weekly downloads
4.0.1: 24,410 weekly downloads
4.0.0:  3,731 weekly downloads
stable  1,800 weekly downloads
extended  558 weekly downloads
contrib41 weekly downloads
milestones:31 weekly downloads
packages6 weekly downloads

The "localized" and "stable" folders only provide the old 3.2.x, 3.3.0 
and 3.4.x releases, so getting more than 28000 weekly downloads there is 
an alarming signal.


The "packages" folder contains old OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 releases for 
SolarisX86, SolarisSparc, MacPPC and for languages that are not yet 
supported by AOO such as Maithili or Konkani.


The "extended" folder contains ISO-images with several builds of OOo321 
and OOo330.


The "contrib" folder contains old dictionaries. They are not directly 
usable and the newest one is from 2009.


So the current layout is apparently confusing and misleads a lot of 
people to download stuff they wouldn't use if they knew that better 
alternatives are available. I don't want to spend much time one this but 
I'd like to clean up the "localized", "stable", "extended", "contrib" 
and "packages" top-level directories by either

- removing them altogether
- recreate a 3.4.1 folder and remove the others
- recreate a 3.4.1 and an old-OOo folder and remove the others

Herbert

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

Bad Web Link

[Doug Davis]

I was just trying to download the Mac OS-X 4.1 version of open office but the 
link leads to version 4.0.1 instead.  I used the URL to FIND the correct file 
to download but you might want to update this for ease by others.
Thanks,
* * * * * * * * * *
 Douglas S. Davis
 Information Systems Coordinator

  Monical Pizza Corporation
 815.929.2074 - office
 815.644.4863 - mobile
 * * * * * * * * * *
 
  This communication may contain proprietary and confidential information
 for the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended
recipient, please note that any other dissemination, distribution, use or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Anyone who receives
this message in error should notify the sender immediately by telephone
or by return e-mail and delete it from their computer. 
 

Re: cleaning up our sourceforge top-level directory

[Kay Schenk]

On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 8:00 AM, Herbert Duerr  wrote:

> I just noticed that many people seem to download AOO directly from
> sourceforge and that the directory structure obviously misleads them to
> download obsolete binaries. Here is the top-level layout and its weekly
> download count:
>
> 4.1.0:843,483 weekly downloads
> localized: 25,891 weekly downloads
> 4.0.1: 24,410 weekly downloads
> 4.0.0:  3,731 weekly downloads
> stable  1,800 weekly downloads
> extended  558 weekly downloads
> contrib41 weekly downloads
> milestones:31 weekly downloads
> packages6 weekly downloads
>
> The "localized" and "stable" folders only provide the old 3.2.x, 3.3.0 and
> 3.4.x releases, so getting more than 28000 weekly downloads there is an
> alarming signal.
>
> The "packages" folder contains old OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 releases for
> SolarisX86, SolarisSparc, MacPPC and for languages that are not yet
> supported by AOO such as Maithili or Konkani.
>
> The "extended" folder contains ISO-images with several builds of OOo321
> and OOo330.
>
> The "contrib" folder contains old dictionaries. They are not directly
> usable and the newest one is from 2009.
>
> So the current layout is apparently confusing and misleads a lot of people
> to download stuff they wouldn't use if they knew that better alternatives
> are available. I don't want to spend much time one this but I'd like to
> clean up the "localized", "stable", "extended", "contrib" and "packages"
> top-level directories by either
> - removing them altogether
> - recreate a 3.4.1 folder and remove the others
> - recreate a 3.4.1 and an old-OOo folder and remove the others
>
> Herbert
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
I wonder if some of this is due to "auto" processes that are still using
the old structure. We still allow for downloads of "legacy" OOo, so it
would probably be better to move the older versions to something like our
current structure -- your second option above? And, should the older
"packages", if it applies only to 3.3, also have its own area? Maybe
someone still wants/needs these.


-- 
-
MzK

"Even a happy life cannot be without a measure of darkness, and
 the word  happy would lose its meaning if it were not
 balanced by sadness.  It is far better (to) take things as they come
 along  with patience and  equanimity."

  -- Carl Jung

Question for the Open Office for Android and blind users?

[Marco Retzlaff]

Hello,
 
i think, that my question isn't right here, but this is the best place I
think.
Is the Android Version of Open Office fully compatible with TalkBack (The
Screen Reader for blind users in Android)? I'm blind myself and this is a
very important question for all blind users.
If not, will this get implemented in future?
 
Thanks for your help!
 
Best Regards Marco


---
Diese E-Mail ist frei von Viren und Malware, denn der avast! Antivirus Schutz 
ist aktiv.
http://www.avast.com

Re: Question for the Open Office for Android and blind users?

[Keith N. McKenna]

Marco Retzlaff wrote:
> Hello,
>  
> i think, that my question isn't right here, but this is the best place I
> think.
> Is the Android Version of Open Office fully compatible with TalkBack (The
> Screen Reader for blind users in Android)? I'm blind myself and this is a
> very important question for all blind users.
> If not, will this get implemented in future?
>  
> Thanks for your help!
>  
> Best Regards Marco
> 
> 
> ---
> Diese E-Mail ist frei von Viren und Malware, denn der avast! Antivirus Schutz 
> ist aktiv.
> http://www.avast.com
> 
Marco;

The Android version, called AndreOpen Office is a port by a third party
developer and is not an official release of the Apache OpenOffice
project;(see http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html). As such it
is not supported directly by the project.

It is available from
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.andropenoffice and
there is a link to email the developer at the bottom of that page. He
should be able to give you more details on your question.

Regards
Keith McKenna



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: cleaning up our sourceforge top-level directory

[Marcus (OOo)]

Am 05/27/2014 05:00 PM, schrieb Herbert Duerr:

I just noticed that many people seem to download AOO directly from
sourceforge and that the directory structure obviously misleads them to
download obsolete binaries. Here is the top-level layout and its weekly
download count:

4.1.0: 843,483 weekly downloads
localized: 25,891 weekly downloads
4.0.1: 24,410 weekly downloads
4.0.0: 3,731 weekly downloads
stable 1,800 weekly downloads
extended 558 weekly downloads
contrib 41 weekly downloads
milestones: 31 weekly downloads
packages 6 weekly downloads

The "localized" and "stable" folders only provide the old 3.2.x, 3.3.0
and 3.4.x releases, so getting more than 28000 weekly downloads there is
an alarming signal.


wow, yes. :-O

Thanks for bringing this to our attention.


The "packages" folder contains old OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 releases for
SolarisX86, SolarisSparc, MacPPC and for languages that are not yet
supported by AOO such as Maithili or Konkani.

The "extended" folder contains ISO-images with several builds of OOo321
and OOo330.

The "contrib" folder contains old dictionaries. They are not directly
usable and the newest one is from 2009.

So the current layout is apparently confusing and misleads a lot of
people to download stuff they wouldn't use if they knew that better
alternatives are available. I don't want to spend much time one this but
I'd like to clean up the "localized", "stable", "extended", "contrib"
and "packages" top-level directories by either
- removing them altogether
- recreate a 3.4.1 folder and remove the others
- recreate a 3.4.1 and an old-OOo folder and remove the others


IMPORTANT:

Before deciding to remove any release builds, please consider the new 
download webpage I'm building currently. This will offer also older AOO 
versions. So, when we want to offer older version, then of course they 
need to be available. ;-)


Therefore my suggestion:

- 4.1.0, 4.0.1, 4.0.0
Keep

- contrib, extended
Delete as it's outdated content

- packages
Move to archive

- localized, stable
Keep the 3.4.1 builds as last stable 3.x release, re-order them like the 
4.x directory structure and move the 3.4.0 and older ones to archive


- milestones
Keep (as it's currently empty)

Marcus


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

Re: Question for the Open Office for Android and blind users?

[Marcus (OOo)]

Forwarding the mail to Marco as it's not sure if he is subscribed to 
this mailing list.




Am 05/27/2014 07:29 PM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:

Marco Retzlaff wrote:

Hello,

i think, that my question isn't right here, but this is the best place I
think.
Is the Android Version of Open Office fully compatible with TalkBack (The
Screen Reader for blind users in Android)? I'm blind myself and this is a
very important question for all blind users.
If not, will this get implemented in future?

Thanks for your help!

Best Regards Marco


---
Diese E-Mail ist frei von Viren und Malware, denn der avast! Antivirus Schutz 
ist aktiv.
http://www.avast.com


Marco;

The Android version, called AndreOpen Office is a port by a third party
developer and is not an official release of the Apache OpenOffice
project;(see http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html). As such it
is not supported directly by the project.

It is available from
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.andropenoffice and
there is a link to email the developer at the bottom of that page. He
should be able to give you more details on your question.

Regards
Keith McKenna


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

Re: Bad Web Link

[Marcus (OOo)]

Am 05/27/2014 03:58 PM, schrieb Doug Davis:

I was just trying to download the Mac OS-X 4.1 version of open office

> but the link leads to version 4.0.1 instead.  I used the URL to FIND
> the correct file to download but you might want to update this for
> ease by others.

thanks for your mail.

Too bad ;-) that you don't tell us:
a) from where you tried to download
b) if you see any error message or hint text
c) which OS X version you are using.

But from your description it sounds as you are running 10.6 or older and 
tried to download from "www.openoffice.org/download/".


Since AOO 4.1.0 there is no longer support for older OS X systems. This 
should be visible in the green box and as alternative you are offered 
with the previous version 4.0.1.


HTH

Marcus

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

Re: cleaning up our sourceforge top-level directory

[Marcus (OOo)]

Am 05/27/2014 05:46 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:

On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 8:00 AM, Herbert Duerr  wrote:


I just noticed that many people seem to download AOO directly from
sourceforge and that the directory structure obviously misleads them to
download obsolete binaries. Here is the top-level layout and its weekly
download count:

4.1.0:843,483 weekly downloads
localized: 25,891 weekly downloads
4.0.1: 24,410 weekly downloads
4.0.0:  3,731 weekly downloads
stable  1,800 weekly downloads
extended  558 weekly downloads
contrib41 weekly downloads
milestones:31 weekly downloads
packages6 weekly downloads

The "localized" and "stable" folders only provide the old 3.2.x, 3.3.0 and
3.4.x releases, so getting more than 28000 weekly downloads there is an
alarming signal.

The "packages" folder contains old OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 releases for
SolarisX86, SolarisSparc, MacPPC and for languages that are not yet
supported by AOO such as Maithili or Konkani.

The "extended" folder contains ISO-images with several builds of OOo321
and OOo330.

The "contrib" folder contains old dictionaries. They are not directly
usable and the newest one is from 2009.

So the current layout is apparently confusing and misleads a lot of people
to download stuff they wouldn't use if they knew that better alternatives
are available. I don't want to spend much time one this but I'd like to
clean up the "localized", "stable", "extended", "contrib" and "packages"
top-level directories by either
- removing them altogether
- recreate a 3.4.1 folder and remove the others
- recreate a 3.4.1 and an old-OOo folder and remove the others

Herbert

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



I wonder if some of this is due to "auto" processes that are still using
the old structure.


even if this would be the case. Do we want to support this for longer? I 
don't think so.


> We still allow for downloads of "legacy" OOo, so it

would probably be better to move the older versions to something like our
current structure -- your second option above?


+1


And, should the older
"packages", if it applies only to 3.3, also have its own area? Maybe
someone still wants/needs these.


Then they should look for them in the ASF archive. This should be the 
only location for very old release builds.


Marcus


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

Re: cleaning up our sourceforge top-level directory

[Andrea Pescetti]

Herbert Duerr wrote:

The "localized" and "stable" folders only provide the old 3.2.x, 3.3.0
and 3.4.x releases, so getting more than 28000 weekly downloads there is
an alarming signal.


This could be our fault too. It seems that "localized" is mainly used to 
serve these languages (using numbers from 
http://sourceforge.net/projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/localized/ ):

pl 9500
nb 3400
da 2700
es 2100

For Danish, the problem is surely coming from ourselves: we are not 
listing 4.1.0 at http://www.openoffice.org/da/ (discussed at 
http://markmail.org/message/ibhey3f7jt6b7db2 , I'll fix it now so we can 
see if the number decreases). For other languages, we should check our 
own site first!



I'd like to clean up the "localized", "stable", "extended", "contrib"
and "packages" top-level directories by either
- removing them altogether
- recreate a 3.4.1 folder and remove the others
- recreate a 3.4.1 and an old-OOo folder and remove the others


Breaking existing links is very bad. If people are getting these files, 
we can't just remove them. I'd rather work on the causes (let's see what 
Danish looks like in one week) and we can add a README.txt or something 
if you believe people are browsing the SourceForge file tree and getting 
lost; but files are there, they are being heavily downloaded and 
removing there immediately would simply cause confusion.


Regards,
  Andrea.

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

Reporting a problem with the OpenOffice website

[simon furneaux]

Hi,

My computer will not allow me to uninstall open office.

Is states there is no file path an I need to create one.

Please advise how download


Kind Regards
Simon Furneaux
T: 0151 329 2813
M: 0780 777 5791
si...@focusbestdeals.co.uk

[FocusMarketing_FinalLogo]

www.focusbestdeals.co.uk

Re: How to update, commit and publish only a single file/directory? [WAS: Re: need wiki help]

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 26/05/2014 Marcus (OOo) wrote:

Am 05/26/2014 10:34 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:

I read his mail in this discussion as "when you publish, you always
publish the whole thing"  ...

Sorry, I still can edit, update and publish a single file.
What's the problem to try again on your side?


OK, so I did this:
1) Committed a change to the Danish home page: 
http://svn.apache.org/r1597866 directly with svn
2) http://www.openoffice.org/da/index.html (I manually added 
"index.html" just in case)

3) Login via CMS bookmarklet
4) Click on [Edit] in the row for "index.html"
5) Click on [Update] on the top

Here the URL becomes 
"https://cms.apache.org/ooo-site/wc/update/pescetti-XXYYZZ/trunk/content/da/index.html 
and I get:


Update complete
Status

Updating 
'usr/local/cms/wc/ooo-site/pescetti-XXYYZZ/trunk/content/da/index.html':

Uusr/local/cms/wc/ooo-site/pescetti-XXYYZZ/trunk/content/da/index.html
Updated to revision 1597866.

And if I go to http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/da/index.html I see my 
change.


But then if I go to https://cms.apache.org/ooo-site/publish?diff=1 I see 
many more differences than my change, including for example changes in 
content/download/test/index_droplist.html


I didn't publish. But are you able now to do any other edits to the 
website and get them published without publishing my changes to 
http://www.openoffice.org/da/index.html ? This would show that selective 
publication is possible.


Regards,
  Andrea.

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

Re: How to update, commit and publish only a single file/directory? [WAS: Re: need wiki help]

[Marcus (OOo)]

Am 05/27/2014 10:15 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:

On 26/05/2014 Marcus (OOo) wrote:

Am 05/26/2014 10:34 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:

I read his mail in this discussion as "when you publish, you always
publish the whole thing" ...

Sorry, I still can edit, update and publish a single file.
What's the problem to try again on your side?


OK, so I did this:
1) Committed a change to the Danish home page:
http://svn.apache.org/r1597866 directly with svn
2) http://www.openoffice.org/da/index.html (I manually added
"index.html" just in case)
3) Login via CMS bookmarklet
4) Click on [Edit] in the row for "index.html"
5) Click on [Update] on the top

Here the URL becomes
"https://cms.apache.org/ooo-site/wc/update/pescetti-XXYYZZ/trunk/content/da/index.html
and I get:

Update complete
Status

Updating
'usr/local/cms/wc/ooo-site/pescetti-XXYYZZ/trunk/content/da/index.html':
U usr/local/cms/wc/ooo-site/pescetti-XXYYZZ/trunk/content/da/index.html
Updated to revision 1597866.

And if I go to http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/da/index.html I see my
change.

But then if I go to https://cms.apache.org/ooo-site/publish?diff=1 I see
many more differences than my change, including for example changes in
content/download/test/index_droplist.html

I didn't publish. But are you able now to do any other edits to the
website and get them published without publishing my changes to
http://www.openoffice.org/da/index.html ? This would show that selective
publication is possible.


I've seen your changes as I've done mine in the same minutes. Great for 
testing this.


Now I've updated only my edited files. However in the diff (with your 
mentioned link above) I can see also your edits on the Danish webpage. 
And after my publish the Danish webpage has your changes.


So, I've not uncovered a hidden feature. Too bad. ;-)

But OK, mystery solved.

Marcus


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

Re: How to update, commit and publish only a single file/directory? [WAS: Re: need wiki help]

[Marcus (OOo)]

@Joe:
See my last my mail.

Lesson learned:
I've just seen what was updated in my workspace. But there is no hint 
that other commits will be taken into account, too. Until you open this 
link:

https://cms.apache.org/ooo-site/publish?diff=1

As here the truth is shown.

So finally, believe in your admin or burn in hell. :-)

Marcus



Am 05/19/2014 11:56 PM, schrieb Joe Schaefer:

I think there's some confusion about what is actually happening
when you click on the Update link in the webgui.  All that does
is run

% svn up /path/to/underlying/svn/resource

on the CMS server.  When you publish you are essentially doing

% svn rm https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/ooo-site/content
% svn cp 
https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/staging/ooo-site/trunk/content 
https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/ooo-site/content


but in a single-step using svnmucc.

That's all the webgui does- it's just a wrapper around the underlying
svn commands.  What you are working with in the webgui is an svn
checkout of the site.  "Update" just brings your current checkout up
to date within the portion of the tree that you are browsing.

HTH


On Monday, May 19, 2014 3:44 PM, Marcus (OOo)  wrote:





Am 05/19/2014 09:20 PM, schrieb Joe Schaefer:

Sorry but technically the CMS publishes all committed
changes to the staging site.  The only way to partition
changes is to partition your commits.



but which data will be published: the content of the SVN repository or
the content of the personal CMS work space?

I guess the work space as I need to update it with the SVN content.
Otherwise there is nothing new to publish.

Thanks

Marcus





On Monday, May 19, 2014 3:17 PM, Marcus (OOo)   wrote:

Am 05/19/2014 09:51 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
On 29/04/2014 Marcus (OOo) wrote:

The main point is *where you are* in the CMS Browse View when you click
on the "Update" link.


I tried several times, but I'm not sure it works for me. Maybe it works
if we see "update" as "update this directory".


Example to update and publish only a file:
1. In your browser open, e.g.,
"www.openoffice.org/my-dir/my-subdir/index.html".
2. Open the CMS via the bookmarklet.
3. Click on the link "[Edit]" in the row of the

"index.html" file.

4. Click on the link "[Update]".
5. Do your changes in the file.
6. Commit your changes.
7. On the following page click on the link "[Publish]".


In the last days I tried to do this for the main index.html page and for
the download/devbuilds.html page. I commit to SVN directly (so I don't
use the CMS for editing pages), but the rest works as you describe. So I
browse to download/ in the CMS and when I update it downloads my changed
devbuilds.html page and nothing else. But then, when I publish, if I


Then you have update the *complete directory* but *not the single file*.

OK, I'll do it again:

1. Open w.oo.o/index.html
2. Login via CMS bookmarklet
3. Click on [Edit] in the row for "index.html"
4. Click on [Update] on the top
5. Only this file was updated
6.

click "View diff" I see all the changes in "download".

So maybe committing through SVN means that I'm forced to update the
directory, and thus if I change the main index.html file I must publish
the whole site, and if I change devbuilds.html I must publish the whole
subtree (download/) containing it? In that setup, indeed I wasn't able
to find a command like "Update this file only".


No, SVN is outside of this. I do it like you. It's like I wrote on the top:

The main point is *where you are* in the CMS Browse View when you click
on the "Update" link.

That means:
When you are in a directory, e.g., "download/" and click on
"Update"
then you get every new thing of this directory.

But when a single file, e.g., "devbuild.html" is shown and you click
on
the "Update" link then only this file is updated and nothing else.

Please can you try it and confirm?

Thanks


Marcus


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

Re: How to update, commit and publish only a single file/directory? [WAS: Re: need wiki help]

[Kay Schenk]

On 05/27/2014 01:30 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> @Joe:
> See my last my mail.
> 
> Lesson learned:
> I've just seen what was updated in my workspace. But there is no hint
> that other commits will be taken into account, too. Until you open this
> link:
> https://cms.apache.org/ooo-site/publish?diff=1
> 
> As here the truth is shown.
> 
> So finally, believe in your admin or burn in hell. :-)
> 
> Marcus

Well maybe not burn in hell, but at least gain some truth. Reviewing
this "diff" can be is very important at times. :)

> 
> 
> 
> Am 05/19/2014 11:56 PM, schrieb Joe Schaefer:
>> I think there's some confusion about what is actually happening
>> when you click on the Update link in the webgui.  All that does
>> is run
>>
>> % svn up /path/to/underlying/svn/resource
>>
>> on the CMS server.  When you publish you are essentially doing
>>
>> % svn rm
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/ooo-site/content
>> % svn cp
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/staging/ooo-site/trunk/content
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/ooo-site/content
>>
>>
>> but in a single-step using svnmucc.
>>
>> That's all the webgui does- it's just a wrapper around the underlying
>> svn commands.  What you are working with in the webgui is an svn
>> checkout of the site.  "Update" just brings your current checkout up
>> to date within the portion of the tree that you are browsing.
>>
>> HTH
>>
>>
>> On Monday, May 19, 2014 3:44 PM, Marcus (OOo) 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 05/19/2014 09:20 PM, schrieb Joe Schaefer:
 Sorry but technically the CMS publishes all committed
 changes to the staging site.  The only way to partition
 changes is to partition your commits.
>>>
>>>
>>> but which data will be published: the content of the SVN repository or
>>> the content of the personal CMS work space?
>>>
>>> I guess the work space as I need to update it with the SVN content.
>>> Otherwise there is nothing new to publish.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Marcus
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
> On Monday, May 19, 2014 3:17 PM, Marcus
> (OOo)   wrote:
>> Am 05/19/2014 09:51 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>> On 29/04/2014 Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>> The main point is *where you are* in the CMS Browse View when
>>> you click
>>> on the "Update" link.
>>
>> I tried several times, but I'm not sure it works for me. Maybe
>> it works
>> if we see "update" as "update this directory".
>>
>>> Example to update and publish only a file:
>>> 1. In your browser open, e.g.,
>>> "www.openoffice.org/my-dir/my-subdir/index.html".
>>> 2. Open the CMS via the bookmarklet.
>>> 3. Click on the link "[Edit]" in the row of the
> "index.html" file.
>>> 4. Click on the link "[Update]".
>>> 5. Do your changes in the file.
>>> 6. Commit your changes.
>>> 7. On the following page click on the link "[Publish]".
>>
>> In the last days I tried to do this for the main index.html
>> page and for
>> the download/devbuilds.html page. I commit to SVN directly (so
>> I don't
>> use the CMS for editing pages), but the rest works as you
>> describe. So I
>> browse to download/ in the CMS and when I update it downloads
>> my changed
>> devbuilds.html page and nothing else. But then, when I
>> publish, if I
>
> Then you have update the *complete directory* but *not the single
> file*.
>
> OK, I'll do it again:
>
> 1. Open w.oo.o/index.html
> 2. Login via CMS bookmarklet
> 3. Click on [Edit] in the row for "index.html"
> 4. Click on [Update] on the top
> 5. Only this file was updated
> 6.
>> click "View diff" I see all the changes in "download".
>>
>> So maybe committing through SVN means that I'm forced to
>> update the
>> directory, and thus if I change the main index.html file I
>> must publish
>> the whole site, and if I change devbuilds.html I must publish
>> the whole
>> subtree (download/) containing it? In that setup, indeed I
>> wasn't able
>> to find a command like "Update this file only".
>
> No, SVN is outside of this. I do it like you. It's like I wrote on
> the top:
>
> The main point is *where you are* in the CMS Browse View when you
> click
> on the "Update" link.
>
> That means:
> When you are in a directory, e.g., "download/" and click on
> "Update"
> then you get every new thing of this directory.
>
> But when a single file, e.g., "devbuild.html" is shown and you click
> on
> the "Update" link then only this file is updated and nothing else.
>
> Please can you try it and confirm?
>
> Thanks
>
>
> Marcus
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffi

Re: Local marketing and resources (Re: Native Language and Localization pages on cwiki might benefit from some organization)

[Andrea Pescetti]

Alexandro Colorado wrote:

On 5/27/14, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

http://openoffice.apache.org/press.html that is used to route requests
to the appropriate person depending on the request.

Who decides who is the appropriate person? If someone send an email in
chineese requesting a contact, would it be routed to the chineese
community or to a specific person? Who will that person be? If an
event is looking for available speakers, how will press find the
correct speaker closest to the location and available to give a talk?
Has this situation happened before, how was it handled?


We never received this kind of requests. Most of the times press@ is 
used for simple requests, you can read

http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/press_kit.html
to have an idea of the most frequently asked questions.

The press@ alias goes to the whole PMC, so it's still a rather large 
group and can deal with no problems with simple requests. If requests 
like the above ones (say, an event in India looking for speakers and 
contacting press@ to find a speaker) occur, the person making the 
request will maybe be told to contact the mailing lists. But nothing 
like this happened so far.


Regards,
  Andrea.

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

Re: cleaning up our sourceforge top-level directory

[Kay Schenk]

On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Marcus (OOo)  wrote:

> Am 05/27/2014 05:46 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>
>  On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 8:00 AM, Herbert Duerr  wrote:
>>
>>  I just noticed that many people seem to download AOO directly from
>>> sourceforge and that the directory structure obviously misleads them to
>>> download obsolete binaries. Here is the top-level layout and its weekly
>>> download count:
>>>
>>> 4.1.0:843,483 weekly downloads
>>> localized: 25,891 weekly downloads
>>> 4.0.1: 24,410 weekly downloads
>>> 4.0.0:  3,731 weekly downloads
>>> stable  1,800 weekly downloads
>>> extended  558 weekly downloads
>>> contrib41 weekly downloads
>>> milestones:31 weekly downloads
>>> packages6 weekly downloads
>>>
>>> The "localized" and "stable" folders only provide the old 3.2.x, 3.3.0
>>> and
>>> 3.4.x releases, so getting more than 28000 weekly downloads there is an
>>> alarming signal.
>>>
>>> The "packages" folder contains old OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 releases for
>>> SolarisX86, SolarisSparc, MacPPC and for languages that are not yet
>>> supported by AOO such as Maithili or Konkani.
>>>
>>> The "extended" folder contains ISO-images with several builds of OOo321
>>> and OOo330.
>>>
>>> The "contrib" folder contains old dictionaries. They are not directly
>>> usable and the newest one is from 2009.
>>>
>>> So the current layout is apparently confusing and misleads a lot of
>>> people
>>> to download stuff they wouldn't use if they knew that better alternatives
>>> are available. I don't want to spend much time one this but I'd like to
>>> clean up the "localized", "stable", "extended", "contrib" and "packages"
>>> top-level directories by either
>>> - removing them altogether
>>> - recreate a 3.4.1 folder and remove the others
>>> - recreate a 3.4.1 and an old-OOo folder and remove the others
>>>
>>> Herbert
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>  I wonder if some of this is due to "auto" processes that are still using
>> the old structure.
>>
>
> even if this would be the case. Do we want to support this for longer? I
> don't think so.
>
>
> > We still allow for downloads of "legacy" OOo, so it
>
>> would probably be better to move the older versions to something like our
>> current structure -- your second option above?
>>
>
> +1
>
>
>  And, should the older
>> "packages", if it applies only to 3.3, also have its own area? Maybe
>> someone still wants/needs these.
>>
>
> Then they should look for them in the ASF archive. This should be the only
> location for very old release builds.
>
> Marcus


sure...that's fine. I never think about the archives I guess. :/


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


-- 
-
MzK

"Even a happy life cannot be without a measure of darkness, and
 the word  happy would lose its meaning if it were not
 balanced by sadness.  It is far better (to) take things as they come
 along  with patience and  equanimity."

  -- Carl Jung

Re: cleaning up our sourceforge top-level directory

[Roberto Galoppini]

2014-05-27 21:25 GMT+02:00 Andrea Pescetti :

> Herbert Duerr wrote:
>
>> The "localized" and "stable" folders only provide the old 3.2.x, 3.3.0
>> and 3.4.x releases, so getting more than 28000 weekly downloads there is
>> an alarming signal.
>>
>
> This could be our fault too. It seems that "localized" is mainly used to
> serve these languages (using numbers from http://sourceforge.net/
> projects/openofficeorg.mirror/files/localized/ ):
> pl 9500
> nb 3400
> da 2700
> es 2100
>
> For Danish, the problem is surely coming from ourselves: we are not
> listing 4.1.0 at http://www.openoffice.org/da/ (discussed at
> http://markmail.org/message/ibhey3f7jt6b7db2 , I'll fix it now so we can
> see if the number decreases). For other languages, we should check our own
> site first!
>
>
>  I'd like to clean up the "localized", "stable", "extended", "contrib"
>> and "packages" top-level directories by either
>> - removing them altogether
>> - recreate a 3.4.1 folder and remove the others
>> - recreate a 3.4.1 and an old-OOo folder and remove the others
>>
>
> Breaking existing links is very bad. If people are getting these files, we
> can't just remove them. I'd rather work on the causes (let's see what
> Danish looks like in one week) and we can add a README.txt or something if
> you believe people are browsing the SourceForge file tree and getting lost;
> but files are there, they are being heavily downloaded and removing there
> immediately would simply cause confusion.
>

Excellent analysis, and I totally agree on conclusions. I have a couple of
things to add:

1. we are open to investigate end-users' patterns if that helps, let me
know if any file in particular worth that
2. we might use symlinks if we end up by figuring out that some behaviours
are 'wrong' (e.g. referrals) or just the result of people looking for
'stable' versions

PS if we go with symlinks note that it will affect downloads stats for
those specifics files

Roberto





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