Re: Apache OpenOffice NG
Hello, > From: Raphael Bircher [mailto:rbircherapa...@gmail.com] > Apache OpenOffice NG stands for New Generation. I know, this > thread is > difficult. Just sit down, relax and read it. This is just a > brainstorm. We > don't talk now if it's possible or not. > > What would happened if we drop the product but not the > project? Drop the > binaries and just doing source Release. The idea is to hand > over the final > products (can be a variety of products) to third party organizations > (Companies, whatever). The Project remains open to provide a common > codebase. > > I know, this is a complete different way. At first i said: > "NO, NEVER", > but if I start thinking a bit longer I also see the big chances in. Everything you propose can be done today, there is no need for a separate decision. Your mistake is (imho) to believe that a decision from us would automatically increase the interest of third party organizations. > Maybe we should say goodbye to the idea of the one big office > suite who > try to serve all the peoples needs and start to think in > direction of > smaller office tools who are customized for a User Group. I do not read the word "cloud", but I am afraid that is meant. In this case, I say: I need, even in the future, a _desktop_ office. For me this is a question of security, because in today's reality, the cloud is only safe until the next hacker attack. Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Apache OpenOffice NG
Am 22.04.2017 um 10:02 schrieb Jörg Schmidt: > > In this case, I say: I need, even in the future, a _desktop_ office. For me > this > is a question of security, because in today's reality, the cloud is only safe > until the next hacker attack. > "There is no cloud, just other people's computers." But if you put your own cloud on your own computers, you can enjoy the advantages of a cloud without facing the drawbacks. Kind regards Michael signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Apache OpenOffice NG
> From: Dr. Michael Stehmann [mailto:anw...@rechtsanwalt-stehmann.de] > > In this case, I say: I need, even in the future, a > _desktop_ office. For me this > > is a question of security, because in today's reality, the > cloud is only safe > > until the next hacker attack. > > > "There is no cloud, just other people's computers." > > But if you put your own cloud on your own computers, you can enjoy the > advantages of a cloud without facing the drawbacks. Yes, I can do it, but it does not give me any advantage over a classic desktop office. Note: under a cloud office I understand an Office running in the browser, a normal Desktop Office, installed in the LAN(*), is for me not a cloud office. (*) in the case of OO that means a "server installation" with: setup.exe /a Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Apache OpenOffice NG
Am 22.04.2017 um 10:46 schrieb Jörg Schmidt: > Note: under a cloud office I understand an Office running in the browser, a > normal > Desktop Office, installed in the LAN(*), is for me not a cloud office. > Yes, cloud means more than a server installation. Kind regards Michael P.S.: Why should I install Apache OpenOffice on a server under wine? ;-) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: ASF logo in Splash Screen?
Am 21.04.2017 um 19:09 schrieb Kay Schenk: > > > On 04/17/2017 12:47 AM, Marcus wrote: >> Am 15.04.2017 um 18:56 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >>> For those who want to have a look, take: >>> >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/hdjd6z6u2rgl1e2/intro.png?dl=0 >> >> this looks very good. > > I like this first one also. But maybe the text could be just a bit > darker? Maybe... I just erased the line with the non-existent URL and added the new (good looking) ASF logo. At the moment it is just "patching" existing graphics. ;-) Regards, Matthias > >> >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/rpkjy5xbiusg51f/logo.png?dl=0 >> >> Where / For what is this graphic used? I don't remember that I've seen >> this somewhere in OpenOffice. >> >> Thanks >> >> Marcus >> >> >> >>> Am 15.04.2017 um 11:37 schrieb Marcus: Am 14.04.2017 um 14:08 schrieb Matthias Seidel: > At some point (4.1.0?) the ASF logo was removed from the splash > screen. > > Older version (4.0.1): > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO401/main/default_images/introabout/intro.png > > > > > I would like to ask if we want to re-add the new ASF logo as the > graphic > must be updated anyway [1] ? > > [1] https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122376 it's also gone from the About dialog (menu Help - About). Maybe because the same graphic is used. Yes, let's add the feather again to the graphic. Will you make a graphical proposal? >> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [GitHub] Missing tag for 4.1.3 release
Am 19.04.2017 um 20:52 schrieb Marcus: > Am 19.04.2017 um 11:26 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >> Thank you! >> >> But as I understand it, the SVN tag is done after the (last) RC is >> promoted to be final. (That is the point where we know the Revision to >> checkout). So it should be further down in the documentation. > > ah, yes, please see my answer to Andrea's mail. > >> A little story: >> >> Until recently "heise Download" [1] offered only AOO 4.1.2. >> Andrea did the SVN tag on Saturday, 8. April. On Monday, 10. April heise >> updated their page to AOO 4.1.3. >> So I think, they monitor the tags either on GitHub or SVN to see if a >> new version is available. >> >> [1] https://www.heise.de/download/product/openoffice-9375 > > Then I really hope they have learned from this error. Sure, Apache > software is in the very most cases the source code itself and not the > binaries - when there are any at all. But for OpenOffice it's > different. They should know us long enough to know this difference. > > PS: > It's never forbidden to ask for facts. ;-) Heise has been a good source for information... 20 years ago... Now they are not relevant anymore. Matthias > > Marcus > > > >> Am 17.04.2017 um 16:18 schrieb Marcus: >>> Am 10.04.2017 um 20:38 schrieb Marcus: Thanks for this. My intention was not to get answers to the questions. They were more ment as rough ideas for what could be added to the cook book. ;-) However, I'll take them for addition, but not before Easter. >>> >>> I've added the topics now to the cook book [1] and incorporated them >>> into the "Initiating a Release" section. After looking twice they seem >>> to fit very well there. >>> >>> [1] >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/How+to+Cook+a+Release >>> >>> >>> Marcus >>> >>> >>> Am 08.04.2017 um 10:28 schrieb Andrea Pescetti: > On 07/04/2017 Marcus wrote: >> Am 06.04.2017 um 00:11 schrieb Patricia Shanahan: >>> If it needs to be done early, put it early in the document. > > Tagging is not to be done early. We tag retroactively, once a RC is > approved. > > I don't care about the Github mirror very much, since it is > unofficial, > poorly maintained, it shows wrong numbers and it even stopped working > for many months last year. That said, the issue Matthias raised > affect > SVN too, so it is still relevant: > > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/tags/ > > Also note: Github "releases" based on tags are not the same as our > official releases; it's the same source code of course, but there are > minor packaging details. So the Github releases in themselves > (like the > Github repository overall) have no value. Ask me to expand if this is > unclear. > >> Let's create a new section like >> "Build Preparations" and put the following stuff (and more, of >> course) >> there: >> - How to create new SVN tag? > > Again, this happens retroactively, when a specific RC is voted. At > that > point, you simply SVN copy the branch to the tag. > > How do you do this? > > 1. Double-check what version was built (for 4.1.3 it's Rev. 1761381, > you > find it even in the About Box); of course, if this happens during the > release process, the Release Manager knows it. > > 2. Find the relevant branch in > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/branches/ (in this case it's > AOO413 and revision number is indeed 1761381) and check it is aligned > (it is, since the two revisions match). > > 3. SVN copy the branch to the tag. You can do it locally but it's > much > more efficient to do it remotely. So, from anywhere on a machine with > SVN access, just run: > > $ svn copy > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO413 > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO413 -m "AOO > revision > 1761381 from branch AOO413 was voted to be released as Apache > OpenOffice > 4.1.3 in October 2016" > > Committed revision 1790662. > > This results in the new tag appearing at > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/tags/ (while at it I fixed > the > missing 4.1.3 tag, so I did run the command above). > >> - How to check out code? > > Just "svn checkout" the relevant branch. Starting with 4.1.3 we have > been using dedicated branches, so naming is now obvious (we had been > reusing branches in precedence, like AOO410 was used for 4.1.0, 4.1.1 > and 4.1.2). Branches are listed at > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/branches/ > > So: > > $ svn checkout > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO413 > >> - How to do a build with release options? > > Use the scripts at > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/devtools/build-scripts/ > > The 4.1.2 scripts are
