Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Top Posting... Can we have an LO Mailing List Guidelines Page?

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-09-10 7:31 AM, Ken Springer  wrote:

At this point, this add-on would seem to eliminate the need of trimming,
too.


No, no, NO... trimming should still be required.

All QuoteCollapse does is spare me a lot of pain when I encounter morons 
who refuse to trim posts...


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Top Posting... Can we have an LO Mailing List Guidelines Page?

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-09-11 9:47 PM, Ken Springer  wrote:

Even if they did push it through, if no one enforces the eventual rule,
the time will be wasted.  I'd prefer interspersion, as I almost always
have to scroll around somewhere in order to remember what was being
replied to.


Most people who advocate for bottom posting really mean inline, aka 
'interspersed' posting anyway...


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Top Posting... Can we have an LO Mailing List Guidelines Page?

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-09-12 8:42 PM, Robert Holtzman  wrote:

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 05:06:49PM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:

On 2011-09-11 9:47 PM, Ken Springer  wrote:

Even if they did push it through, if no one enforces the eventual rule,
the time will be wasted.  I'd prefer interspersion, as I almost always
have to scroll around somewhere in order to remember what was being
replied to.



Most people who advocate for bottom posting really mean inline, aka
'interspersed' posting anyway...



I think you will find that most people are smart enough to know the
difference.


I think you overestimate the intelligence of 'most people'.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Top Posting...

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-10-02 2:38 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:

On 10/2/11 at 09:07, Italo Vignoli wrote:

I have published a comprehensive Mailing List Netiquette, which should
satisfy your needs.

http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette

Of course, a mailing list netiquette is just a reference document, and
we cannot kill people who ignore it (the majority of users ignore the
simple existence of the netiquette).


> Thank you for the Mailing List Netiquette page.

And yet you continue to top-post, totally ignoring the recommendations...

PLONK

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] RE: [libreoffice-users] Re: OASIS Standard ODF 1.2 Approved

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-10-04 5:58 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:




what is with this stupid quoting/replying method???

Oh... Outlook user...

Never mind...

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Top Posting... Can we have an LO Mailing List Guidelines Page?

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-10-20 4:52 AM, Mélodie  wrote:

I've used Quote Colors for quite some time, at each update of TB I get
error messages, then mysteriously all starts to work again within a
couple of days without any intervention from my part, and without an
update to QC (is working at the moment).


It is called a compatibility update...

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Show prominently on web site first page 64 bit problem.

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-11-04 4:48 AM, sjonnie  wrote:

i think it is only fair to warn people with a 64 bit OS that we do not
function well on a 64 bit OS.

2 friends have asked for help since they bought a new laptop with a 64 bit
OS.

now they are pissed off because they were not told about this problem.


What problem? We are using LibO 3.4.3 32 bit on Windows 7 Pro 64 bit 
with zero issues...


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Show prominently on web site first page 64 bit problem.

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-11-04 9:29 AM, sjonnie  wrote:

OS is windows 7 ultimate sp1 with internet explo. completely locked up and
using firefox 7.

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39659  more talk about java
1.7.0


The solution is simple - DON'T USE JRE7.

This is a well known issue.

I NEVER upgrade to the first (or second) version of a major upgrade to 
ANYTHING. You're just asking for trouble.


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Status of .docX etc.

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-12-13 3:11 PM, Italo Vignoli  wrote:

On 13/12/2011 14:43, Harold Fuchs wrote:


Can LO read/import these formats for *editing*? All of them? If not, which?


Yes, all of them.


Can LO write/export these formats? All of them? If not, which?


Yes, all of them, although - given the immense complexity and the non
standard nature of MS Office formats - interoperability is not perfect,
and the layout of the documents might have slight differences.


Fr from perfect...

Some of the most irritating issues we've had is changes to page 
layout/format for printing are never saved.


The first thing I check when somoene is having a problem with a document 
is if it is in this format - if it is, saving it as odf almost always 
solves the problem.


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] overall communication guidelines and reply-to mangling

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-12-14 6:41 PM, Florian Effenberger 
 wrote:

So, my point is the following:

- I have people strongly asking for disabling reply-to mangling, e.g. on
the website list.

- I have people strongly asking for leaving reply-to mangling as is.

- So, whatever I do, someone will be upset.

- I myself would like to keep reply-to mangling as is, as I have set it
up for good reasons.

- We have been discussing that issue for two months now without any
clear result, it still is that some people want it, some don't.

So, what shall I do? Flip a coin?


On the dovecot mail list, the user can CHOOSE whether or not reply-to 
mangling is used. So, the best of both worlds. I believe they are using 
mailman for the list server.


I understand there are technical reasons (mainly to do with the ability 
of list admins to have their own separate passwords) that you don't want 
to use mailman, but these problems are all solved by the up and coming 
mailman3.


So, my proposal is to DEFER this decision until after mailman3 is 
released, migrate the lists to mailman3, then simply document how 
individual list subscribers can choose their poison.


I'd also suggest that the DEFAULT be to enable reply-to mangling, and 
explain to the user how they can change this in the welcom emessage that 
is sent.


Charles

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] overall communication guidelines and reply-to mangling

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-12-19 6:31 AM, Florian Effenberger 
 wrote:

Friedrich Strohmaier wrote on 2011-12-15 23:56:

As well the proposal of Charles (Tanstaafl) of having a choice
while subscribing is worth considering. Maybe there is a possibility to
have a further subscribing mode with mlmmj. If possible, this might be
not ideal, but should be no problem for a dev mind. But this is nothing
to be in effect within days.


indeed. I don't know if this approach makes sense - it causes more
system load (because mails have to be processed twice), and needs
development time.


My quggestion was not to code this from scratch im mlmmj, it was to wait 
until Mailman3 is released, and simply migrate all of the lists to it - 
which fits in well with your last statement:



Well, since it's Christmas soon anyways, and I am busy with "real life"
things ;), I will keep my hands off this topic anyways for the moment. I
still think we should do something soon, as the developers have been
asking for a change for months, two of them we discussed - but I myself
won't have time before next year, so let's leave it at that for now...



--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] overall communication guidelines and reply-to mangling

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-12-19 1:26 PM, Florian Effenberger 
 wrote:

I think migrating to Mailman 3 will take a while, since it requires
lots of efforts to switch our mail system, I guess.


I would wager that if whoever would be tasked with doing this was to ask 
nicely on the mailman-dev list, you would get lots of help with the 
migration to make it easy/smooth.



Apart from that, Mailman 3 has not been released yet, so I would
consider such an option to be realistic - if we want it at all -
within 6 to 12 months.


Well... the first beta is scheduled to be released in January, so I 
imagine it will be rtm by mid year, so if you were to start working on 
the logistics and infrastructure, and start a dialog with the mailman 
devs on how to migrate the users/settings from mlmmj to mailman, that 
you could be ready to go as soon as the release happens...


But, obviously, it will not be without effort...

Anyway, thats my .02 clad coins worth...

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] removing mailing list prefixes?

[Tanstaafl]

I vote for removing them from ALL lists...

On 2012-08-01 6:28 PM, Florian Ehrenberg  
wrote:

Hello,

today, a discussion started on the certification mailing list whether we
want to get rid of those mailing list prefixes in the subject, like
[libreoffice-announce], [libreoffice-conference] or [tdf-discuss].

This would be helpful in several ways, like DKIM and other e-mail
signing tools don't break, plus it looks much better in the mail overview.

However, this depends on how people filter their e-mail. Filtering on
the subject line is a *real* bad idea, rather use the List-Post or
List-Id header. However, some mail clients don't support that.

So, my question is:
Are there mailing lists where we could get rid of this prefix? What do
people think?

I would imagine that for the users list, removing the prefix is a bad
idea, while for other lists, it could work pretty well.

Thoughts?
Florian




--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Reply settings on this list have changed

[Tanstaafl]

On 2012-08-12 12:26 PM, Florian Effenberger 
 wrote:

I know we had numerous discussions on this topic in the past, but the
outcome was that roughly 50% were for this change, and 50% refused it,
so I am really sitting between two chairs here, for which I beg for your
understanding. On the one hand, those complaining the lists are unusable
with reply-to mangling, on the other hand, those complaining the lists
are unusable without reply-to mangling. Unfortunately, combining those
two, even on a per-recipient basis, is not possible, so they are
mutually exclusive to each other.

In order to find out the real impact, I simply changed the setting, and
again, I beg for your understanding.


The ideal would be a way for this setting to be per user...

I'm fairly sure the new Mailman3 will allow this... and there are lots 
more reasons to migrate once it is released/stable as well.


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Adding the browser to Libreoffice

[Tanstaafl]

Please don't.

This is just stupid, and would be a total waste of developer resources.

There are plenty of browsers to choose from.

On 2012-11-08 4:04 PM, Randolph D.  wrote:

Dear all,
after some talks with some board members, the request rised to include more
members and developers in the idea of adding a browser to Libreoffice.
We know this needs time and work, but would not be impossible to add it to
the installer and create a place to be for it, and see, how the community
reacts to it and requests more interaction. This security orientated webkit
browser would be a good codebasis for that:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/dooble/
Any pro or cons from anyone? No person in the office works today without
the internet, the consequence is, an office suite needs or could provide an
open source browser. Anyone interested to test or join the idea or
recommendations for the steps to plan?
Regards Randolph




--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] LO vs AOO : GPL/LGPL vs ASL licences

[Tanstaafl]

I think the most important distinction to an end user, aside from 
knowing that both allow them to *use* the software in any way they see 
fit - personal, commercial, etc, is that the LO project is able to 
benefit from AOO code, but AOO is not allowed to benefit from the LO code.



On 2013-01-01 1:17 PM, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak  wrote:

On 12/31/2012 02:40 PM, Immanuel Giulea wrote:

In the marketing materials that I am writing covering LO vs AOO, I was
wondering if it would be relevant to go into an explanation about why the
GPL/LGPL licence used by LO was superior to the ASL as a "true open
source".


An average user does not care and will likely only be confused by any
claim that LO is better than AOO based on LO using a more restrictive
license or some sort of moral high ground that people should only use
software using this license.  I expect that the more a person cares
about the distinction, the more likely they will not need marketing
material to explain it to them.


I found this great document that explains the three "most common"
licences:
ASL, GPL and LGPL (MPL is not included) (1, 2)

Any thoughts on how relevant it would be to extract some of the
information
and apply it on the materials?


Almost none. If you do desire to add something, I would probably say
something like this (but with cleaned up wording and more thought).
"Project contributors will note ". Or have a section
that calls out advantages specifically for people that changes stuff and
contribute it back. The license is a choice, and some will prefer it and
some will not.






Cheers and Happy New Year

Immanuel

(1)
http://www.openlogic.com/Portals/172122/docs/understanding-the-three-most-common-open-source-licenses.pdf

(2) http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/10518967






--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] creation of a Persona Gallery Page on LO page system

[Tanstaafl]

On 2013-02-18 2:00 PM, webmaster-Kracked_P_P 
 wrote:

I just found out that LibreOffice does not use the font color that the
FF Persona designs call for.  So if the menu color is white in Firefox,
LO will still use the black menu color.  That really messes up people
who want a dark color background that works well with FF.


So you reported the bug? Bug#?

;)

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Is this a bug?

[Tanstaafl]

On 2013-09-23 11:20 AM, Terrence Enger  wrote:

BTW, thank you, Pedro, for noticing that this list has been unhelpful
in the past.  If questions like these should go somewhere else,
guidance is welcome.


This list is NOT intended for general Libreoffice support, it is 
intended for discussion of topics related to: The Document Foundation.


If you want support for Libreoffice, please use the Libreoffice users list:

us...@global.libreoffice.org

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Java still broke on LibreOffice 5.1.1

[Tanstaafl]

On 3/11/2016 12:51 PM, Larry Gusaas  wrote:
> On 2016-03-11, 4:18 AM Alexander Thurgood wrote:
>> Le 11/03/2016 01:47, Larry Gusaas a écrit :
>>> LibreOffice 5.1.1 on Macs still doesn't recognize Java Runtime
>>> Environment (JRE 1.8.0_73 & OS X ver.10.11.3)
>>>
>>> You need to fix this bug. Can't use database without JRE.
>>>
>> Cf. bug 96163
>>
>> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96163

> That is not a fix but a workaround. Fix it.

Since this is only a problem on Mac, are you sure it isn't a bug caused
by Apple/OSX?

Maybe THEY should 'fix it'.

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Java still broke on LibreOffice 5.1.1

[Tanstaafl]

Why is this thread in the tdf-discuss list?

On 3/11/2016 3:28 PM, Larry Gusaas  wrote:
> Proof??? JRE works with 5.0 and doesn't work with 5.1. That is pretty 
> objective  proof. 
> LibreOffice code changed and now does not find JRE on OS X.
> 
> In case you weren't paying attention when 5.1.0 came out, here are some posts 
> from a thread 
> "Java broke on LO 5.1 on Macs"
> from the us...@global.libreoffice.org mailing list. Note the comment /*"I'm 
> not sure we did 
> ourselves a favour with that change..."*/.

And in that very thread - started by you - it was explained - to you -
that this was a *deliberate* code change to address a *broken* JRE
provided by Apple (the fact that you had to have the Java6 JRE installed
to get the Jave8 JRE installed is a clue that something wasn't right,
no?)...

I quote V Stuart Foote:

> No, Oracle  must fix the JRE, or Apple must correct OS X Java system calls. 
> Until then, LO for tdf#94716 now requires use of the unaffected JDK -- at
> the expense of OS X users now having to install the JDK rather than a broken
> JRE to access the Java runtimes.
> 
> See Oracle's notes:
> http://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7131356
> 
> The LibreOffice details are in  tdf#74877
> and  
> tdf#94716   
> 
> LibreOffice has no skin in the game beyond running the Java based HSQLDB 
> for Base internal database--and when we fully move to FireBird very little
> requirement for Java going forward.  Java runtime -- from a JRE or JDK
> becomes irrelevant to the project.

So, you are complaining about a Mac bug here... please take it to the
appropriate place (wherever you report Mac bugs)...

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Java still broke on LibreOffice 5.1.1

[Tanstaafl]

On 3/11/2016 4:19 PM, Larry Gusaas  wrote:

On 3/11/2016 4:19 PM, Larry Gusaas  wrote:
> No. It is a LibreOffice bug. You broke the usability of LibreOffice
> on Macs with your code change.

*I* broke it? Sorry Larry I'm just a user like you.

> It worked before.

Past performance is no guarantee of future performance.

Libreoffice *fixed* a bug that brought to light a Mac bug.

Deal with it.

It isn't Libreoffice's responsibility to 'work around' everyone else's bugs.

> Any new user of LibreOffice on Macs will find out the database
> doesn't work.

No - they will find that a *few* features/functions won't work.

The reality is *most* will never know it.

> It is not Apples's responsibility to make your software usable

There is a *bug* in Apple's provided JRE package that has been there for
a very long time.

The Libreoffice devs finally decided to make a change to their code that
stops 'working around' Apple's long standing bug (at least thats how I
read the comments)...

There is a simple workaround that *you* can employ - install the JDK -
until Apple fixes *their* JRE package bug.

Enjoy...

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Java still broke on LibreOffice 5.1.1

[Tanstaafl]

On 3/11/2016 6:22 PM, Larry Gusaas  wrote:
> On 2016-03-11, 4:11 PM Tanstaafl wrote:
>> On 3/11/2016 4:19 PM, Larry Gusaas  wrote:
>>> No. It is a LibreOffice bug. You broke the usability of LibreOffice
>>> on Macs with your code change.

>> *I* broke it? Sorry Larry I'm just a user like you.

> It's obvious that "you" on a product mailing list refers to the LibreOffice 
> developers.Quit 
> being pedantic.

Actually, why don't you stop acting like a spoiled child?

>> Libreoffice *fixed* a bug that brought to light a Mac bug.

> No. LibreOffice broke it's usability on OS X. If it makes a product for OS X 
> it should work for 
> OS X as it currently exists.

And every time a new bug crops up in OSX, it is on every other software
developer to work around their bugs?

> It did not bring to light a Mac bug. The requirement for the older 
> Apple developed version of Java to be installed has been known for
> several years and is mentioned in the installation notes.

And it is a BUG - or rather, a very poor Apple workaround for a long
standing (meaning may likely never get fixed so deal with it) Java bug.

But my understanding is that Apple *could* fix it, they just chose the
easiest way, probably because they don't give a crap about Java (just
like they ditched Flash support a very long time ago).

> By the way, the bug is in Java. The installation of the old Apple 
> Java is the long-known workaround. The current version broke that
> functionality.

Correct - so complain to Apple about their crappy workaround, complain
to Oracle to fix the JRE, or stfu and just implement the new workaround
to install the JDK.

> Yeah. Mac users will deal with it. They'll quit using LibreOffice.

No, most will just install the JDK and move on.

>> The Libreoffice devs finally decided to make a change to their code that
>> stops 'working around' Apple's long standing bug (at least thats how I
>> read the comments)...
> 
> Actually, it's a bug in Java.

I actually knew it was a Java bug, but it is apparently very long
standing, which means it may never get fixed. The bug I was referring to
above was Apple's BUGGY (lazy) workaround.

> You obviously didn't do a lot of research.

This is the first time I've seen *you* say it was a Java bug - which
begs the question, if you knew it was a Java bug, why are you
complaining here? So now it is Libreoffice's responsibility to not only
fix Apple bugs (lazy/crappy workarounds) but to fix Oracle JRE bugs as well?

>> There is a simple workaround that *you* can employ - install the JDK -
>> until Apple fixes *their* JRE package bug.

> And that fact is not mentioned in the installation instructions or
> in the release note.

This is really the only legitimate complaint that you have presented
during this entire riduculous thread.

> And until the release of 5.1 there was no need to install the JDK.

Things/requirements change.

> And, unless you are a developer, there is no other need for it.

Actually there is - it is now required if you want Libreoffice 5.1+ to
recognize Java8 on a Mac because of Apple's longstanding broken JRE
packaging and a very long standing bug in Java (or is it just the Java
packaging?) itself.

> Besides, it takes up a lot more disk space on your computer.

Rotflmao!

The exact same argument could be made about having to install the old,
extremely insecure Java6 just to make Java8 work.

> I have my own workaround. Use a different product.

Thank god its still a relatively free country.

> This bug will create a very negative impression of LibreOffice among Mac 
> users. That is why I 
> keep reiterating that LibreOffice needs to fix the problem
> 
> Obviously you don't care about Mac users.

Wrong, I just don't care about cry babies who refuse to acknowledge
reality, but prefer to cry and threaten to hold their breath if they
don't get their way.

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Java still broke on LibreOffice 5.1.1

[Tanstaafl]

On 3/14/2016 9:51 PM, Larry Gusaas  wrote:
> My "Fix it" comment was aimed at LibreOffice in general, not to you 
> specifically.

Oh, so you prefer to issue 'general purpose' commands and edicts rather
than ones aimed at spoecific people. How very thoughtful.

> You are one of the people who understands the issue.

Unlike yourself, who refuses to acknowledge where the bug really lies
(Oracle/Java combined with a broken JRE package provided by Apple).

Apple worshippers are the worst kind of fanatic.

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-06-08 12:25 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> On Jun 8, 2011, at 11:17 AM, M Henri Day wrote:
>> Jim, thank you for your considered - and considerate ! - reply.
>> The circumstances being what they are, would not the best path for
>> ASF to take(as seems to me to be the case) be to accept the grant
>> (in the event Oracle is offering it *nulla condicione astrictus*)
>> and then donate both the code and the trademark to TDF, given the
>> great work that the latter has been doing on LibreOffice ?...

> It's possible, sure, but if the ASF were to do this, then I would
> expect that they/we would spent quite a bit of time determining the
> "best" place for it... Not saying that it's not TDF, but who knows...
> Not a slam against TDF at all, just an honest statement that we don't
> know where it would go.

I honestly don't know how you can say that with a straight face...
Where *else* would even be a *remotely* viable candidate?

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-06-08 2:04 PM, BRM wrote:
> Like all the venom towards Oracle, OOo, and ASF that has been spewed 
> by TDF members and contributors on this topic over the last few days?

Very little of the negative reaction has been directed at the ASF,
mostly it is directed at Oracle...

Personally, I think it is silly - LibO obviously has moved way past
where OOo was, so it is imho a non issue...

Rest in peace, OOo... long live LibO!

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-06-18 5:39 AM, Simos Xenitellis wrote:
> And there is no better way to do this than have the 'git repositories'
> of the LibreOffice source code.

You were correct earlier - he is merely pointing out that nowhere in the
license agreement (I haven't read it so am not making the same claim)
does it say where or how to GET ACCESS TO the source code.

If this is true, it should be rectified immediately.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: LibO 3.4.2 RC1 under Windows

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-07-19 8:10 AM, Jesús Corrius wrote:
> 2. The versions of the C++ libraries we are distributing are the last
> ones available from Microsoft as a full package. According to the
> security bulletin:

That isn't the point...

NO software should EVER force the installation of older libraries when
newer versions are already installed.

TEST for the existence of whatever is required - if it (required version
OR NEWER) is already installed, SKIP the installation of that component.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: LibO 3.4.2 RC1 under Windows

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-07-19 9:47 AM, Jesús Corrius wrote:
> We can detect if there a new version installed, and then do nothing,
> but the trade-off will be to make LibreOffice less reliable.

Or, you could code LibO to force a 'repair install' of the *existing*
version so that it does work fine, and only install the included version
if no other version is already installed.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] ignore m$ legacy?

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-07-28 4:40 PM, Jomar Silva  wrote:
> In summary: It's good to users that we support MSO files, but the real
> world side effect of that is that people will keep using MSO files...
> it's up to us to find a way to change the Status Quo in a smooth way

It'll never happen...

For better or worse, MSO has the lions share of the market, and no
amount of chest thumping will change it.

MSO support can and MUST be maintained, and in fact improved on an
ongoing basis now and 'forever'...

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] ignore m$ legacy?

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-07-28 4:54 PM, Olivier Hallot
 wrote:
> What you say is almost that we should give up on ODF and stick with
> Microsoft formats...

Not at all...

> I would prefer that LO import MSO format flawlessly but not export them at
> all...

My same response - that eliminates LibO as an option for people who
*must* exchange documents with people who are using MSO on an ongoing
basis - which is 95% of the corporate world.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted