2013/7/31 Andrea Pescetti
> On 30/07/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>>
>>> If your extension is compatible with AOO 4.0, please take a moment to
>>> update the extension's compatibility information so that end-users will
>>> know it works with
Hi,
On 31.07.2013 13:12, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
On 30/07/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
If your extension is compatible with AOO 4.0, please take a moment to
update the extension's compatibility information so that end-users will
know it works wi
On 30/07/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
If your extension is compatible with AOO 4.0, please take a moment to
update the extension's compatibility information so that end-users will
know it works with the latest release. If your extension is not co
Top posting
Same as Rob.
Hagar
Le 30/07/2013 15:55, Rob Weir a écrit :
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Roberto Galoppini
wrote:
2013/7/29 Roberto Galoppini
2013/7/27 Rob Weir
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Roberto Galoppini
wrote:
2013/7/27 Rob Weir
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 5
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Roberto Galoppini
wrote:
> 2013/7/29 Roberto Galoppini
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/7/27 Rob Weir
>>
>>> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Roberto Galoppini
>>> wrote:
>>> > 2013/7/27 Rob Weir
>>> >
>>> >> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Hagar Delest <
>>> hagar.del...@l
2013/7/29 Roberto Galoppini
>
>
>
> 2013/7/27 Rob Weir
>
>> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Roberto Galoppini
>> wrote:
>> > 2013/7/27 Rob Weir
>> >
>> >> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Hagar Delest <
>> hagar.del...@laposte.net>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Le 26/07/2013 15:40, Roberto Galoppini a
2013/7/27 Rob Weir
> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Roberto Galoppini
> wrote:
> > 2013/7/27 Rob Weir
> >
> >> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Hagar Delest >
> >> wrote:
> >> > Le 26/07/2013 15:40, Roberto Galoppini a écrit :
> >> >
> >> >> A) a link to a version compatible with AOO 4.0 has
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Roberto Galoppini
wrote:
> 2013/7/27 Rob Weir
>
>> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Hagar Delest
>> wrote:
>> > Le 26/07/2013 15:40, Roberto Galoppini a écrit :
>> >
>> >> A) a link to a version compatible with AOO 4.0 has been added for
>> >> http://extensions.o
2013/7/27 Rob Weir
> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Hagar Delest
> wrote:
> > Le 26/07/2013 15:40, Roberto Galoppini a écrit :
> >
> >> A) a link to a version compatible with AOO 4.0 has been added for
> >> http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/pdfimport and
> >> http://extensions.openof
On 26/07/2013 Hagar Delest wrote:
Here we are. The first messages (ML and forum) about incompatibility are
coming.
I'm keeping
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Extensions/Extensions_and_Apache_OpenOffice_4.0
up-to-date with what is reported on this list. Feel free to collect
further information
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Hagar Delest wrote:
> Le 26/07/2013 15:40, Roberto Galoppini a écrit :
>
>> A) a link to a version compatible with AOO 4.0 has been added for
>> http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/pdfimport and
>> http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/mysql_connector
Le 26/07/2013 15:40, Roberto Galoppini a écrit :
A) a link to a version compatible with AOO 4.0 has been added for
http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/pdfimport and
http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/mysql_connector
B) 4.0" has been added to the list of possible compatibilities.
2013/7/26 Hagar Delest
> Top posting.
>
> Here we are. The first messages (ML and forum) about incompatibility are
> coming.
> The identified extensions (with toolbar and not updated for 4.0) should be
> at least tagged in the extension site as not compatible with 4.0.
>
This has been already d
Top posting.
Here we are. The first messages (ML and forum) about incompatibility are coming.
The identified extensions (with toolbar and not updated for 4.0) should be at
least tagged in the extension site as not compatible with 4.0.
A quick tutorial on how to update the extension in case auth
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Herbert Dürr wrote:
> On 2013/03/07 11:41 AM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>>
>> Below the list of Extensions top downloads during the last month:
>>
>> #1 http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/node/3620 Monthly: 1725
>> [...]
>>
>> #50 http://extensions.services.op
On 2013/03/07 11:41 AM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
Below the list of Extensions top downloads during the last month:
#1 http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/node/3620 Monthly: 1725
[...]
#50 http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/node/3409 Monthly: 42
The extension popularity list is ver
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 2/25/13 4:36 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Jürgen Schmidt
>> wrote:
>>> On 2/21/13 10:05 AM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 09:22:34AM +0100, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>> Th
On 2/25/13 4:36 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> On 2/21/13 10:05 AM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 09:22:34AM +0100, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> The first step should be a simple check if an Addons.xcu is
>> c
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 2/21/13 10:05 AM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 09:22:34AM +0100, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> The first step should be a simple check if an Addons.xcu is
> contained at all. Something like "unzip -l | grep
>
On 2/21/13 10:05 AM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 09:22:34AM +0100, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
The first step should be a simple check if an Addons.xcu is
contained at all. Something like "unzip -l | grep
Addons.xcu" should be enough. The second step if an
Hi,
It would also be interesting to know the last time the extension was
updated; besides that expecting unmaintained extensions to work on a new
major release might not be plausible, the extension is likely not be
adapted to any change if it is unmaintained, no matter how popular it is
(exampl
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 09:22:34AM +0100, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> >> The first step should be a simple check if an Addons.xcu is contained at
> >> all. Something like "unzip -l | grep Addons.xcu" should be
> >> enough. The second step if an Addons.xcu is contained is to check for
> >> the "" entry
On 2/20/13 8:14 PM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On 2/17/13 10:36 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>>> On 12/02/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
If we support both the
underlying code would be more complex, slower and more ugly to maintain.
>
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 2/17/13 10:36 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> > On 12/02/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> >> If we support both the
> >> underlying code would be more complex, slower and more ugly to maintain.
> >
> > OK. I had understood this part, so let's ha
On 2/17/13 10:36 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> On 12/02/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> If we support both the
>> underlying code would be more complex, slower and more ugly to maintain.
>
> OK. I had understood this part, so let's have a detailed description of
> the impact before we see how to hand
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> My impression was that even if we made no changes, from the user's
> perspective, they would lose all extensions. This is due to the
> change in base directory for the profile. So all extensions would be
> lost and need to be reinstalled. So th
On 12/02/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
If we support both the
underlying code would be more complex, slower and more ugly to maintain.
OK. I had understood this part, so let's have a detailed description of
the impact before we see how to handle this.
The whole discussion is really based on as
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Hagar Delest wrote:
> Le 12/02/2013 13:05, Rob Weir a écrit :
>
>> I don't know. I was asking a question. But I think this is an
>> important question: Why would an extension author not update their
>> extension for AOO 4.0? Some hypothetical answers:
>>
>> 1)
Le 12/02/2013 13:05, Rob Weir a écrit :
I don't know. I was asking a question. But I think this is an
important question: Why would an extension author not update their
extension for AOO 4.0? Some hypothetical answers:
1) The extension is unmaintained
One of the top reasons I guess. I mysl
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 01:42:42PM +0100, Joost Andrae wrote:
> Hi,
>
> in the moment I have just one question in mind:
>
> Who's going to adapt the Sun/Oracle extensions that contain
> Addons.xcu like presentation-minimizer.oxt ?
This extension does not provide a toolbar of its own, it uses onl
On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 15:06:27 +0100
Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 2/12/13 2:15 PM, Rory O'Farrell wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 14:07:59 +0100
> > Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> >
> >> On 2/12/13 1:42 PM, Joost Andrae wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> in the moment I have just one question in mind:
> >>>
> >>
On 2/12/13 2:15 PM, Rory O'Farrell wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 14:07:59 +0100
> Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On 2/12/13 1:42 PM, Joost Andrae wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> in the moment I have just one question in mind:
>>>
>>> Who's going to adapt the Sun/Oracle extensions that contain Addons.xcu
>>> li
On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 14:07:59 +0100
Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 2/12/13 1:42 PM, Joost Andrae wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > in the moment I have just one question in mind:
> >
> > Who's going to adapt the Sun/Oracle extensions that contain Addons.xcu
> > like presentation-minimizer.oxt ?
>
> well the e
On 2/12/13 1:42 PM, Joost Andrae wrote:
> Hi,
>
> in the moment I have just one question in mind:
>
> Who's going to adapt the Sun/Oracle extensions that contain Addons.xcu
> like presentation-minimizer.oxt ?
well the extensions where we have the source code can be changed by
volunteers. Maybe d
Hi,
in the moment I have just one question in mind:
Who's going to adapt the Sun/Oracle extensions that contain Addons.xcu
like presentation-minimizer.oxt ?
8) Inconvenience -- it is natural for anyone to complain about needing
to do additional work where they don't see the advantage. So i
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 4:11 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 2/12/13 12:41 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Hagar Delest
>> wrote:
>>> Le 11/02/2013 22:46, Rob Weir a écrit :
My impression was that even if we made no changes, from the user's
perspective, they
On 2/12/13 12:41 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Hagar Delest
> wrote:
>> Le 11/02/2013 22:46, Rob Weir a écrit :
>>>
>>> My impression was that even if we made no changes, from the user's
>>> perspective, they would lose all extensions. This is due to the
>>> change in ba
On 2/12/13 12:03 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> On 11/02/2013 Hagar Delest wrote:
>> No real problem with reinstalling extensions after a major upgrade, I've
>> done that too.
>> But there is a difference between the mere inconvenience of reinstalling
>> extensions and losing them completely (waiting
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 6:03 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>> On 11/02/2013 Hagar Delest wrote:
>>>
>>> No real problem with reinstalling extensions after a major upgrade, I've
>>> done that too.
>>> But there is a difference between the mere inconv
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 6:03 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> On 11/02/2013 Hagar Delest wrote:
>>
>> No real problem with reinstalling extensions after a major upgrade, I've
>> done that too.
>> But there is a difference between the mere inconvenience of reinstalling
>> extensions and losing them com
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Hagar Delest wrote:
> Le 11/02/2013 22:46, Rob Weir a écrit :
>>
>> My impression was that even if we made no changes, from the user's
>> perspective, they would lose all extensions. This is due to the
>> change in base directory for the profile. So all extension
On 11/02/2013 Hagar Delest wrote:
No real problem with reinstalling extensions after a major upgrade, I've
done that too.
But there is a difference between the mere inconvenience of reinstalling
extensions and losing them completely (waiting that someone dare update
them).
The real issue is her
Le 11/02/2013 22:46, Rob Weir a écrit :
My impression was that even if we made no changes, from the user's
perspective, they would lose all extensions. This is due to the
change in base directory for the profile. So all extensions would be
lost and need to be reinstalled. So there will be no d
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Hagar Delest wrote:
> You certainly have seen from the 0^0 discussion that I have raised the
> problem of the backward compatibility with 4.0 and extensions. In fact, it
> affects only the extensions with a custom toolbar. But except the
> dictionaries, I guess tha
You certainly have seen from the 0^0 discussion that I have raised the problem
of the backward compatibility with 4.0 and extensions. In fact, it affects only
the extensions with a custom toolbar. But except the dictionaries, I guess that
it makes a good deal of them still.
The problem has bee
45 matches
Mail list logo
