oh sorry I just realized this discussion was from 4 years ago! it seemed
more recent at first. I see there is a wiki page for Groovy
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Groovy_UNO_Extension , and I saw now a
reference to Carl's github repo https://github.com/cbmarcum/guno-extension .
-- John
On Fri,
I've touched up the wiki page in the past week or so, as I've been using
the Netbeans plugin on more recent versions of Netbeans.
I believe Patricia was asking about the wiki for the Groovy / Gradle tests?
Is there any information on how to proceed in testing the Groovy / Gradle
implementation?
O
On 03/27/2016 10:59 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
On 3/27/2016 3:53 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
On 03/27/2016 05:01 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
On 3/27/2016 12:26 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
...
When we have three PMC members willing to commit to voting (at due
time)
on the NetBeans plugin, this di
On 3/27/2016 3:53 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
On 03/27/2016 05:01 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
On 3/27/2016 12:26 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
...
When we have three PMC members willing to commit to voting (at due time)
on the NetBeans plugin, this discussion will make sense. Otherwise we
are wasting
On 03/27/2016 05:01 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
On 3/27/2016 12:26 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
...
When we have three PMC members willing to commit to voting (at due time)
on the NetBeans plugin, this discussion will make sense. Otherwise we
are wasting our time.
I generally have at least one
On 3/27/2016 12:26 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
...
When we have three PMC members willing to commit to voting (at due time)
on the NetBeans plugin, this discussion will make sense. Otherwise we
are wasting our time.
I generally have at least one Windows box with Netbeans installed, so I
should
+1 on the three PMC members
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2016 12:26
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache OpenOffice API plugin for NetBeans
>
> Dennis E. Hami
Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
From: Andrea Pescetti
On 27/03/2016 Patricia Shanahan wrote:
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html.
Then all of us are violating the policy every time we update the
website.
[orcmid]
That is not the case for *any* Apache Project web site or the web site for
Apache i
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2016 09:46
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache OpenOffice API plugin for NetBeans
>
> On 27/03/2016 Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>
On 27/03/2016 Patricia Shanahan wrote:
On 3/26/2016 10:37 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
3) We recognize that http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ has
different areas, and that not all of them should be subject to the same
policy. Just like I don't call a release vote when I change a web page
(t
On 03/26/2016 05:58 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2016 10:38
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache OpenOffice API plugin for NetBeans
On 20/03/2016 Patricia
On 3/26/2016 2:58 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
-Original Message- From: Andrea Pescetti
[mailto:pesce...@apache.org] Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2016 10:38
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache
OpenOffice API plugin for NetBeans
On 20/03/2016 Patricia
On 3/26/2016 10:37 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
On 20/03/2016 Patricia Shanahan wrote:
The issue is whether it is ASF distributed software, for which ASF
trademarks can appropriately be used. I think it is and should continue
to be ASF distributed software.
...
3) We recognize that http://svn.ap
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
> Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2016 10:38
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache OpenOffice API plugin for NetBeans
>
> On 20/03/2016 Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> &
On 20/03/2016 Patricia Shanahan wrote:
The issue is whether it is ASF distributed software, for which ASF
trademarks can appropriately be used. I think it is and should continue
to be ASF distributed software.
So far we've adopted another approach: it is a development tool meant to
ease OpenOf
elsewhere is a
good idea.
-Original Message-
From: Carl Marcum [mailto:cmar...@apache.org]
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 09:49
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache OpenOffice API plugin for NetBeans
[ ... ]
I do prefer this is from the project and if it needs
s of Apache
OpenOffice, it can be taken to Apache legal and elsewhere
where review and approval at the Foundation level is
required.
- Dennis
-Original Message-
From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 04:31
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Relea
+1
I think exploring that source being at ASF and the artifact be elsewhere is a
good idea.
> -Original Message-
> From: Carl Marcum [mailto:cmar...@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 09:49
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache OpenOf
s of Apache
OpenOffice, it can be taken to Apache legal and elsewhere
where review and approval at the Foundation level is
required.
- Dennis
-Original Message-
From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 04:31
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Relea
ndicator of the
>> project's viability.
>>
>> If the Apache OpenOffice Project Management Committee
>> words and procedurally-approves a narrow, specific request
>> for an exception with regard to the UNO Tools of Apache
>> OpenOffice, it can be take
ere review and approval at the Foundation level is required.
- Dennis
-Original Message-
From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 04:31
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache OpenOffice API plugin for NetBeans
Am 03/20/2016 11:29 A
l is required.
- Dennis
> -Original Message-
> From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de]
> Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 04:31
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache OpenOffice API plugin for NetBeans
>
> Am 03/20/2016 11:29 AM, schrieb
Am 03/20/2016 11:29 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
On 20/03/2016 Marcus wrote:
Am 03/18/2016 12:19 AM, schrieb Carl Marcum:
Do we need to treat the submission of plugin artifacts for availability
at NetBeans.org and through their update mechanism as official project
releases requiring a vote? ...
On 20/03/2016 Marcus wrote:
Am 03/18/2016 12:19 AM, schrieb Carl Marcum:
Do we need to treat the submission of plugin artifacts for availability
at NetBeans.org and through their update mechanism as official project
releases requiring a vote? ...
@all:
Is there anything that would speak against
On Sun, 20 Mar 2016 10:04:43 +0100
Marcus wrote:
> Am 03/18/2016 12:19 AM, schrieb Carl Marcum:
> > Do we need to treat the submission of plugin artifacts for availability
> > at NetBeans.org and through their update mechanism as official project
> > releases requiring a vote?
> >
> > If so, what
Am 03/18/2016 12:19 AM, schrieb Carl Marcum:
Do we need to treat the submission of plugin artifacts for availability
at NetBeans.org and through their update mechanism as official project
releases requiring a vote?
If so, what would the verification procedure look like?
We had the first Japanes
26 matches
Mail list logo
