read-only?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Matthias
>>
>> Am 26.02.25 um 02:26 schrieb Dave Fisher:
>>> Hi -
>>>
>>> The devtools repo is now in git -
>>> https://github.com/apache/openoffice-devtools
>>>
>>> C
Hi Matthias,
No it’s not.
Best,
Dave
> On Feb 27, 2025, at 6:22 AM, Matthias Seidel
> wrote:
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> Is the SVN repo now read-only?
>
> Regards,
>
>Matthias
>
> Am 26.02.25 um 02:26 schrieb Dave Fisher:
>> Hi -
>>
>> Th
Hi Dave,
Is the SVN repo now read-only?
Regards,
Matthias
Am 26.02.25 um 02:26 schrieb Dave Fisher:
Hi -
The devtools repo is now in git - https://github.com/apache/openoffice-devtools
Created as follows:
curl https://gitbox.apache.org/authors.txt --output authors.txt
git svn clone
On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 10:24:49AM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Woot!
+1
> > On Feb 25, 2025, at 8:26 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> >
> > Hi -
> >
> > The devtools repo is now in git -
> > https://github.com/apache/openoffice-devtools
> >
Woot!
> On Feb 25, 2025, at 8:26 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> Hi -
>
> The devtools repo is now in git -
> https://github.com/apache/openoffice-devtools
>
> Created as follows:
>
> curl https://gitbox.apache.org/authors.txt --output authors.txt
> git svn clone
Hi Dave,
Looks good!
Thanks for creating this.
Regards,
Matthias
Am 26.02.25 um 02:26 schrieb Dave Fisher:
Hi -
The devtools repo is now in git - https://github.com/apache/openoffice-devtools
Created as follows:
curl https://gitbox.apache.org/authors.txt --output authors.txt
git svn
Woot!
> On Feb 25, 2025, at 8:26 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> Hi -
>
> The devtools repo is now in git -
> https://github.com/apache/openoffice-devtools
>
> Created as follows:
>
> curl https://gitbox.apache.org/authors.txt --output authors.txt
> git svn clone
Hi -
The devtools repo is now in git - https://github.com/apache/openoffice-devtools
Created as follows:
curl https://gitbox.apache.org/authors.txt --output authors.txt
git svn clone https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/devtools -A
authors.txt
cd devtools
git remote add origin https
these to a devtools directory in openoffice.git?
We can then archive the directories that are no longer relevant
On Dec 12, 2024, at 2:26 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
The `devtools` repo is still hosted under svn... should we migrate it to git?
Personally, I think that the latter makes more sense.
AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Dec 12, 2024, at 10:39 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Dec 12, 2024, at 1:04 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Agreed. Shou
:34 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
On Dec 12, 2024, at 10:39 AM, Jim Jagielski
wrote:
On Dec 12, 2024, at 1:04 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
Agreed. Should we call the git version openoffice-devtools.git?
Or do we move these to a devtools directory in openoffice.git?
We can then archive the directories that
Dec 12, 2024, at 1:04 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
Agreed. Should we call the git version openoffice-devtools.git? Or do we move
these to a devtools directory in openoffice.git?
We can then archive the directories that are no longer relevant
On Dec 12, 2024, at 2:26 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
The
2024, at 12:34 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 12, 2024, at 10:39 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Dec 12, 2024, at 1:04 PM, Dave Fisher wrote
call the git version openoffice-devtools.git? Or do we move
these to a devtools directory in openoffice.git?
We can then archive the directories that are no longer relevant
On Dec 12, 2024, at 2:26 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
The `devtools` repo is still hosted under svn... should we migrate it
12, 2024, at 1:04 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Agreed. Should we call the git version openoffice-devtools.git? Or do we
>>>> move these to a devtools directory in openoffice.git?
>>>>
>>>> We can then archive the directories that
> On Dec 12, 2024, at 10:39 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Dec 12, 2024, at 1:04 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>
>> Agreed. Should we call the git version openoffice-devtools.git? Or do we
>> move these to a devtools directory in openoffice.git?
>&g
> On Dec 12, 2024, at 1:04 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> Agreed. Should we call the git version openoffice-devtools.git? Or do we move
> these to a devtools directory in openoffice.git?
>
> We can then archive the directories that are no longer relevant
>
>> On De
Agreed. Should we call the git version openoffice-devtools.git? Or do we move
these to a devtools directory in openoffice.git?
We can then archive the directories that are no longer relevant
> On Dec 12, 2024, at 2:26 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> The `devtools` repo is still hosted
The `devtools` repo is still hosted under svn... should we migrate it to git?
--
Jim
"If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball."
long as it is done I would agree to a devtools repository.
To migrate it back into OpenOffice.git I am at -1 because OpenOffice
Code + Build environment is already hard to learn. Especially for new
commers.
It is better to cluster by topics.
I also think that code and tools should be
devtools repository.
To migrate it back into OpenOffice.git I am at -1 because OpenOffice
Code + Build environment is already hard to learn. Especially for new
commers.
It is better to cluster by topics.
All the best
Peter
On 12.08.21 18:00, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Any other opinions or
Hi Arrigo,
Am 13.08.21 um 16:14 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori:
> Hello Jim, All,
>
> On Fri, Aug 06, 2021 at 12:30:43PM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>> Our devtools repo is till under svn; should we switch it to git. It
>> would be nice, I think, to use on version control i
Hello Jim, All,
On Fri, Aug 06, 2021 at 12:30:43PM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Our devtools repo is till under svn; should we switch it to git. It
> would be nice, I think, to use on version control implementation for
> all our code related repos.
TL;DR: +1
Longer reply: I agree
a new
/Apache/OpenOffice-devtools.git?
+1, especially if history is preserved.
Of course there would be wiki and webpages to update.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 6, 2021, at 9:31 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Our devtools repo is till under svn; should we switch it to git. It would be
nice, I think, to
he/OpenOffice.git repository? Or a new
>> /Apache/OpenOffice-devtools.git?
>>
>> +1, especially if history is preserved.
>>
>> Of course there would be wiki and webpages to update.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Aug 6, 2021, at 9:31
eserved.
>
> Of course there would be wiki and webpages to update.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Aug 6, 2021, at 9:31 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>> Our devtools repo is till under svn; should we switch it to git. It would
>> be nice, I think, to use on ver
Within /Apache/OpenOffice.git repository? Or a new
/Apache/OpenOffice-devtools.git?
+1, especially if history is preserved.
Of course there would be wiki and webpages to update.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 6, 2021, at 9:31 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> Our devtools repo is till
Our devtools repo is till under svn; should we switch it to git. It would be
nice, I think, to use on version control implementation for all our code
related repos.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
Hello all,
On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 02:54:26AM +0200, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 1:34 AM Don Lewis wrote:
>
> > On 16 Jun, ard...@apache.org wrote:
> > > Author: ardovm
> > > Date: Wed Jun 16 19:07:44 2021
> > > New Revision: 1890844
> > >
> > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/
On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 1:34 AM Don Lewis wrote:
> On 16 Jun, ard...@apache.org wrote:
> > Author: ardovm
> > Date: Wed Jun 16 19:07:44 2021
> > New Revision: 1890844
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1890844&view=rev
> > Log:
> > Build script for AOO 4.1.10 under Mingw
> >
> > Better
On 16 Jun, ard...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: ardovm
> Date: Wed Jun 16 19:07:44 2021
> New Revision: 1890844
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1890844&view=rev
> Log:
> Build script for AOO 4.1.10 under Mingw
>
> Better late than never... could be used as a template for the future
I tho
the same used for
> release builds.
>
> I must confess I got lost a couple of times while searching the wiki
> for this information, but I eventually found out this SVN repository:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/devtools/build-scripts/
>
> I would like to propose som
e builds.
>
> I must confess I got lost a couple of times while searching the wiki
> for this information, but I eventually found out this SVN repository:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/devtools/build-scripts/
>
> I would like to propose some changes to those scripts. They d
repository:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/devtools/build-scripts/
I would like to propose some changes to those scripts. They do not
seem to be on GitHub, so a pull request is not possible. I am writing
to this list in the hope to reach the responsible people. I will be
happy to write to more
> things into smaller parts.
> There is no rush.
>
> Am 6. August 2020 13:56:27 MESZ schrieb Jim Jagielski :
> >So are you thinking about breaking devtools into a bunch of sep repos?
> >Or keeping it as a single repo that contains a collection of devtools?
> >
> >Why
schrieb Jim Jagielski :
>So are you thinking about breaking devtools into a bunch of sep repos?
>Or keeping it as a single repo that contains a collection of devtools?
>
>Why am I proposing this: Currently, to build our community AOO builds
>you need BOTH svn and git. It would be ni
So are you thinking about breaking devtools into a bunch of sep repos? Or
keeping it as a single repo that contains a collection of devtools?
Why am I proposing this: Currently, to build our community AOO builds you need
BOTH svn and git. It would be nice to need just one.
> On Aug 5, 2020,
>On Tue, Aug 4, 2020, 5:09 PM Carl Marcum wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Jim,
>> >>
>> >> On 8/4/20 4:12 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> >> > Considering that AOO is now, itself, under gitbox, should we
>also
>> >move
>> >> devtoo
22 MESZ schrieb Nathan Rosenburg <
> nathanrosenburg198...@gmail.com>:
> >Good.send on.
> >
> >On Tue, Aug 4, 2020, 5:09 PM Carl Marcum wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Jim,
> >>
> >> On 8/4/20 4:12 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> >> > Considerin
> Hi Jim,
>>
>> On 8/4/20 4:12 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> > Considering that AOO is now, itself, under gitbox, should we also
>move
>> devtools as well over there as well?
>> >
>-
&
Good.send on.
On Tue, Aug 4, 2020, 5:09 PM Carl Marcum wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> On 8/4/20 4:12 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > Considering that AOO is now, itself, under gitbox, should we also move
> devtools as well
On 8/4/20 7:23 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Aug 4, 2020, at 6:09 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
Hi Jim,
On 8/4/20 4:12 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Considering that AOO is now, itself, under gitbox, should we also move devtools
as well over there as well
> On Aug 4, 2020, at 6:09 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
>
> Hi Jim,
>
> On 8/4/20 4:12 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Considering that AOO is now, itself, under gitbox, should we also move
>> devtools
Hi Jim,
On 8/4/20 4:12 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Considering that AOO is now, itself, under gitbox, should we also move devtools
as well over there as well?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For
Considering that AOO is now, itself, under gitbox, should we also move devtools
as well over there as well?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h
gt;> >>>>
>> >>>> And we didn't use --with-vendor for a release build before.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Regards,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Matthias
>> >>>>
>
>>>>
> >>>> Matthias
> >>>>
> >>>> Am 22.10.18 um 14:31 schrieb j...@apache.org mailto:j...@apache.org :
> >>>>> Author: jim
> >>>>> Date: Mon Oct 22 12:31:52 2018
> >>>&g
gt;
>>>> And we didn't use --with-vendor for a release build before.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Matthias
>>>>
>>>> Am 22.10.18 um 14:31 schrieb j...@apache.org:
>>>>> Author: jim
&g
Office"
>>>
>>> And we didn't use --with-vendor for a release build before.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Matthias
>>>
>>> Am 22.10.18 um 14:31 schrieb j...@apache.org:
>>>> Author: jim
>>>> Date: Mon Oc
n't use --with-vendor for a release build before.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>Matthias
>>
>> Am 22.10.18 um 14:31 schrieb j...@apache.org:
>>> Author: jim
>>> Date: Mon Oct 22 12:31:52 2018
>>> New Revision: 1844550
>&
te: Mon Oct 22 12:31:52 2018
>> New Revision: 1844550
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1844550&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Update vendor for builds
>>
>> Modified:
>>
>> openoffice/devtools/build-scripts/4.1.6/unxlngi6/build_aoo32b
.10.18 um 14:31 schrieb j...@apache.org:
> Author: jim
> Date: Mon Oct 22 12:31:52 2018
> New Revision: 1844550
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1844550&view=rev
> Log:
> Update vendor for builds
>
> Modified:
>
> openoffice/devtools/build-scripts/4
..
> +PATH: .
> +PATH: .
> +PATH: .
> +PATH: .
> +PATH: .
> +PATH: .
> +PATH: /home/jim/src/asf/code/aoo-414/main/solenv/unxlngx6.pro/bin
> +PATH: /home/jim/src/asf/code/aoo-414/main/solenv/bin
> +PATH: /home/jim/src/asf/code/aoo-414/main/solenv/unxlngx6.pro/bin
> +PATH: /home/jim/src/asf/code/aoo
Hi All,
Apologies for the long post...
Recently I have be proposing, calling votes and implementing various
pieces of things related to Java UNO like adding the AOO Java UNO jars
and the bootstrap-connector jar to Maven, etc, without really explaining
what I'm working toward.
The goal is to
8, 2016 11:46
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL][DEVTOOLS] Stage Java BootstrapConnector to Maven
Repository
-Original Message-
From: Carl Marcum [mailto:cmar...@apache.org]
Sent: Friday, February 5, 2016 03:56
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL][DEVTOOLS] Stage Java
s really up to Carl to pursue this, which I recommend, or go off-project
(which would remain an alternative anyhow).
- Dennis
> -Original Message-
> From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@apache.org]
> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2016 11:46
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> -Original Message-
> From: Carl Marcum [mailto:cmar...@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, February 5, 2016 03:56
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL][DEVTOOLS] Stage Java BootstrapConnector to Maven
> Repository
>
> On 02/04/2016 03:48 PM,
-
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@apache.org]
Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2016 13:39
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL][DEVTOOLS] Stage Java BootstrapConnector to Maven
Repository
-Original Message-
From: Carl Marcum [mailto:cmar...@apache.org]
Sent: Saturday,
ache.org]
> Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2016 13:39
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL][DEVTOOLS] Stage Java BootstrapConnector to Maven
> Repository
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Carl Marcum [mailto:cmar...@apache.org]
> > S
6 12:09
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL][DEVTOOLS] Stage Java BootstrapConnector to Maven
>> Repository
>>
>> Hi Dennis,
>>
>> comments below..
>>
>> On 01/30/2016 12:17 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> [ ... ]
>>
> -Original Message-
> From: Carl Marcum [mailto:cmar...@apache.org]
> Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2016 12:09
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL][DEVTOOLS] Stage Java BootstrapConnector to Maven
> Repository
>
> Hi Dennis,
>
> comments
the AOO-Netbeans plugin that is made available through
NetBeans.org.
Best regards,
Carl
-Original Message-
From: Carl Marcum [mailto:cmar...@apache.org]
Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2016 06:42
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: [PROPOSAL][DEVTOOLS] Stage Java BootstrapConnector to Maven
Re
Following this I will update the wiki
page to describe the steps to reproduce future updates.
Another option to this is that I publish them as an individual with a
different groupId if this is preferred.
[1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/devtools/guno-extension
h a release process if we determine that we need to do so.
- Dennis
> -Original Message-
> From: Carl Marcum [mailto:cmar...@apache.org]
> Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2016 06:42
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: [PROPOSAL][DEVTOOLS] Stage Java BootstrapConnector to Mave
Consensus and proceed
to implement the above proposal.
Another option to this is that I publish them as an individual with a
different groupId if this is preferred.
[1]
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/devtools/bootstrap-connector/trunk/
[2] https://forum.openoffice.or
them as an individual with a
different groupId if this is preferred.
[1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/devtools/guno-extension
[2] https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Groovy_UNO_Extension
Thanks,
Carl
-
To unsubscri
Maven and
the previously mentioned
Groovy UNO Extension is used locally until it can be released on Maven also.
I created a bugzilla issue [5] to track the development work on these.
[1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/devtools/guno-extension
[2] https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki
On 12/05/2015 03:22 PM, Rory O'Farrell wrote:
On Fri, 04 Dec 2015 18:55:38 -0500
Carl Marcum wrote:
Hi All,
The NetBeans integration plugin has been updated and verified by the
NetBeans team for NB 8.1.
It is available for download from NetBeans.org here [1] or through the
NetBeans Update Ce
On Fri, 04 Dec 2015 18:55:38 -0500
Carl Marcum wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> The NetBeans integration plugin has been updated and verified by the
> NetBeans team for NB 8.1.
>
> It is available for download from NetBeans.org here [1] or through the
> NetBeans Update Center.
>
> For reference this is
Hi All,
The NetBeans integration plugin has been updated and verified by the
NetBeans team for NB 8.1.
It is available for download from NetBeans.org here [1] or through the
NetBeans Update Center.
For reference this is plugin version 4.1.4 for NB 8.1.
The last version for NB 8.0 is plugin
,
it didn't occur in my case.
Thanks,
-Amenel.
De : Carl Marcum
À : a...@openoffice.apache.org; "dev@openoffice.apache.org"
Envoyé le : Mardi 10 mars 2015 11h07
Objet : Re: [DEVTOOLS][EXT] Update to Netbeans plugin
On 12/10/2014 09:10 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
Hi
.
De : Carl Marcum
À : a...@openoffice.apache.org; "dev@openoffice.apache.org"
Envoyé le : Mardi 10 mars 2015 11h07
Objet : Re: [DEVTOOLS][EXT] Update to Netbeans plugin
On 12/10/2014 09:10 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I ran into an issue when trying to cre
://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=78645
[2]
http://people.apache.org/~cmarcum/devtools/org-openoffice-extensions-4.1.0.nbm
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: api-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail:
y="true" compress="true"
jarfile="${dist.jar}">
I have updated the plugin to version 4.1.0 to better reflect the AOO SDK
version compatibility.
A compiled version can be found here [2]
[1] http://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=7
(tested on Fedora 17 x86-64).
I have tested a simple AddOn for Writer, AddIn for Calc, and a Client
Application.
It's possible more work is needed for Mac and Windows.
I have upload an updated NBM file to:
http://people.apache.org/~cmarcum/devtools/
select org-openoffice-extensions-4.0.5.alph
tested a simple AddOn for Writer, AddIn for Calc, and a Client
Application.
It's possible more work is needed for Mac and Windows.
I have upload an updated NBM file to:
http://people.apache.org/~cmarcum/devtools/
select org-openoffice-extensions-4.0.5.alpha.nbm
Thanks,
On 9/16/13 12:35 AM, Carl Marcum wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm going on an assumption that the 3-layer removal is a directory
> structure change putting the sdk under the AOO program directory.
>
> I have a question on the directory layout of sdk on platforms other than
> linux.
>
> In netbeans plugin cu
Hi,
I'm going on an assumption that the 3-layer removal is a directory
structure change putting the sdk under the AOO program directory.
I have a question on the directory layout of sdk on platforms other than
linux.
In netbeans plugin current code is broken for AOO4.
private void skeleton
Hi All,
I have committed a change to Netbeans plugin trunk for AOO 4.0 for
setting toolbar name in Addons.xcu and setting to AOO 4.0.
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=122055
I have attached to the issue an example Addons.xcu created with the
plugin and a older developer snapshot
>
>>>>>>>>>> I agree now and with my upcoming 3layer removal there will be
>> some
>>>>>>>>> work
>>>>>>>>> to do in the plugin. It mainly that places of jars, tools, libs
>> have
>>>
; changed.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Juergen
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Is this something that will be implemented in AOO 4 release?
> &g
; Is this something that will be implemented in AOO 4 release?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> How come it is a 3.0 branch ?? that sounds old to me, shouldnt it be
>>>>> 3.4.1x branch ?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
On 15 April 2013 11:22, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 4/15/13 9:42 AM, janI wrote:
> > On 15 April 2013 00:23, Carl Marcum wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Jan,
> >>
> >>
> >> On 04/14/2013 02:58 PM, janI wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 14 April 2013 20:25, Carl Marcum wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Juergen,
>
>
>
On 4/15/13 9:42 AM, janI wrote:
> On 15 April 2013 00:23, Carl Marcum wrote:
>
>> Hi Jan,
>>
>>
>> On 04/14/2013 02:58 PM, janI wrote:
>>
>>> On 14 April 2013 20:25, Carl Marcum wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Juergen,
On 04/14/2013 01:32 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
Hi Carl,
>
>>
On 15 April 2013 00:23, Carl Marcum wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
>
> On 04/14/2013 02:58 PM, janI wrote:
>
>> On 14 April 2013 20:25, Carl Marcum wrote:
>>
>> Hi Juergen,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 04/14/2013 01:32 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Carl,
Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013 um 19:23 schrie
Hi Jan,
On 04/14/2013 02:58 PM, janI wrote:
On 14 April 2013 20:25, Carl Marcum wrote:
Hi Juergen,
On 04/14/2013 01:32 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
Hi Carl,
Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013 um 19:23 schrieb Carl Marcum:
On 02/10/2013 04:11 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
On 02/10/2013 02:50 PM, J
Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013 um 20:25 schrieb Carl Marcum:
> Hi Juergen,
>
> On 04/14/2013 01:32 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
> > Hi Carl,
> >
> >
> > Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013 um 19:23 schrieb Carl Marcum:
> >
> > > On 02/10/2013 04:11 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
> > > > On 02/10/2013 02:50 PM, Juerge
On 14 April 2013 20:25, Carl Marcum wrote:
> Hi Juergen,
>
>
> On 04/14/2013 01:32 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
>
>> Hi Carl,
>>
>>
>> Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013 um 19:23 schrieb Carl Marcum:
>>
>> On 02/10/2013 04:11 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
>>>
On 02/10/2013 02:50 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
>
Hi Juergen,
On 04/14/2013 01:32 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
Hi Carl,
Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013 um 19:23 schrieb Carl Marcum:
On 02/10/2013 04:11 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
On 02/10/2013 02:50 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013 um 19:04 schrieb Carl Marcum:
Hi all,
I woul
Hi Carl,
Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013 um 19:23 schrieb Carl Marcum:
> On 02/10/2013 04:11 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
> > On 02/10/2013 02:50 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
> > > Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013 um 19:04 schrieb Carl Marcum:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I would like to branch NB integrati
Hi all,
I am working on updating the Netbeans plugin for setting toolbar name in
Addons.xcu for AOO 4.
This is required for AOO changes documented in bug 121577 and I created
bug 122055 to track this change.
Since the change will be incompatible with AOO 3.4, I tagged a 3.0.2
version and cre
On 02/10/2013 04:11 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
On 02/10/2013 02:50 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013 um 19:04 schrieb Carl Marcum:
Hi all,
I would like to branch NB integration plugin for 3.0 and start modifying
trunk for AOO 4.0 compatibility.
I would like to also tag curre
On 02/10/2013 02:50 PM, Juergen Schmidt wrote:
Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013 um 19:04 schrieb Carl Marcum:
Hi all,
I would like to branch NB integration plugin for 3.0 and start modifying
trunk for AOO 4.0 compatibility.
I would like to also tag current version as 3.0.1 at the same time.
Trunk
Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2013 um 19:04 schrieb Carl Marcum:
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to branch NB integration plugin for 3.0 and start modifying
> trunk for AOO 4.0 compatibility.
>
> I would like to also tag current version as 3.0.1 at the same time.
>
> Trunk would become version 4.0 to main
Hi all,
I would like to branch NB integration plugin for 3.0 and start modifying
trunk for AOO 4.0 compatibility.
I would like to also tag current version as 3.0.1 at the same time.
Trunk would become version 4.0 to maintain major version number the same
as AOO.
If there are no objections
95 matches
Mail list logo
