And now it should be.
> On Feb 27, 2025, at 6:40 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> 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
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 -
>>
>> The devtools repo is now in git -
>> https://github.com/a
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 http
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
> >
> > Created as follows:
> >
> > curl https://gitbox.a
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 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/
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 cl
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 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/
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://gi
Hi Dave,
Am 15.02.25 um 20:52 schrieb Dave Fisher:
Hi -
I have not got to it yet. I do see updates occurring including just today.
Yes, I uploaded some new SVG graphics (experimental).
But still, I don't think this belongs in our source code repo. I would
prefer a separate repo for it.
Re
Hi -
I have not got to it yet. I do see updates occurring including just today.
Best,
Dave
> On Feb 15, 2025, at 4:47 AM, Matthias Seidel
> wrote:
>
> So I assume this is canceled?
>
> Matthias
>
> Am 14.12.24 um 09:36 schrieb Marcus:
>> Am 14.12.24 um 00:42 schrieb Dave Fisher:
On Dec
So I assume this is canceled?
Matthias
Am 14.12.24 um 09:36 schrieb Marcus:
Am 14.12.24 um 00:42 schrieb Dave Fisher:
On Dec 13, 2024, at 3:35 PM, Matthias Seidel
wrote:
Am 13.12.24 um 16:58 schrieb Dave Fisher:
On Dec 13, 2024, at 2:34 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Dec 13, 2024, at 12:34 A
Am 14.12.24 um 00:42 schrieb Dave Fisher:
On Dec 13, 2024, at 3:35 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote:
Am 13.12.24 um 16:58 schrieb Dave Fisher:
On Dec 13, 2024, at 2:34 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Dec 13, 2024, at 12:34 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
On Dec 12, 2024, at 10:39 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On
> On Dec 13, 2024, at 3:35 PM, Matthias Seidel
> wrote:
>
> Hi Dave, Jim, All,
>
> Am 13.12.24 um 16:58 schrieb Dave Fisher:
>>
>>> On Dec 13, 2024, at 2:34 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
On Dec 13, 2024, at 12:34 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> On Dec 12, 202
Hi Dave, Jim, All,
Am 13.12.24 um 16:58 schrieb Dave Fisher:
On Dec 13, 2024, at 2:34 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Dec 13, 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:
Agreed. Should we
> On Dec 13, 2024, at 2:34 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Dec 13, 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:
Agreed. Should we call the git ver
> 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
> 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 Dec 12, 2024, at 2:26 AM, Jim Jag
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 under svn..
Am 14.08.21 um 13:33 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
Last discussion on this topic is at [1]
[1]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r64090cf9de98c0147098b5d7d58b5f248c71b42e06d3dcb1c536bc88%40%3Cdev.openoffice.apache.org%3E
+1 to move to git. I would separate each tool in an own repository. But
as l
Last discussion on this topic is at [1]
[1]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r64090cf9de98c0147098b5d7d58b5f248c71b42e06d3dcb1c536bc88%40%3Cdev.openoffice.apache.org%3E
+1 to move to git. I would separate each tool in an own repository. But
as long as it is done I would agree to a devt
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 implementation for
>> all our
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 it would, and
Hi Jim,
For the directories:
bootstrap-connector
guno-extension
lazybones-templates
I have copied to my github account projects and have been working on
them there.
I haven't done anything with netbeansintegration yet but I could.
These all work best as standalone projects in Git due to th
Any other opinions or comments?
> On Aug 6, 2021, at 12:52 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> To me, it being within OpenOffice.git makes the most sense... but I'm fine
> either way ;)
>
>> On Aug 6, 2021, at 12:49 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>
>> Within /Apache/OpenOffice.git repository? Or a new
>>
To me, it being within OpenOffice.git makes the most sense... but I'm fine
either way ;)
> On Aug 6, 2021, at 12:49 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> Within /Apache/OpenOffice.git repository? Or a new
> /Apache/OpenOffice-devtools.git?
>
> +1, especially if history is preserved.
>
> Of course there
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 under svn; s
There is.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020, 12:04 AM Peter Kovacs wrote:
> I am suggesting to break the svn in several repos, yes. But we can do it
> theoretically at any time. I just thought if we switch it is a good
> opportunity to take a look. As I said below we have ideas to split multiple
> things into
I am suggesting to break the svn in several repos, yes. But we can do it
theoretically at any time. I just thought if we switch it is a good opportunity
to take a look. As I said below we have ideas to split multiple things into
smaller parts.
There is no rush.
Am 6. August 2020 13:56:27 MESZ
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, at
Imho Svn or Git is also not important. ;)
Am 5. August 2020 15:56:34 MESZ schrieb Nathan Rosenburg
:
>Not important.
>
>On Wed, Aug 5, 2020, 7:50 AM Peter Kovacs wrote:
>
>> Due to the fact that Git repos unlike svn can only checked out in
>total, I
>> would rather prefer to split all applicati
Not important.
On Wed, Aug 5, 2020, 7:50 AM Peter Kovacs wrote:
> Due to the fact that Git repos unlike svn can only checked out in total, I
> would rather prefer to split all applications into own repos.
> Just don't forget we have the idea to split a lot of other things. GSI
> Check will move
Due to the fact that Git repos unlike svn can only checked out in total, I
would rather prefer to split all applications into own repos.
Just don't forget we have the idea to split a lot of other things. GSI Check
will move into its own Repo. UNO libraries WE have talked about to separate
into o
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 over there 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 as well over there as well?
>> -
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 add
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
,
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
On 12/10/2014 09:10 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
Hi All,
I ran into an issue when trying to create an UNO client application
with the Netbeans plugin.
External library jars were not added to dist/lib or the jar manifest
during build.
This problem appeared to be related to this issue [1].
I have
On 09/22/2013 07:41 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
Hi all,
Just to update, I have documented my work on the Netbeans plugin related
to 3-Layer removal changes here:
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123266
I seem to have the plugin working on Netbeans 7.2 and AOO 4.0.0 at least
for linux (t
Hi all,
Just to update, I have documented my work on the Netbeans plugin related
to 3-Layer removal changes here:
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123266
I seem to have the plugin working on Netbeans 7.2 and AOO 4.0.0 at least
for linux (tested on Fedora 17 x86-64).
I have tested
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
On 4/15/13 3:36 PM, janI wrote:
> On 15 April 2013 15:31, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On 4/15/13 2:12 PM, janI wrote:
>>> 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 15 April 2013 15:31, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 4/15/13 2:12 PM, janI wrote:
> > 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 wrot
On 4/15/13 2:12 PM, janI wrote:
> 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:
>
>>>
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
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
58 matches
Mail list logo
