review requested: [Issue 126781] replace external ftp sources with http downloads : [Attachment 85243] replace ftp sources in external_deps.lst with http links

j.nitsc...@ok.de has asked for review: Issue 126781: replace external ftp sources with http downloads https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126781 Attachment 85243: replace ftp sources in external_deps.lst with http links https://bz.apache.org/ooo/attachment.cgi?id=85243&action=edit --- De

Re: Updating the WHY section of www.openoffice.org

On 01/08/2016 07:28 PM, Jan Høydahl wrote: Hi I filed bug https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126777 about outdated WHY sub page "Office 2003 EOL”. See issue for details. Dennis requested that the discussion continues in this mailing list. My initial concern was that an outdated web p

Re: Compiler Error

On Thu, 07 Jan 2016 18:12:15 +1100 Brett Grentell wrote: > Don't worry - I did a clean build and it worked perfectly. Congratulations! if you got suggestions on how to make the build guide better don't be shy. or request a wiki account here and edit them yourself. signature.asc Description: Op

Damage to an item while editing the Extension directory

Hello, Sorry, but I have damaged an entry in the extension directory. I have below: http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/basicaddonbuilder-extensions-packager following text added: "Important information (date: Jan 2016): Notes on the current development of Basic Addon Builder, see the w

Proofing Tool GUI 3.0 - build 89 - 20160109 - Autocorrect working

Hello, I have just released a new build of PTG, which now allows to edit the "Autocorrect words": Above is the en_GB autocorrect file. You can download PTG from the official site: http://marcoagpinto.cidadevirtual.pt/proofingtoolgui.html Special instructions for working with autocorrect fil

Re: Proofing Tool GUI 3.0 - build 89 - 20160109 - Autocorrect working

On 09/01/2016 Marco A.G.Pinto wrote: I hereby offer myself to update the pt_PT since I have several grammar books with dozens/hundreds of examples of incorrect/correct words Last time I looked at it was several years ago, to fix the Italian autocorrect list. Everything is documented in https:

RE: Damage to an item while editing the Extension directory

Hello, Jörg, Clarification please: At 2015-01-09T15:50Z, over the Internet from Seattle, Washington, 1. is accessible and it has your change. 2.

RE: Updating the WHY section of www.openoffice.org

+1 on removing the page. > -Original Message- > From: Carl Marcum [mailto:cmar...@apache.org] > Sent: Saturday, January 9, 2016 04:59 > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org > Subject: Re: Updating the WHY section of www.openoffice.org > > > > On 01/08/2016 07:28 PM, Jan Høydahl wrote: > > Hi

Re: Damage to an item while editing the Extension directory

2016-01-09 17:39 GMT+01:00 Dennis E. Hamilton : > Hello, Jörg, > > Clarification please: > > At 2015-01-09T15:50Z, over the Internet from Seattle, Washington, > > 1. < > http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/basicaddonbuilder-extensions-packager > > > is accessible and it has your change. >

Re: Damage to an item while editing the Extension directory

2016-01-09 14:47 GMT+01:00 Jörg Schmidt : > Hello, > > Sorry, but I have damaged an entry in the extension directory. > > I have below: > > http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/basicaddonbuilder-extensions-packager > > following text added: > > "Important information (date: Jan 2016): > Not

Re: Damage to an item while editing the Extension directory

Hello, > At 2015-01-09T15:50Z, over the Internet from Seattle, Washington, > > 1. > -extensions-packager> > is accessible and it has your change. at 14:47 Central European Time (CET) that was not the case > 2. >

Re: Damage to an item while editing the Extension directory

Hello, > From: Roberto Galoppini [mailto:roberto.galopp...@gmail.com] > > 1. < > > > http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/basicaddonbuilder- > extensions-packager > > > > > is accessible and it has your change. > > > > It has been published just few minutes ago. Oh yes, i see. Have

Re: Damage to an item while editing the Extension directory

> From: Roberto Galoppini [mailto:roberto.galopp...@gmail.com] > Just want to add that we had to republish it because it didn't pass > anti-spam logic. For future updates you won't have similar > problems because > we upgraded the anti-spam filters. OK, thank you. Jörg

review granted: [Issue 126781] replace external ftp sources with http downloads : [Attachment 85243] replace ftp sources in external_deps.lst with http links

Andrea Pescetti has granted j.nitsc...@ok.de's request for review: Issue 126781: replace external ftp sources with http downloads https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=126781 Attachment 85243: replace ftp sources in external_deps.lst with http links https://bz.apache.org/ooo/attachment.cgi?id

BasicAddonBuilder 0.5.2 released

Hello, After over a year testing, i have today released Basic Addon Builder 0.5.2, see: http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/basicaddonbuilder-extensions-packager#releases This version is compatible with AOO 4.0 and later versions. (A current version for LibreOffice can be downloaded fro

Resetting feedback the extension directory?

Hello, Is it possible reset the feedback on 4.x compatibility the extension directory? What is the problem? For Basic Addon Builder voted on compatibility, as no compatible version was published, so the vote is rather negative [1]. Now a compatible version is released, so the outcome of the vote

Re: Updating the WHY section of www.openoffice.org

Yes, remove the Office 2003 EOL page But also consider rephrasing these two: * http://www.openoffice.org/why/why_new_computers.html You are not required to spend $100, $200 or more for a copy of Microsoft Office * http://www.openoffice.org/why/why_easy.html: Studies have proved it is easier

Re: Updating the WHY section of www.openoffice.org

Jan Høydahl wrote: Yes, remove the Office 2003 EOL page That page was written to have a SEO-friendly resource for people who were looking for options to upgrade from Office 2003 back at the time. It can probably be retired since it served its purpose. But also consider rephrasing these two

Re: Norwegian translation for website

Marcus wrote: Am 01/08/2016 12:05 AM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti: By the way, Marcus, while you are at it, we also have a eu-test to eu transition ready (see l10n list). OK, haven't seen this so far. Seeing that the "eu" one was just a svn mv, I did it; but unfortunately the CMS stopped working

RE: Updating the WHY section of www.openoffice.org

I am +1 for also looking at the why_new_computers page as Jan suggests. Telling people that AOO is free is not the issue. Where it is an advantage is a matter for users to decide. We should let them judge for themselves. Our blanket claims are not helpful and come off like commercial puffery.