You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> on 2012/07/31 20:36:48 UTC
What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports? (BSD,
Solaris, OS/2)?
I'm drafting the 3.4.1 release announcement blog post. I have a
bullet list where I highlight what is in 3.4.1. I list what platforms
are supported, mention the Windows 8 compatibility improvements, and
then follow with this bullet item:
"Community members are also working on BSD, Solaris and OS/2 ports,
with plans to release these outside of Apache."
Is this accurate and worth saying? Would it make sense to also
include links for each of these ports, where the reader can go for
more information?
Although these are not Apache releases, they are part of the close
ecosystem, with developers working directly in our project to support
these ports. So I think there is some logic to mentioning them in the
release announcement. But work that happens entirely outside of the
project, like portable applications versions, would not get a mention.
Does this seem fair and appropriate?
If we agree to do this, I'll need a link for each of BSD, Solaris and
OS/2, for more information.
The alternative would be to not mention the ports at all.
Regards,
-Rob
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Fernando Cassia <fc...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> If we agree to do this, I'll need a link for each of BSD, Solaris and
> OS/2, for more information.
>
> The alternative would be to not mention the ports at all.
I think it´s worth mentioning them. And linking to them, if possible
(at least to the www.openoffice.org/ports... parge), as it shows
there´s a large "community" behind the project and that it´s not only
a product of Apache members.
I also think it´s worth removing the "cancelled" ports from the ports
page... I mean, what point is there to listing to an IRIX port that
has been since removed from the tree?
Just my $0.02
FC
--
During times of Universal Deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act
Durante épocas de Engaño Universal, decir la verdad se convierte en un
Acto Revolucionario
- George Orwell
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Rory O'Farrell <of...@iol.ie>.
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 14:36:48 -0400
Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'm drafting the 3.4.1 release announcement blog post. I have a
> bullet list where I highlight what is in 3.4.1. I list what platforms
> are supported, mention the Windows 8 compatibility improvements, and
> then follow with this bullet item:
>
> "Community members are also working on BSD, Solaris and OS/2 ports,
> with plans to release these outside of Apache."
>
> Is this accurate and worth saying? Would it make sense to also
> include links for each of these ports, where the reader can go for
> more information?
>
> Although these are not Apache releases, they are part of the close
> ecosystem, with developers working directly in our project to support
> these ports. So I think there is some logic to mentioning them in the
> release announcement. But work that happens entirely outside of the
> project, like portable applications versions, would not get a mention.
>
> Does this seem fair and appropriate?
>
> If we agree to do this, I'll need a link for each of BSD, Solaris and
> OS/2, for more information.
>
> The alternative would be to not mention the ports at all.
>
It would be worthwhile to mention a download count for AOO 3.4.0 and/or a download rate of so many per day.
--
Rory O'Farrell <of...@iol.ie>
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 18:23 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> > Am 07/31/2012 11:04 PM, schrieb drew:
> >
> >> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 14:36 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I'm drafting the 3.4.1 release announcement blog post. I have a
> >>> bullet list where I highlight what is in 3.4.1. I list what platforms
> >>> are supported, mention the Windows 8 compatibility improvements, and
> >>> then follow with this bullet item:
> >>>
> >>> "Community members are also working on BSD, Solaris and OS/2 ports,
> >>> with plans to release these outside of Apache."
> >>>
> >>
> >> Howdy Rob,
> >>
> >>> Is this accurate and worth saying?
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes IIRC and yes IMO.
> >
> >
> > Also from me a yes. I think it's an advantage to point to other platforms
> > that we (somehow) support as this shows clearly a big diversity and open
> > mind.
> >
> >
> >>> Would it make sense to also
> >>> include links for each of these ports, where the reader can go for
> >>> more information?
> >>
> >>
> >> I would think a better return if instead of putting direct links for
> >> each, create a fixed address (wiki page?) for 'other ports' (or more
> >> appropriate for a title).
> >
> >
> > Or a separate webpage, but anyhow. A single page that contains all ports
> > with a bit text and finaly a link to go to the respective download
> > possibilities.
> >
>
> I see that we have this legacy page: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>
> Would that work? (It looks like it would need some updating)
I suppose that's as good location as any - at least for today.
Will make changes to that page and ping the list when it's in stagging,
for a review - OK
//drew
>
> -Rob
>
>
> >
> >> Link to that from the announcement/blog and would make that a precedent
> >> for future announcements.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Although these are not Apache releases, they are part of the close
> >>> ecosystem, with developers working directly in our project to support
> >>> these ports. So I think there is some logic to mentioning them in the
> >>> release announcement. But work that happens entirely outside of the
> >>> project, like portable applications versions, would not get a mention.
> >>
> >>
> >> I would disagree, somewhat, in that personal preference would be to
> >> include the 2 or 3 portable 'wrapper' distributors as this has seemed to
> >> be of interest to quite a few folks in the past.
> >
> >
> > Right. Just add them to the single page with text and link. That's it. :-)
> >
> >
> >> Just my .02
> >>
> >> //drew
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Does this seem fair and appropriate?
> >>>
> >>> If we agree to do this, I'll need a link for each of BSD, Solaris and
> >>> OS/2, for more information.
> >>>
> >>> The alternative would be to not mention the ports at all.
> >
> >
> > I don't see this as an alternative. Even when we don't support the ports and
> > portables directly resp. in a big way, it's absolutely worth to mention
> > this. The most common thing is the shared code base - and that's not small.
> >
> > Marcus
> >
>
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> Am 07/31/2012 11:04 PM, schrieb drew:
>
>> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 14:36 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm drafting the 3.4.1 release announcement blog post. I have a
>>> bullet list where I highlight what is in 3.4.1. I list what platforms
>>> are supported, mention the Windows 8 compatibility improvements, and
>>> then follow with this bullet item:
>>>
>>> "Community members are also working on BSD, Solaris and OS/2 ports,
>>> with plans to release these outside of Apache."
>>>
>>
>> Howdy Rob,
>>
>>> Is this accurate and worth saying?
>>
>>
>> Yes IIRC and yes IMO.
>
>
> Also from me a yes. I think it's an advantage to point to other platforms
> that we (somehow) support as this shows clearly a big diversity and open
> mind.
>
>
>>> Would it make sense to also
>>> include links for each of these ports, where the reader can go for
>>> more information?
>>
>>
>> I would think a better return if instead of putting direct links for
>> each, create a fixed address (wiki page?) for 'other ports' (or more
>> appropriate for a title).
>
>
> Or a separate webpage, but anyhow. A single page that contains all ports
> with a bit text and finaly a link to go to the respective download
> possibilities.
>
I see that we have this legacy page: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
Would that work? (It looks like it would need some updating)
-Rob
>
>> Link to that from the announcement/blog and would make that a precedent
>> for future announcements.
>>
>>>
>>> Although these are not Apache releases, they are part of the close
>>> ecosystem, with developers working directly in our project to support
>>> these ports. So I think there is some logic to mentioning them in the
>>> release announcement. But work that happens entirely outside of the
>>> project, like portable applications versions, would not get a mention.
>>
>>
>> I would disagree, somewhat, in that personal preference would be to
>> include the 2 or 3 portable 'wrapper' distributors as this has seemed to
>> be of interest to quite a few folks in the past.
>
>
> Right. Just add them to the single page with text and link. That's it. :-)
>
>
>> Just my .02
>>
>> //drew
>>>
>>>
>>> Does this seem fair and appropriate?
>>>
>>> If we agree to do this, I'll need a link for each of BSD, Solaris and
>>> OS/2, for more information.
>>>
>>> The alternative would be to not mention the ports at all.
>
>
> I don't see this as an alternative. Even when we don't support the ports and
> portables directly resp. in a big way, it's absolutely worth to mention
> this. The most common thing is the shared code base - and that's not small.
>
> Marcus
>
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 07/31/2012 11:04 PM, schrieb drew:
> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 14:36 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> I'm drafting the 3.4.1 release announcement blog post. I have a
>> bullet list where I highlight what is in 3.4.1. I list what platforms
>> are supported, mention the Windows 8 compatibility improvements, and
>> then follow with this bullet item:
>>
>> "Community members are also working on BSD, Solaris and OS/2 ports,
>> with plans to release these outside of Apache."
>>
>
> Howdy Rob,
>
>> Is this accurate and worth saying?
>
> Yes IIRC and yes IMO.
Also from me a yes. I think it's an advantage to point to other
platforms that we (somehow) support as this shows clearly a big
diversity and open mind.
>> Would it make sense to also
>> include links for each of these ports, where the reader can go for
>> more information?
>
> I would think a better return if instead of putting direct links for
> each, create a fixed address (wiki page?) for 'other ports' (or more
> appropriate for a title).
Or a separate webpage, but anyhow. A single page that contains all ports
with a bit text and finaly a link to go to the respective download
possibilities.
> Link to that from the announcement/blog and would make that a precedent
> for future announcements.
>
>>
>> Although these are not Apache releases, they are part of the close
>> ecosystem, with developers working directly in our project to support
>> these ports. So I think there is some logic to mentioning them in the
>> release announcement. But work that happens entirely outside of the
>> project, like portable applications versions, would not get a mention.
>
> I would disagree, somewhat, in that personal preference would be to
> include the 2 or 3 portable 'wrapper' distributors as this has seemed to
> be of interest to quite a few folks in the past.
Right. Just add them to the single page with text and link. That's it. :-)
> Just my .02
>
> //drew
>>
>> Does this seem fair and appropriate?
>>
>> If we agree to do this, I'll need a link for each of BSD, Solaris and
>> OS/2, for more information.
>>
>> The alternative would be to not mention the ports at all.
I don't see this as an alternative. Even when we don't support the ports
and portables directly resp. in a big way, it's absolutely worth to
mention this. The most common thing is the shared code base - and that's
not small.
Marcus
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 31/07/2012 drew wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 14:36 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> "Community members are also working on BSD, Solaris and OS/2 ports,
>> with plans to release these outside of Apache." ...
>> I think there is some logic to mentioning them in the
>> release announcement. But work that happens entirely outside of the
>> project, like portable applications versions, would not get a mention.
> I would disagree, somewhat, in that personal preference would be to
> include the 2 or 3 portable 'wrapper' distributors as this has seemed to
> be of interest to quite a few folks in the past.
I can see the reasons to mention ports that are done by project members
but are released outside the project; but I agree with Drew that final
users probably have more interest in a portable version for Windows, so
(while still labeling them as unofficial and external to the project) it
would be good to list the portable version(s) available.
Regards,
Andrea.
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 11:57 AM, drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 08:47 -0700, Kay Schenk wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 2:04 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 14:36 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> > > I'm drafting the 3.4.1 release announcement blog post. I have a
>> > > bullet list where I highlight what is in 3.4.1. I list what platforms
>> > > are supported, mention the Windows 8 compatibility improvements, and
>> > > then follow with this bullet item:
>> > >
>> > > "Community members are also working on BSD, Solaris and OS/2 ports,
>> > > with plans to release these outside of Apache."
>> > >
>> >
>> > Howdy Rob,
>> >
>> > > Is this accurate and worth saying?
>> >
>> > Yes IIRC and yes IMO.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > > Would it make sense to also
>> > > include links for each of these ports, where the reader can go for
>> > > more information?
>> >
>> > I would think a better return if instead of putting direct links for
>> > each, create a fixed address (wiki page?) for 'other ports' (or more
>> > appropriate for a title).
>> >
>>
>> Hi Drew--
>>
>> We have a page -- actually a former "project" at --
>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>>
>> that needs a LOT of cleanup.
>>
>> Any volunteers to take the lead on cleaning this up and just highlighting
>> what we're dealing with now? FreeBSD, OS/2, and Solaris?
>
> Hi Kay,
>
> Yes, I'll work on that page today and ping the list when it is in
> stagging.
>
This isn't a reliable way of having a proposed change reviewed.
Anyone else publishing any other, unrelated, change to the website
would cause your change to be published as well.
A surer way is to make changes via the CMS, submit but don't commit,
then click "diff", and chose to mail the diff to ooo-dev.
Or in this case, since it is not technically difficult or
controversial, JFDI is fine. If some one wants to make more changes,
then they can. Almost anything gets us closer. For example, I made
some changes earlier today, on branding and fixing some broken links.
-Rob
> //drew
>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Link to that from the announcement/blog and would make that a precedent
>> > for future announcements.
>> >
>> > >
>> > > Although these are not Apache releases, they are part of the close
>> > > ecosystem, with developers working directly in our project to support
>> > > these ports. So I think there is some logic to mentioning them in the
>> > > release announcement. But work that happens entirely outside of the
>> > > project, like portable applications versions, would not get a mention.
>> >
>> > I would disagree, somewhat, in that personal preference would be to
>> > include the 2 or 3 portable 'wrapper' distributors as this has seemed to
>> > be of interest to quite a few folks in the past.
>> >
>> > Just my .02
>> >
>> > //drew
>> > >
>> > > Does this seem fair and appropriate?
>> > >
>> > > If we agree to do this, I'll need a link for each of BSD, Solaris and
>> > > OS/2, for more information.
>> > >
>> > > The alternative would be to not mention the ports at all.
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > >
>> > > -Rob
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 08/01/2012 06:16 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 8:57 AM, drew jensen<dr...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 08:47 -0700, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 2:04 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 14:36 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>> I'm drafting the 3.4.1 release announcement blog post. I have a
>>>>> bullet list where I highlight what is in 3.4.1. I list what
>> platforms
>>>>> are supported, mention the Windows 8 compatibility improvements, and
>>>>> then follow with this bullet item:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Community members are also working on BSD, Solaris and OS/2 ports,
>>>>> with plans to release these outside of Apache."
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Howdy Rob,
>>>>
>>>>> Is this accurate and worth saying?
>>>>
>>>> Yes IIRC and yes IMO.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Would it make sense to also
>>>>> include links for each of these ports, where the reader can go for
>>>>> more information?
>>>>
>>>> I would think a better return if instead of putting direct links for
>>>> each, create a fixed address (wiki page?) for 'other ports' (or more
>>>> appropriate for a title).
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Drew--
>>>
>>> We have a page -- actually a former "project" at --
>>>
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>>>
>>> that needs a LOT of cleanup.
>>>
>>> Any volunteers to take the lead on cleaning this up and just highlighting
>>> what we're dealing with now? FreeBSD, OS/2, and Solaris?
>>
>> Hi Kay,
>>
>> Yes, I'll work on that page today and ping the list when it is in
>> stagging.
>>
>> //drew
>>
>
> SUPER! :)
Great that you want to takeover this task. Just updating would be great
but I fear that you have to start at (nearly ?) zero. ;-)
Marcus
>>>> Link to that from the announcement/blog and would make that a precedent
>>>> for future announcements.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Although these are not Apache releases, they are part of the close
>>>>> ecosystem, with developers working directly in our project to support
>>>>> these ports. So I think there is some logic to mentioning them in
>> the
>>>>> release announcement. But work that happens entirely outside of the
>>>>> project, like portable applications versions, would not get a
>> mention.
>>>>
>>>> I would disagree, somewhat, in that personal preference would be to
>>>> include the 2 or 3 portable 'wrapper' distributors as this has seemed
>> to
>>>> be of interest to quite a few folks in the past.
>>>>
>>>> Just my .02
>>>>
>>>> //drew
>>>>>
>>>>> Does this seem fair and appropriate?
>>>>>
>>>>> If we agree to do this, I'll need a link for each of BSD, Solaris and
>>>>> OS/2, for more information.
>>>>>
>>>>> The alternative would be to not mention the ports at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> -Rob
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 8:57 AM, drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 08:47 -0700, Kay Schenk wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 2:04 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 14:36 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> > > > I'm drafting the 3.4.1 release announcement blog post. I have a
> > > > bullet list where I highlight what is in 3.4.1. I list what
> platforms
> > > > are supported, mention the Windows 8 compatibility improvements, and
> > > > then follow with this bullet item:
> > > >
> > > > "Community members are also working on BSD, Solaris and OS/2 ports,
> > > > with plans to release these outside of Apache."
> > > >
> > >
> > > Howdy Rob,
> > >
> > > > Is this accurate and worth saying?
> > >
> > > Yes IIRC and yes IMO.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Would it make sense to also
> > > > include links for each of these ports, where the reader can go for
> > > > more information?
> > >
> > > I would think a better return if instead of putting direct links for
> > > each, create a fixed address (wiki page?) for 'other ports' (or more
> > > appropriate for a title).
> > >
> >
> > Hi Drew--
> >
> > We have a page -- actually a former "project" at --
> >
> > http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
> >
> > that needs a LOT of cleanup.
> >
> > Any volunteers to take the lead on cleaning this up and just highlighting
> > what we're dealing with now? FreeBSD, OS/2, and Solaris?
>
> Hi Kay,
>
> Yes, I'll work on that page today and ping the list when it is in
> stagging.
>
> //drew
>
SUPER! :)
>
> >
> >
> >
> > > Link to that from the announcement/blog and would make that a precedent
> > > for future announcements.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Although these are not Apache releases, they are part of the close
> > > > ecosystem, with developers working directly in our project to support
> > > > these ports. So I think there is some logic to mentioning them in
> the
> > > > release announcement. But work that happens entirely outside of the
> > > > project, like portable applications versions, would not get a
> mention.
> > >
> > > I would disagree, somewhat, in that personal preference would be to
> > > include the 2 or 3 portable 'wrapper' distributors as this has seemed
> to
> > > be of interest to quite a few folks in the past.
> > >
> > > Just my .02
> > >
> > > //drew
> > > >
> > > > Does this seem fair and appropriate?
> > > >
> > > > If we agree to do this, I'll need a link for each of BSD, Solaris and
> > > > OS/2, for more information.
> > > >
> > > > The alternative would be to not mention the ports at all.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > -Rob
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"I'm just a normal jerk who happens to make music.
As long as my brain and fingers work, I'm cool."
-- Eddie Van Halen
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 08:47 -0700, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 2:04 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 14:36 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> > > I'm drafting the 3.4.1 release announcement blog post. I have a
> > > bullet list where I highlight what is in 3.4.1. I list what platforms
> > > are supported, mention the Windows 8 compatibility improvements, and
> > > then follow with this bullet item:
> > >
> > > "Community members are also working on BSD, Solaris and OS/2 ports,
> > > with plans to release these outside of Apache."
> > >
> >
> > Howdy Rob,
> >
> > > Is this accurate and worth saying?
> >
> > Yes IIRC and yes IMO.
> >
> >
> >
> > > Would it make sense to also
> > > include links for each of these ports, where the reader can go for
> > > more information?
> >
> > I would think a better return if instead of putting direct links for
> > each, create a fixed address (wiki page?) for 'other ports' (or more
> > appropriate for a title).
> >
>
> Hi Drew--
>
> We have a page -- actually a former "project" at --
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>
> that needs a LOT of cleanup.
>
> Any volunteers to take the lead on cleaning this up and just highlighting
> what we're dealing with now? FreeBSD, OS/2, and Solaris?
Hi Kay,
Yes, I'll work on that page today and ping the list when it is in
stagging.
//drew
>
>
>
> > Link to that from the announcement/blog and would make that a precedent
> > for future announcements.
> >
> > >
> > > Although these are not Apache releases, they are part of the close
> > > ecosystem, with developers working directly in our project to support
> > > these ports. So I think there is some logic to mentioning them in the
> > > release announcement. But work that happens entirely outside of the
> > > project, like portable applications versions, would not get a mention.
> >
> > I would disagree, somewhat, in that personal preference would be to
> > include the 2 or 3 portable 'wrapper' distributors as this has seemed to
> > be of interest to quite a few folks in the past.
> >
> > Just my .02
> >
> > //drew
> > >
> > > Does this seem fair and appropriate?
> > >
> > > If we agree to do this, I'll need a link for each of BSD, Solaris and
> > > OS/2, for more information.
> > >
> > > The alternative would be to not mention the ports at all.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > -Rob
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports? (BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>.
Hi Drew;
That would be a start ;).
The FreeBSD site can still have some enhancements, like adding a link to the ports:
http://www.freshports.org/editors/openoffice-3/
http://www.freshports.org/editors/openoffice-3-devel/
but I guess I can have a try on that later on with my rudimentary html. :)
Pedro.
>________________________________
> From: drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com>
>To: Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>
>Cc: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, August 1, 2012 11:24 AM
>Subject: Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports? (BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
>
>On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>> Hi Kay;
>>
>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime ago:
>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>
>>
>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site though.
>>
>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the release
>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the FreeBSD port.
>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the port is
>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's available
>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>
>> Pedro.
>>
>Hi Pedro,
>
>Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you updated,
>yes?
>
>//drew
>
><snip>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Maho NAKATA <ch...@mac.com>.
Hi Marcus,
- FreeBSD by Maho Nakata / Pedro Giffuni
thanks
Nakata Maho
From: "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>
Subject: Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports? (BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2012 18:34:53 +0200
> Am 08/18/2012 04:38 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>> Am 08/18/2012 04:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Am 08/18/2012 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
>>>>>>>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ago:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site
>>>>>>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD
>>>>>>>>>>>>> port.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> port is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
>>>>>>>>>>>> updated,
>>>>>>>>>>>> yes?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one
>>>>>>>>>>> page.
>>>>>>>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the announcement,
>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the
>>>>>>>>>>> future.
>>>>>>>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the
>>>>>>>>>>> porting
>>>>>>>>>>> page from the download page.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for this
>>>>>>>>>> evening.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the
>>>>>>>>>> task - a
>>>>>>>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official
>>>>>>>>>> AOO
>>>>>>>>>> release regiment.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the
>>>>>>>>>> act of
>>>>>>>>>> creating a port, with
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
>>>>>>>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and that offers links to places such as
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official
>>>>>>>>>> ports
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
>>>>>>>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a
>>>>>>>>>> resource
>>>>>>>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
>>>>>>>>>> announcement(s) that is.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused
>>>>>>>>> page?
>>>>>>>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software /
>>>>>>>> packages:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage
>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>> was totally outdated.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
>>>>>>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
>>>>>>>>> appropriate, yes?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think so.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Morning All;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any
>>>>>>> consensus
>>>>>>> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
>>>>>>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the
>>>>>>> information
>>>>>>> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
>>>>>>> OpenOffice is available.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a
>>>>>> statement to
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> "non_ASF.html" webpage.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>>>>>
>>>>> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
>>>>> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Maybe not wrong but IMHO totally oudated since months and years and
>>>> needs
>>>> also a clean-up. ;-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> IMHO, It is almost always better to clean up (or replace) an existing
>>> page at a well-known URL than to create an entirely new page at a new
>>> URL. Why? Because the existing page is already linked to, both
>>> internally and externally. So if we think the new content is relevant
>>> to the purpose of the old webpage, e.g., information on ports, then we
>>> should keep the old URL for it.
>>
>> Sure.
>>
>> Maybe we can make a deal, so that everybody has a little task:
>>
>> - I'll clean-up the porting homepage (at least the starting page)
>> - Drew is adding text for the ports to the other webpage
>> - I'll add this text also to the porting homepage
>> - and you just need to keep the link in the announcement ;-)
>
> I've updated the starting webpage at
> "http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html":
>
> @Maho,Pedro,Yuri,Nicolas:
>
> Like stated with the other ports I would like to list your name and
> mail address (if available, the Apache addresses):
>
> - OpenSolaris by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
> - Solaris (Sparc and x86) by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
> - FreeBSD by Pedro Giffuni / Maho Nakata
> - OS/2 by Yuri Dario
>
> Is this OK for you?
>
> Thanks
>
> Marcus
>
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 18/08/2012 22:14, Taf wrote:
> We'll ready to prepare the portable version. Today Andrea sent us the link
> with last/final 3.4.1
> we are waiting for a while only to be sure "r1372282" will be confirmed
> "officially.
I see http://www.winpenpack.com/en/download.php?view.1341 has already
been updated with the live/portable version of OpenOffice 3.4.1
("X-ApacheOpenOffice 3.4.1 [rev2]").
Thanks!
Andrea.
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com>.
On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 22:14 +0200, Taf wrote:
> SNIP
>
> >
> > Howdy,
> >
> > Great - updated the page at
> > http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
> > with the winpenpack info also.
> >
> > //drew
> >
>
> Good news!
> We'll ready to prepare the portable version. Today Andrea sent us the link
> with last/final 3.4.1
> we are waiting for a while only to be sure "r1372282" will be confirmed
> "officially.
Hi Taf,
Very good - I saw the email go our from Andrea and will continue to
follow along and update the page appropriately and quickly ;)
Best wishes
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Taf <ta...@gmail.com>.
SNIP
>
> Howdy,
>
> Great - updated the page at
> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
> with the winpenpack info also.
>
> //drew
>
Good news!
We'll ready to prepare the portable version. Today Andrea sent us the link
with last/final 3.4.1
we are waiting for a while only to be sure "r1372282" will be confirmed
"officially.
Regards
--
ByE By TaF® O-|-> (winPenPack team member)
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Drew Jensen <dr...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As for the non_ASF page, I will be happy to remove it entirely. It was the
> start of something that didn't go anywhere and for which we had a change of
> heart/direction.
>
Looks that way - just remove it then.
//drew
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 21/08/2012 Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Actually I don't know how many other distributions are there, but the
> only requests I've seen so far on mailing lists and forums are for
> portable versions and, to a smaller extent, for versions compatible with
> older Linux glibc versions (and Ariel provided those too, on his
> personal web space, and I believe they should be listed on the same page
> too).
I updated http://www.openoffice.org/porting/ to list the glibc 2.5
version too (a special build by Ariel that will run on older Linux-based
systems) as discussed above.
Regards,
Andrea.
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 08/21/2012 08:29 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Andrea Pescetti<pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Rob Weir wrote:
>>>
>>> I agree that we should have some mention of other versions or
>>> distributions that are based on AOO code, even if they are not
>>> strictly "ports". The question is where to mention them?
>>
>>
>> So far only winPenPack showed up, so for version 3.4.1 it seems natural to
>> just use the
>> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
>> page (which will be published online) and list it there.
>>
>
> I wonder... if we changed the title/header of that page to say "Ports
> and Distributions", but kept the same contents, would that make
> everyone happy?
Sure. With an additional small text that explains what we as AOO project
understand between "Port" and "Ditruibution" this should be a great help.
Marcus
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > Rob Weir wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I agree that we should have some mention of other versions or
>> >> distributions that are based on AOO code, even if they are not
>> >> strictly "ports". The question is where to mention them?
>> >
>> >
>> > So far only winPenPack showed up, so for version 3.4.1 it seems natural
>> to
>> > just use the
>> > http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
>> > page (which will be published online) and list it there.
>> >
>>
>> I wonder... if we changed the title/header of that page to say "Ports
>> and Distributions", but kept the same contents, would that make
>> everyone happy?
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>
> We can certainly do that.
>
> If this is the agreed upon action, I guess I will start a new thread on
> what to do about corrections to the Distribution page. As you know, we
> have had a fair number of requests for CD (DVD) copies as well. Assuming
> the creators step forward, I guess we'll list them.
>
Hmmm.... I think we have two different meanings for the word "distribution".
I'm think of it like a Linux distro, things that take a base
distribution, customize it, possibly add new stuff, and then release
it as a new distribution. But I see we also use the term to refer to
CD's. But I think that is confusing. But I can avoid using the word
distribution in the sense of a distro, if we want to user that word
for CD's.
If so, some suggested definitions:
1) A project release (or unofficial release) (or convenience binary)
(or unofficial convenience binary) is the installers that we produce
within the project, test and vote on (or not, depending on who you
listen to) and then distribute. This currently includes versions for
Windows, Mac OS, Linux 32 and 64-bit
2) A Port (or external release) (or non-ASF release) is based on AOO
source code, with little or no modifications, generally aiming to have
the same feature set as our project releases. It is released outside
of the project. The BSD, OS/2 and Solaris ports are examples.
3) A repackaging (a "distro") would take the core code, repackage it,
adding extensions, clipart, templates, possibly rebuilding or wrapping
the install. We see a lot of this, especially since it is relatively
easy to do and the extensions API is so powerful.
4) A derivative would be a product that more extensively transforms
the core AOO product, by addition or subtraction. In that sense
Symphony was a derivative of OOo.
5) A distribution would be a project release distributed on media such
as an optical disc or USB key.
Given the above, I think we could list 2-4 on a single page and have
it be one of the links from the download page.
We could say something like:
"These projects and products are based on Apache OpenOffice, but are
not maintained or endorsed by the Apache OpenOffice project. The
following links are provided as a convenience to the user:"
#5 is important for some users as well, but I'm not sure we have
anything new to say there?
-Rob
>
>
>>
>> > Regards,
>> > Andrea.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "As a child my family's menu consisted of two choices:
> take it or leave it. "
> -- Buddy Hackett
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > Rob Weir wrote:
> >>
> >> I agree that we should have some mention of other versions or
> >> distributions that are based on AOO code, even if they are not
> >> strictly "ports". The question is where to mention them?
> >
> >
> > So far only winPenPack showed up, so for version 3.4.1 it seems natural
> to
> > just use the
> > http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
> > page (which will be published online) and list it there.
> >
>
> I wonder... if we changed the title/header of that page to say "Ports
> and Distributions", but kept the same contents, would that make
> everyone happy?
>
> -Rob
>
We can certainly do that.
If this is the agreed upon action, I guess I will start a new thread on
what to do about corrections to the Distribution page. As you know, we
have had a fair number of requests for CD (DVD) copies as well. Assuming
the creators step forward, I guess we'll list them.
>
> > Regards,
> > Andrea.
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"As a child my family's menu consisted of two choices:
take it or leave it. "
-- Buddy Hackett
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> I agree that we should have some mention of other versions or
>> distributions that are based on AOO code, even if they are not
>> strictly "ports". The question is where to mention them?
>
>
> So far only winPenPack showed up, so for version 3.4.1 it seems natural to
> just use the
> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
> page (which will be published online) and list it there.
>
I wonder... if we changed the title/header of that page to say "Ports
and Distributions", but kept the same contents, would that make
everyone happy?
-Rob
> Regards,
> Andrea.
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Rob Weir wrote:
> I agree that we should have some mention of other versions or
> distributions that are based on AOO code, even if they are not
> strictly "ports". The question is where to mention them?
So far only winPenPack showed up, so for version 3.4.1 it seems natural
to just use the
http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
page (which will be published online) and list it there.
Regards,
Andrea.
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 08/21/2012 12:42 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Kay Schenk wrote:
>> We can leave the porting page "as is" with winPenPack on it, and just
>> see what happens. But I guarantee that based on comments on
>> comments/questions we've already had over the past year, we will
>> basically be obliged to list every other distributor that also feels
>> they have legitimate distribution.
>> And, listing winPenPack contradicts what we have on the "distribution"
>> page: http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/
>
> No, there's a major difference between a "distribution" (a terminology
> existing at Apache but not in the previous OpenOffice.org project) and a
> "distributor" (which is terminology used in the old OpenOffice.org
> project and is what http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/ refers to,
> or used to refer to).
>
> A "distribution" is a piece a software derived from OpenOffice. The
> winPenPack team (and PortableApps too, if/when they decide to provide
> it) takes the original binaries as downloaded from the OpenOffice
> website, performs a "fake installation", changes a few configuration
> settings and makes the result available on SourceForge as a
> "portable/live" variant of OpenOffice. Others might start from source,
> add extensions and templates (and even functionality) and obtain
> something called "Xyz, based on OpenOffice.org".
>
> A "distributor", for the old project, was someone delivering unmodified
> copies of the OpenOffice.org source and binaries on CD-ROM (and/or
> selling download links, and this was considered borderline behavior). A
> portable version would have never been included in
> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/ since that page/project was only
> related to different ways (rather than downloading from the official
> site) to obtain the unmodified OpenOffice.org.
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
Andrea, OK, I see what you're saying. I was using these terms in the
more general "parts of speech" sense. A "distributor" is one who markets
(in some way) a "distribution".
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"As a child my family's menu consisted of two choices:
take it or leave it. "
-- Buddy Hackett
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Kay Schenk wrote:
> We can leave the porting page "as is" with winPenPack on it, and just
> see what happens. But I guarantee that based on comments on
> comments/questions we've already had over the past year, we will
> basically be obliged to list every other distributor that also feels
> they have legitimate distribution.
> And, listing winPenPack contradicts what we have on the "distribution"
> page: http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/
No, there's a major difference between a "distribution" (a terminology
existing at Apache but not in the previous OpenOffice.org project) and a
"distributor" (which is terminology used in the old OpenOffice.org
project and is what http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/ refers to,
or used to refer to).
A "distribution" is a piece a software derived from OpenOffice. The
winPenPack team (and PortableApps too, if/when they decide to provide
it) takes the original binaries as downloaded from the OpenOffice
website, performs a "fake installation", changes a few configuration
settings and makes the result available on SourceForge as a
"portable/live" variant of OpenOffice. Others might start from source,
add extensions and templates (and even functionality) and obtain
something called "Xyz, based on OpenOffice.org".
A "distributor", for the old project, was someone delivering unmodified
copies of the OpenOffice.org source and binaries on CD-ROM (and/or
selling download links, and this was considered borderline behavior). A
portable version would have never been included in
http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/ since that page/project was only
related to different ways (rather than downloading from the official
site) to obtain the unmodified OpenOffice.org.
Regards,
Andrea.
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 08/20/2012 04:39 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 7:24 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>
>>> So, I think the second column on the porting page should be removed
>>> entirely. I feel winPenPack is a distribution and not a port, and
>>> therefore this would go as well. (I need to look again to see how/why
>>> this was even suggested). I think we would take on an incredible amount
>>> of work if we decided to start listing distribution entities
>>
>>
>> There are surely many more (say, 100x) people asking for a "portable"
>> version for Windows (and we have WinPenPack already available, and I hope
>> PortableApps will join soon) than people asking for a BSD, Solaris or OS/2
>> port. So I feel that removing portable versions would be a disservice to
>> users.
>>
>> Actually I don't know how many other distributions are there, but the only
>> requests I've seen so far on mailing lists and forums are for portable
>> versions and, to a smaller extent, for versions compatible with older Linux
>> glibc versions (and Ariel provided those too, on his personal web space, and
>> I believe they should be listed on the same page too).
>>
>
> I agree that we should have some mention of other versions or
> distributions that are based on AOO code, even if they are not
> strictly "ports". The question is where to mention them?
>
> -Rob
yes, where to mention them. It seems like we go back to maintaining the
"external" distributions area.
We can leave the porting page "as is" with winPenPack on it, and just
see what happens. But I guarantee that based on comments on
comments/questions we've already had over the past year, we will
basically be obliged to list every other distributor that also feels
they have legitimate distribution.
And, listing winPenPack contradicts what we have on the "distribution" page:
http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/
so I would feel obliged to change this information. We need to be
consistent.
Naturally, I will defer to the majority's will.
>
>> Regards,
>> Andrea.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think."
-- Niels Bohr
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 7:24 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> Kay Schenk wrote:
>>
>> So, I think the second column on the porting page should be removed
>> entirely. I feel winPenPack is a distribution and not a port, and
>> therefore this would go as well. (I need to look again to see how/why
>> this was even suggested). I think we would take on an incredible amount
>> of work if we decided to start listing distribution entities
>
>
> There are surely many more (say, 100x) people asking for a "portable"
> version for Windows (and we have WinPenPack already available, and I hope
> PortableApps will join soon) than people asking for a BSD, Solaris or OS/2
> port. So I feel that removing portable versions would be a disservice to
> users.
>
> Actually I don't know how many other distributions are there, but the only
> requests I've seen so far on mailing lists and forums are for portable
> versions and, to a smaller extent, for versions compatible with older Linux
> glibc versions (and Ariel provided those too, on his personal web space, and
> I believe they should be listed on the same page too).
>
I agree that we should have some mention of other versions or
distributions that are based on AOO code, even if they are not
strictly "ports". The question is where to mention them?
-Rob
> Regards,
> Andrea.
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Kay Schenk wrote:
> So, I think the second column on the porting page should be removed
> entirely. I feel winPenPack is a distribution and not a port, and
> therefore this would go as well. (I need to look again to see how/why
> this was even suggested). I think we would take on an incredible amount
> of work if we decided to start listing distribution entities
There are surely many more (say, 100x) people asking for a "portable"
version for Windows (and we have WinPenPack already available, and I
hope PortableApps will join soon) than people asking for a BSD, Solaris
or OS/2 port. So I feel that removing portable versions would be a
disservice to users.
Actually I don't know how many other distributions are there, but the
only requests I've seen so far on mailing lists and forums are for
portable versions and, to a smaller extent, for versions compatible with
older Linux glibc versions (and Ariel provided those too, on his
personal web space, and I believe they should be listed on the same page
too).
Regards,
Andrea.
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 08/20/2012 01:05 PM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Am 08/20/2012 06:19 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>>
>>
>> On 08/20/2012 03:57 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>>> Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>>> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
>>>> hmmmm...I didn't realize that the winPenPack port is also listed on the
>>>> first page, the porting page. I don't remember seeing this earlier
>>>> today.
>>>> Do we really want to do this? Is this really a "port" or a
>>>> "distribution"?
>>>
>>> Indeed it's more a distribution, but as discussed the porting page is
>>> already there and has more visibility, so I agree to put both
>>> distributions and ports there.
>>>
>>> Maybe we could adapt the title and descriptions to say that the page
>>> lists all third-party packages, including ports and distributions such
>>> as portable versions.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Andrea.
>>
>> OK, I re-read through this thread just now. I guess it was agreed (or
>> not refuted at any rate) that because the "porting" page was a known
>> entity and the non_ASF page was not (not even linked anywhere) to put
>> winPenPack on porting.
>
> Thats what I wrote a few days ago and nobody objected. ;-) So, I've
> added it to the webpage.
OK, well when I looked at the thread it seemed as if Rob ahd made this
comment -- i.e. the known vs the unknown and then, ta da, there is
winPenPack.
>
>> Yes, we should change the title. Other statements we have in the
>> Distribution FAQ will need to be changed as well because of this.
>> We should supply additional information on what the criteria is for
>> being listed on the newly designed "porting" page.
>
> We could transfer the text from the non-ASF page and adapt it slightly
> to fit both puposes:
>
> a) list all binary release work that is done outside the ASF.
> b) list all binary release work on platforms others that the, hm, lets
> say mainstream.
>
> Marcus
I think we discussed at length some time ago (months) when changes were
made to : http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/
that we were not going to attempt to keep tract or reference any
distributions *at all* on the site.
So, I think the second column on the porting page should be removed
entirely. I feel winPenPack is a distribution and not a port, and
therefore this would go as well. (I need to look again to see how/why
this was even suggested). I think we would take on an incredible amount
of work if we decided to start listing distribution entities, regardless
of our good intentions. This is why we took off the list to begin with,
so why this one entry now?
The porting thing is different. These ARE ports to OSes that we do not
currently offer "officially" AND they are built by trusted community
members.
As for the non_ASF page, I will be happy to remove it entirely. It was
the start of something that didn't go anywhere and for which we had a
change of heart/direction.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think."
-- Niels Bohr
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 08/20/2012 06:19 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>
>
> On 08/20/2012 03:57 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>> Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
>>> hmmmm...I didn't realize that the winPenPack port is also listed on the
>>> first page, the porting page. I don't remember seeing this earlier
>>> today.
>>> Do we really want to do this? Is this really a "port" or a
>>> "distribution"?
>>
>> Indeed it's more a distribution, but as discussed the porting page is
>> already there and has more visibility, so I agree to put both
>> distributions and ports there.
>>
>> Maybe we could adapt the title and descriptions to say that the page
>> lists all third-party packages, including ports and distributions such
>> as portable versions.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andrea.
>
> OK, I re-read through this thread just now. I guess it was agreed (or
> not refuted at any rate) that because the "porting" page was a known
> entity and the non_ASF page was not (not even linked anywhere) to put
> winPenPack on porting.
Thats what I wrote a few days ago and nobody objected. ;-) So, I've
added it to the webpage.
> Yes, we should change the title. Other statements we have in the
> Distribution FAQ will need to be changed as well because of this.
> We should supply additional information on what the criteria is for
> being listed on the newly designed "porting" page.
We could transfer the text from the non-ASF page and adapt it slightly
to fit both puposes:
a) list all binary release work that is done outside the ASF.
b) list all binary release work on platforms others that the, hm, lets
say mainstream.
Marcus
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 08/20/2012 03:57 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Kay Schenk wrote:
>>> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
>> hmmmm...I didn't realize that the winPenPack port is also listed on the
>> first page, the porting page. I don't remember seeing this earlier today.
>> Do we really want to do this? Is this really a "port" or a
>> "distribution"?
>
> Indeed it's more a distribution, but as discussed the porting page is
> already there and has more visibility, so I agree to put both
> distributions and ports there.
>
> Maybe we could adapt the title and descriptions to say that the page
> lists all third-party packages, including ports and distributions such
> as portable versions.
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
OK, I re-read through this thread just now. I guess it was agreed (or
not refuted at any rate) that because the "porting" page was a known
entity and the non_ASF page was not (not even linked anywhere) to put
winPenPack on porting.
Yes, we should change the title. Other statements we have in the
Distribution FAQ will need to be changed as well because of this.
We should supply additional information on what the criteria is for
being listed on the newly designed "porting" page.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think."
-- Niels Bohr
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Kay Schenk wrote:
>> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
> hmmmm...I didn't realize that the winPenPack port is also listed on the
> first page, the porting page. I don't remember seeing this earlier today.
> Do we really want to do this? Is this really a "port" or a "distribution"?
Indeed it's more a distribution, but as discussed the porting page is
already there and has more visibility, so I agree to put both
distributions and ports there.
Maybe we could adapt the title and descriptions to say that the page
lists all third-party packages, including ports and distributions such
as portable versions.
Regards,
Andrea.
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> So it looks like we're ending up with two related pages, both now in
> staging:
>
> This page describes the porting work in the project, including
> work-in-progress as well as work that has already lead to a release:
>
> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
>
> And this page lists only ports that are actually available for download:
>
> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/download/non_ASF.html
>
> So in terms of the release announcement, I assume we mention the first
> page, the one for the ports-in-progress, since we are not releasing
> concurrently with any other ports. Does that sound right? The
> mention of ports in the announcement is a statement about the breadth
> of the ecosystem. It is not a statement about immediately
> availability of downloads.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
Actually, they're both in production now.
hmmmm...I didn't realize that the winPenPack port is also listed on the
first page, the porting page. I don't remember seeing this earlier today.
Do we really want to do this? Is this really a "port" or a "distribution"?
I think the latter.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think."
--
Niels Bohr
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
So it looks like we're ending up with two related pages, both now in staging:
This page describes the porting work in the project, including
work-in-progress as well as work that has already lead to a release:
http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
And this page lists only ports that are actually available for download:
http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/download/non_ASF.html
So in terms of the release announcement, I assume we mention the first
page, the one for the ports-in-progress, since we are not releasing
concurrently with any other ports. Does that sound right? The
mention of ports in the announcement is a statement about the breadth
of the ecosystem. It is not a statement about immediately
availability of downloads.
Regards,
-Rob
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 08/19/2012 02:45 AM, schrieb drew:
> On Sun, 2012-08-19 at 01:15 +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>> Am 08/18/2012 07:30 PM, schrieb drew:
>>> On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 18:53 +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:34 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 04:38 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 04:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ago:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> updated,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yes?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> page.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> future.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> porting
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> page from the download page.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> task - a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AOO
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release regiment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> act of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creating a port, with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and that offers links to places such as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ports
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resource
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement(s) that is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused
>>>>>>>>>>>>> page?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software /
>>>>>>>>>>>> packages:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage
>>>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>>>> was totally outdated.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
>>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
>>>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate, yes?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think so.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Morning All;
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any
>>>>>>>>>>> consensus
>>>>>>>>>>> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
>>>>>>>>>>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the
>>>>>>>>>>> information
>>>>>>>>>>> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
>>>>>>>>>>> OpenOffice is available.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a
>>>>>>>>>> statement to
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> "non_ASF.html" webpage.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
>>>>>>>>> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maybe not wrong but IMHO totally oudated since months and years and
>>>>>>>> needs
>>>>>>>> also a clean-up. ;-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> IMHO, It is almost always better to clean up (or replace) an existing
>>>>>>> page at a well-known URL than to create an entirely new page at a new
>>>>>>> URL. Why? Because the existing page is already linked to, both
>>>>>>> internally and externally. So if we think the new content is relevant
>>>>>>> to the purpose of the old webpage, e.g., information on ports, then we
>>>>>>> should keep the old URL for it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe we can make a deal, so that everybody has a little task:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - I'll clean-up the porting homepage (at least the starting page)
>>>>>> - Drew is adding text for the ports to the other webpage
>>>>>> - I'll add this text also to the porting homepage
>>>>>> - and you just need to keep the link in the announcement ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> I've updated the starting webpage at
>>>>> "http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html":
>>>>
>>>> Ahm, it's still in the stageing area:
>>>> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
>>>>
>>>> Marcus
>>>
>>> Howdy,
>>>
>>> Great - updated the page at
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>>> with the winpenpack info also.
>>
>> Sorry, have you already or will you update the page? I still see the old
>> text without a hint for winpenpack.
>
> Hi,
>
> well...I got an update version number from the process and everything,
> really I did...but I don't see a change either...hmm, did I leave out a
> step..let's see.
Now it's in the staging area. Will be public when I've finished my update.
Marcus
>>>>> @Maho,Pedro,Yuri,Nicolas:
>>>>>
>>>>> Like stated with the other ports I would like to list your name and mail
>>>>> address (if available, the Apache addresses):
>>>>>
>>>>> - OpenSolaris by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
>>>>> - Solaris (Sparc and x86) by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
>>>>> - FreeBSD by Pedro Giffuni / Maho Nakata
>>>>> - OS/2 by Yuri Dario
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this OK for you?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> Marcus
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Sun, 2012-08-19 at 01:15 +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Am 08/18/2012 07:30 PM, schrieb drew:
> > On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 18:53 +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> >> Am 08/18/2012 06:34 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
> >>> Am 08/18/2012 04:38 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
> >>>> Am 08/18/2012 04:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> >>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ago:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> available
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pedro.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> updated,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> yes?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> page.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> but
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> future.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> porting
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> page from the download page.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -Rob
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for
> >>>>>>>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>>>> evening.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> task - a
> >>>>>>>>>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official
> >>>>>>>>>>>> AOO
> >>>>>>>>>>>> release regiment.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> act of
> >>>>>>>>>>>> creating a port, with
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> and that offers links to places such as
> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official
> >>>>>>>>>>>> ports
> >>>>>>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a
> >>>>>>>>>>>> resource
> >>>>>>>>>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> announcement(s) that is.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes. ;-)
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused
> >>>>>>>>>>> page?
> >>>>>>>>>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe
> >>>>>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software /
> >>>>>>>>>> packages:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage
> >>>>>>>>>> which
> >>>>>>>>>> was totally outdated.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
> >>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
> >>>>>>>>>>> appropriate, yes?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I think so.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Marcus
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Morning All;
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any
> >>>>>>>>> consensus
> >>>>>>>>> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
> >>>>>>>>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the
> >>>>>>>>> information
> >>>>>>>>> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
> >>>>>>>>> OpenOffice is available.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a
> >>>>>>>> statement to
> >>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> "non_ASF.html" webpage.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
> >>>>>>> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Maybe not wrong but IMHO totally oudated since months and years and
> >>>>>> needs
> >>>>>> also a clean-up. ;-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> IMHO, It is almost always better to clean up (or replace) an existing
> >>>>> page at a well-known URL than to create an entirely new page at a new
> >>>>> URL. Why? Because the existing page is already linked to, both
> >>>>> internally and externally. So if we think the new content is relevant
> >>>>> to the purpose of the old webpage, e.g., information on ports, then we
> >>>>> should keep the old URL for it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Sure.
> >>>>
> >>>> Maybe we can make a deal, so that everybody has a little task:
> >>>>
> >>>> - I'll clean-up the porting homepage (at least the starting page)
> >>>> - Drew is adding text for the ports to the other webpage
> >>>> - I'll add this text also to the porting homepage
> >>>> - and you just need to keep the link in the announcement ;-)
> >>>
> >>> I've updated the starting webpage at
> >>> "http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html":
> >>
> >> Ahm, it's still in the stageing area:
> >> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
> >>
> >> Marcus
> >
> > Howdy,
> >
> > Great - updated the page at
> > http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
> > with the winpenpack info also.
>
> Sorry, have you already or will you update the page? I still see the old
> text without a hint for winpenpack.
Hi,
well...I got an update version number from the process and everything,
really I did...but I don't see a change either...hmm, did I leave out a
step..let's see.
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
> >>> @Maho,Pedro,Yuri,Nicolas:
> >>>
> >>> Like stated with the other ports I would like to list your name and mail
> >>> address (if available, the Apache addresses):
> >>>
> >>> - OpenSolaris by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
> >>> - Solaris (Sparc and x86) by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
> >>> - FreeBSD by Pedro Giffuni / Maho Nakata
> >>> - OS/2 by Yuri Dario
> >>>
> >>> Is this OK for you?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>>
> >>> Marcus
>
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 08/18/2012 07:30 PM, schrieb drew:
> On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 18:53 +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>> Am 08/18/2012 06:34 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>>> Am 08/18/2012 04:38 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>>>> Am 08/18/2012 04:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
>>>>>>>>>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ago:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> updated,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yes?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one
>>>>>>>>>>>>> page.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> future.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> porting
>>>>>>>>>>>>> page from the download page.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for
>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>> evening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the
>>>>>>>>>>>> task - a
>>>>>>>>>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official
>>>>>>>>>>>> AOO
>>>>>>>>>>>> release regiment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the
>>>>>>>>>>>> act of
>>>>>>>>>>>> creating a port, with
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> and that offers links to places such as
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official
>>>>>>>>>>>> ports
>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
>>>>>>>>>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a
>>>>>>>>>>>> resource
>>>>>>>>>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement(s) that is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused
>>>>>>>>>>> page?
>>>>>>>>>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe
>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software /
>>>>>>>>>> packages:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage
>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>> was totally outdated.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate, yes?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think so.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Morning All;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any
>>>>>>>>> consensus
>>>>>>>>> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
>>>>>>>>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the
>>>>>>>>> information
>>>>>>>>> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
>>>>>>>>> OpenOffice is available.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a
>>>>>>>> statement to
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> "non_ASF.html" webpage.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
>>>>>>> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe not wrong but IMHO totally oudated since months and years and
>>>>>> needs
>>>>>> also a clean-up. ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> IMHO, It is almost always better to clean up (or replace) an existing
>>>>> page at a well-known URL than to create an entirely new page at a new
>>>>> URL. Why? Because the existing page is already linked to, both
>>>>> internally and externally. So if we think the new content is relevant
>>>>> to the purpose of the old webpage, e.g., information on ports, then we
>>>>> should keep the old URL for it.
>>>>
>>>> Sure.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe we can make a deal, so that everybody has a little task:
>>>>
>>>> - I'll clean-up the porting homepage (at least the starting page)
>>>> - Drew is adding text for the ports to the other webpage
>>>> - I'll add this text also to the porting homepage
>>>> - and you just need to keep the link in the announcement ;-)
>>>
>>> I've updated the starting webpage at
>>> "http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html":
>>
>> Ahm, it's still in the stageing area:
>> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
>>
>> Marcus
>
> Howdy,
>
> Great - updated the page at
> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
> with the winpenpack info also.
Sorry, have you already or will you update the page? I still see the old
text without a hint for winpenpack.
Marcus
>>> @Maho,Pedro,Yuri,Nicolas:
>>>
>>> Like stated with the other ports I would like to list your name and mail
>>> address (if available, the Apache addresses):
>>>
>>> - OpenSolaris by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
>>> - Solaris (Sparc and x86) by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
>>> - FreeBSD by Pedro Giffuni / Maho Nakata
>>> - OS/2 by Yuri Dario
>>>
>>> Is this OK for you?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Marcus
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 18:53 +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Am 08/18/2012 06:34 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
> > Am 08/18/2012 04:38 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
> >> Am 08/18/2012 04:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> >>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> Am 08/18/2012 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
> >>>>>>>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ago:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> though.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> port.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> port is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> available
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Pedro.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
> >>>>>>>>>>>> updated,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> yes?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one
> >>>>>>>>>>> page.
> >>>>>>>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the
> >>>>>>>>>>> announcement,
> >>>>>>>>>>> but
> >>>>>>>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the
> >>>>>>>>>>> future.
> >>>>>>>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the
> >>>>>>>>>>> porting
> >>>>>>>>>>> page from the download page.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> -Rob
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for
> >>>>>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>> evening.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the
> >>>>>>>>>> task - a
> >>>>>>>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official
> >>>>>>>>>> AOO
> >>>>>>>>>> release regiment.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the
> >>>>>>>>>> act of
> >>>>>>>>>> creating a port, with
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
> >>>>>>>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> and that offers links to places such as
> >>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official
> >>>>>>>>>> ports
> >>>>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
> >>>>>>>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a
> >>>>>>>>>> resource
> >>>>>>>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
> >>>>>>>>>> announcement(s) that is.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Yes. ;-)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused
> >>>>>>>>> page?
> >>>>>>>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe
> >>>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software /
> >>>>>>>> packages:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage
> >>>>>>>> which
> >>>>>>>> was totally outdated.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
> >>>>>>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
> >>>>>>>>> appropriate, yes?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I think so.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Marcus
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Morning All;
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any
> >>>>>>> consensus
> >>>>>>> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
> >>>>>>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the
> >>>>>>> information
> >>>>>>> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
> >>>>>>> OpenOffice is available.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a
> >>>>>> statement to
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> "non_ASF.html" webpage.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
> >>>>> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Maybe not wrong but IMHO totally oudated since months and years and
> >>>> needs
> >>>> also a clean-up. ;-)
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> IMHO, It is almost always better to clean up (or replace) an existing
> >>> page at a well-known URL than to create an entirely new page at a new
> >>> URL. Why? Because the existing page is already linked to, both
> >>> internally and externally. So if we think the new content is relevant
> >>> to the purpose of the old webpage, e.g., information on ports, then we
> >>> should keep the old URL for it.
> >>
> >> Sure.
> >>
> >> Maybe we can make a deal, so that everybody has a little task:
> >>
> >> - I'll clean-up the porting homepage (at least the starting page)
> >> - Drew is adding text for the ports to the other webpage
> >> - I'll add this text also to the porting homepage
> >> - and you just need to keep the link in the announcement ;-)
> >
> > I've updated the starting webpage at
> > "http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html":
>
> Ahm, it's still in the stageing area:
> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
>
> Marcus
Howdy,
Great - updated the page at
http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
with the winpenpack info also.
//drew
>
>
> > @Maho,Pedro,Yuri,Nicolas:
> >
> > Like stated with the other ports I would like to list your name and mail
> > address (if available, the Apache addresses):
> >
> > - OpenSolaris by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
> > - Solaris (Sparc and x86) by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
> > - FreeBSD by Pedro Giffuni / Maho Nakata
> > - OS/2 by Yuri Dario
> >
> > Is this OK for you?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Marcus
>
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 08/18/2012 10:43 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
>
>> Am 08/18/2012 06:34 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>>
>> Am 08/18/2012 04:38 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>>>
>>>> Am 08/18/2012 04:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
>>>>>>>>>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ago:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**porting/freebsd/<http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> updated,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yes?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one
>>>>>>>>>>>>> page.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> future.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> porting
>>>>>>>>>>>>> page from the download page.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for
>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>> evening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the
>>>>>>>>>>>> task - a
>>>>>>>>>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official
>>>>>>>>>>>> AOO
>>>>>>>>>>>> release regiment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the
>>>>>>>>>>>> act of
>>>>>>>>>>>> creating a port, with
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**porting/porting_overview.html<http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**porting/porting_implement.html<http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_**Efforts<http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> and that offers links to places such as
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/**cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html<http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official
>>>>>>>>>>>> ports
>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
>>>>>>>>>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a
>>>>>>>>>>>> resource
>>>>>>>>>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement(s) that is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused
>>>>>>>>>>> page?
>>>>>>>>>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe
>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software /
>>>>>>>>>> packages:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**download/non_ASF.html<http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage
>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>> was totally outdated.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate, yes?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think so.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Morning All;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any
>>>>>>>>> consensus
>>>>>>>>> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
>>>>>>>>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the
>>>>>>>>> information
>>>>>>>>> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
>>>>>>>>> OpenOffice is available.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a
>>>>>>>> statement to
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> "non_ASF.html" webpage.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/**
>>>>>>> porting/<http://www.openoffice.org/porting/>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
>>>>>>> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe not wrong but IMHO totally oudated since months and years and
>>>>>> needs
>>>>>> also a clean-up. ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> IMHO, It is almost always better to clean up (or replace) an existing
>>>>> page at a well-known URL than to create an entirely new page at a new
>>>>> URL. Why? Because the existing page is already linked to, both
>>>>> internally and externally. So if we think the new content is relevant
>>>>> to the purpose of the old webpage, e.g., information on ports, then we
>>>>> should keep the old URL for it.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sure.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe we can make a deal, so that everybody has a little task:
>>>>
>>>> - I'll clean-up the porting homepage (at least the starting page)
>>>> - Drew is adding text for the ports to the other webpage
>>>> - I'll add this text also to the porting homepage
>>>> - and you just need to keep the link in the announcement ;-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> I've updated the starting webpage at
>>> "http://www.openoffice.org/**porting/index.html<http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html>
>>> ":
>>>
>>
>> Ahm, it's still in the stageing area:
>> http://ooo-site.staging.**apache.org/porting/index.html<http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html>
>>
>> Marcus
>
>
> HI --
>
> OK, this is now live with my other publish this am...
>
> It looks like we have a "broken" link to an OS/2 graphic that finally
> resolves to just text "OS/2". We should provide a new reference or just
> change to text so this doesn't hang up the loading.
Thanks, I thought it would be OK to just link to the logos. I've fixed
it and added the first names.
Marcus
>> @Maho,Pedro,Yuri,Nicolas:
>>>
>>> Like stated with the other ports I would like to list your name and mail
>>> address (if available, the Apache addresses):
>>>
>>> - OpenSolaris by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
>>> - Solaris (Sparc and x86) by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
>>> - FreeBSD by Pedro Giffuni / Maho Nakata
>>> - OS/2 by Yuri Dario
>>>
>>> Is this OK for you?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Marcus
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> Am 08/18/2012 06:34 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>
> Am 08/18/2012 04:38 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>>
>>> Am 08/18/2012 04:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
>>>>>>>>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ago:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**porting/freebsd/<http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
>>>>>>>>>>>>> updated,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> yes?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one
>>>>>>>>>>>> page.
>>>>>>>>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the
>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement,
>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the
>>>>>>>>>>>> future.
>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the
>>>>>>>>>>>> porting
>>>>>>>>>>>> page from the download page.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for
>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>> evening.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the
>>>>>>>>>>> task - a
>>>>>>>>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official
>>>>>>>>>>> AOO
>>>>>>>>>>> release regiment.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the
>>>>>>>>>>> act of
>>>>>>>>>>> creating a port, with
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**porting/porting_overview.html<http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**porting/porting_implement.html<http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
>>>>>>>>>>> http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_**Efforts<http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> and that offers links to places such as
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/**cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html<http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official
>>>>>>>>>>> ports
>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
>>>>>>>>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a
>>>>>>>>>>> resource
>>>>>>>>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
>>>>>>>>>>> announcement(s) that is.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused
>>>>>>>>>> page?
>>>>>>>>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software /
>>>>>>>>> packages:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**download/non_ASF.html<http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage
>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>> was totally outdated.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
>>>>>>>>>> appropriate, yes?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think so.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Morning All;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any
>>>>>>>> consensus
>>>>>>>> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
>>>>>>>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the
>>>>>>>> information
>>>>>>>> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
>>>>>>>> OpenOffice is available.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a
>>>>>>> statement to
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> "non_ASF.html" webpage.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/**
>>>>>> porting/ <http://www.openoffice.org/porting/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
>>>>>> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe not wrong but IMHO totally oudated since months and years and
>>>>> needs
>>>>> also a clean-up. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> IMHO, It is almost always better to clean up (or replace) an existing
>>>> page at a well-known URL than to create an entirely new page at a new
>>>> URL. Why? Because the existing page is already linked to, both
>>>> internally and externally. So if we think the new content is relevant
>>>> to the purpose of the old webpage, e.g., information on ports, then we
>>>> should keep the old URL for it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sure.
>>>
>>> Maybe we can make a deal, so that everybody has a little task:
>>>
>>> - I'll clean-up the porting homepage (at least the starting page)
>>> - Drew is adding text for the ports to the other webpage
>>> - I'll add this text also to the porting homepage
>>> - and you just need to keep the link in the announcement ;-)
>>>
>>
>> I've updated the starting webpage at
>> "http://www.openoffice.org/**porting/index.html<http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html>
>> ":
>>
>
> Ahm, it's still in the stageing area:
> http://ooo-site.staging.**apache.org/porting/index.html<http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html>
>
> Marcus
HI --
OK, this is now live with my other publish this am...
It looks like we have a "broken" link to an OS/2 graphic that finally
resolves to just text "OS/2". We should provide a new reference or just
change to text so this doesn't hang up the loading.
>
>
>
> @Maho,Pedro,Yuri,Nicolas:
>>
>> Like stated with the other ports I would like to list your name and mail
>> address (if available, the Apache addresses):
>>
>> - OpenSolaris by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
>> - Solaris (Sparc and x86) by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
>> - FreeBSD by Pedro Giffuni / Maho Nakata
>> - OS/2 by Yuri Dario
>>
>> Is this OK for you?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think."
--
Niels Bohr
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 08/19/2012 05:08 AM, schrieb Pedro Giffuni:
> Hi Marcus;
>
> I am OK with people asking for help but I don't appreciate getting spammed
> If you could please obfuscate my email address it would be better.
sorry, of course. I hope the new way is better. Otherwise just tell me
and suggest a better form.
Marcus
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Cc: rbircher@apache.org
>> Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2012 5:58 PM
>> Subject: Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports? (BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
>>
>> Am 08/18/2012 11:55 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 08/18/2012 09:53 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:34 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 04:38 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 04:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Marcus
>> (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus
>> (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N.
>> McKenna:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob
>> Weir:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM,
>> drew<dr...@baseanswers.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28
>> -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at
>> 12:24 PM, drew
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at
>> 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did some basic
>> update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ago:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The site
>> doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would prefer to
>> spend my time on the code rather than on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement,
>> however feel free to mention explicitly the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to make it
>> clear: we still have some cleanup to do but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fully operational
>> and FreeBSD users are fully aware that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD
>> releases.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should
>> be enough to just point to the page
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> updated,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yes?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate
>> all the porting links onto that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> page.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That way it gives one clear
>> place to link to in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also a single place we can
>> link to from other places in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> future.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, we should
>> probably eventually have a link to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> porting
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> page from the download
>> page.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just
>> getting around to looking at things for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now...
>> *chuckling*..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This might not be the right
>> place for what I thought was the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> task - a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> list of existing known ports
>> which are not part of the official
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AOO
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release regiment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The porting page and it's
>> associated pages seem more about the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> act of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creating a port, with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which starts off by pointing to
>> this page:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and that offers links to places
>> such as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So do we really want a page for
>> listing existing non-official
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ports
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are known, a simple information
>> service for our users without
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> explicitly stating such,
>> endorsing the work - or do we want a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resource
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for those wanting to perform a
>> port to a new platform - for the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement(s) that is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe the existing porting page
>> remains as a developer-focused
>>>>>>>>>>>>> page?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It needs to be updated, of course,
>> but maybe not as urgent.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then we also need a user-facing
>> page about existing ports. Maybe
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> could be a new page in the
>> /download directory?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There is already a page which points to
>> 3rd party software /
>>>>>>>>>>>> packages:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Kay has created this to compensate the
>> old distribution webpage
>>>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>>>> was totally outdated.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So, what about to extend this new page
>> with a "Ports" section
>>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For the announcement the
>> user-facing one would be the most
>>>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate, yes?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think so.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Morning All;
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Just checking in on this thread to see if
>> there has been any
>>>>>>>>>>> consensus
>>>>>>>>>>> on how we should do this or if we should.
>> As we are fast
>>>>>>>>>>> approaching
>>>>>>>>>>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this
>> into the Release Notes.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As a stated bore I believe that it is
>> important to get the
>>>>>>>>>>> information
>>>>>>>>>>> out that these operating systems are not
>> forgotten and that Apache
>>>>>>>>>>> OpenOffice is available.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As I haven't seen any different let's
>> add these OSs with a
>>>>>>>>>> statement to
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> "non_ASF.html" webpage.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The announcement current links to:
>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top
>> listing if someone
>>>>>>>>> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maybe not wrong but IMHO totally oudated since months
>> and years and
>>>>>>>> needs
>>>>>>>> also a clean-up. ;-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> IMHO, It is almost always better to clean up (or replace)
>> an existing
>>>>>>> page at a well-known URL than to create an entirely new
>> page at a new
>>>>>>> URL. Why? Because the existing page is already linked to,
>> both
>>>>>>> internally and externally. So if we think the new content
>> is relevant
>>>>>>> to the purpose of the old webpage, e.g., information on
>> ports, then we
>>>>>>> should keep the old URL for it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe we can make a deal, so that everybody has a little task:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - I'll clean-up the porting homepage (at least the starting
>> page)
>>>>>> - Drew is adding text for the ports to the other webpage
>>>>>> - I'll add this text also to the porting homepage
>>>>>> - and you just need to keep the link in the announcement ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> I've updated the starting webpage at
>>>>> "http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html":
>>>>
>>>> Ahm, it's still in the stageing area:
>>>> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
>>>>
>>>> Marcus
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> @Maho,Pedro,Yuri,Nicolas:
>>>>>
>>>>> Like stated with the other ports I would like to list your name and
>> mail
>>>>> address (if available, the Apache addresses):
>>>>>
>>>>> - OpenSolaris by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
>>>>> - Solaris (Sparc and x86) by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas
>> Christener)
>>>>> - FreeBSD by Pedro Giffuni / Maho Nakata
>>>>> - OS/2 by Yuri Dario
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this OK for you?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> Marcus
>>>
>>> Marcus, on this last part...should Raphael Bircher be added for the
>>> Solaris ports as well? But, we need to hear from both of them.
>>>
>>> Nice job on this update by the way.
>>
>> Hm, I don't know how much he is involved with the port.
>>
>> @Raphael:
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Marcus
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports? (BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>.
Hi Marcus;
I am OK with people asking for help but I don't appreciate getting spammed
If you could please obfuscate my email address it would be better.
thanks,
Pedro.
----- Original Message -----
> From: Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de>
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: rbircher@apache.org
> Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2012 5:58 PM
> Subject: Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports? (BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
>
> Am 08/18/2012 11:55 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>>
>>
>> On 08/18/2012 09:53 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:34 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>>>> Am 08/18/2012 04:38 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 04:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Marcus
> (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus
> (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N.
> McKenna:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob
> Weir:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM,
> drew<dr...@baseanswers.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28
> -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at
> 12:24 PM, drew
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at
> 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did some basic
> update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ago:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The site
> doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would prefer to
> spend my time on the code rather than on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement,
> however feel free to mention explicitly the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to make it
> clear: we still have some cleanup to do but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fully operational
> and FreeBSD users are fully aware that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD
> releases.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should
> be enough to just point to the page
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> updated,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yes?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate
> all the porting links onto that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> page.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That way it gives one clear
> place to link to in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also a single place we can
> link to from other places in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> future.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, we should
> probably eventually have a link to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> porting
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> page from the download
> page.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just
> getting around to looking at things for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>> evening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now...
> *chuckling*..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This might not be the right
> place for what I thought was the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> task - a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> list of existing known ports
> which are not part of the official
>>>>>>>>>>>>> AOO
>>>>>>>>>>>>> release regiment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The porting page and it's
> associated pages seem more about the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> act of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> creating a port, with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> which starts off by pointing to
> this page:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and that offers links to places
> such as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> So do we really want a page for
> listing existing non-official
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ports
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> are known, a simple information
> service for our users without
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> explicitly stating such,
> endorsing the work - or do we want a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> resource
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for those wanting to perform a
> port to a new platform - for the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement(s) that is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe the existing porting page
> remains as a developer-focused
>>>>>>>>>>>> page?
>>>>>>>>>>>> It needs to be updated, of course,
> but maybe not as urgent.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Then we also need a user-facing
> page about existing ports. Maybe
>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> could be a new page in the
> /download directory?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There is already a page which points to
> 3rd party software /
>>>>>>>>>>> packages:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Kay has created this to compensate the
> old distribution webpage
>>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>>> was totally outdated.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So, what about to extend this new page
> with a "Ports" section
>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> For the announcement the
> user-facing one would be the most
>>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate, yes?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think so.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Morning All;
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Just checking in on this thread to see if
> there has been any
>>>>>>>>>> consensus
>>>>>>>>>> on how we should do this or if we should.
> As we are fast
>>>>>>>>>> approaching
>>>>>>>>>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this
> into the Release Notes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As a stated bore I believe that it is
> important to get the
>>>>>>>>>> information
>>>>>>>>>> out that these operating systems are not
> forgotten and that Apache
>>>>>>>>>> OpenOffice is available.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As I haven't seen any different let's
> add these OSs with a
>>>>>>>>> statement to
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> "non_ASF.html" webpage.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The announcement current links to:
>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top
> listing if someone
>>>>>>>> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe not wrong but IMHO totally oudated since months
> and years and
>>>>>>> needs
>>>>>>> also a clean-up. ;-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IMHO, It is almost always better to clean up (or replace)
> an existing
>>>>>> page at a well-known URL than to create an entirely new
> page at a new
>>>>>> URL. Why? Because the existing page is already linked to,
> both
>>>>>> internally and externally. So if we think the new content
> is relevant
>>>>>> to the purpose of the old webpage, e.g., information on
> ports, then we
>>>>>> should keep the old URL for it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sure.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe we can make a deal, so that everybody has a little task:
>>>>>
>>>>> - I'll clean-up the porting homepage (at least the starting
> page)
>>>>> - Drew is adding text for the ports to the other webpage
>>>>> - I'll add this text also to the porting homepage
>>>>> - and you just need to keep the link in the announcement ;-)
>>>>
>>>> I've updated the starting webpage at
>>>> "http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html":
>>>
>>> Ahm, it's still in the stageing area:
>>> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
>>>
>>> Marcus
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> @Maho,Pedro,Yuri,Nicolas:
>>>>
>>>> Like stated with the other ports I would like to list your name and
> mail
>>>> address (if available, the Apache addresses):
>>>>
>>>> - OpenSolaris by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
>>>> - Solaris (Sparc and x86) by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas
> Christener)
>>>> - FreeBSD by Pedro Giffuni / Maho Nakata
>>>> - OS/2 by Yuri Dario
>>>>
>>>> Is this OK for you?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Marcus
>>
>> Marcus, on this last part...should Raphael Bircher be added for the
>> Solaris ports as well? But, we need to hear from both of them.
>>
>> Nice job on this update by the way.
>
> Hm, I don't know how much he is involved with the port.
>
> @Raphael:
> What do you think?
>
> Marcus
>
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 08/18/2012 11:55 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk:
>
>
> On 08/18/2012 09:53 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>> Am 08/18/2012 06:34 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>>> Am 08/18/2012 04:38 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>>>> Am 08/18/2012 04:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
>>>>>>>>>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ago:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> updated,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yes?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>>>>>>> page.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> future.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> porting
>>>>>>>>>>>>> page from the download page.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for
>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>> evening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the
>>>>>>>>>>>> task - a
>>>>>>>>>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official
>>>>>>>>>>>> AOO
>>>>>>>>>>>> release regiment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the
>>>>>>>>>>>> act of
>>>>>>>>>>>> creating a port, with
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> and that offers links to places such as
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official
>>>>>>>>>>>> ports
>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without
>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a
>>>>>>>>>>>> resource
>>>>>>>>>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement(s) that is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused
>>>>>>>>>>> page?
>>>>>>>>>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe
>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software /
>>>>>>>>>> packages:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage
>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>> was totally outdated.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section
>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate, yes?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think so.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Morning All;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any
>>>>>>>>> consensus
>>>>>>>>> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast
>>>>>>>>> approaching
>>>>>>>>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the
>>>>>>>>> information
>>>>>>>>> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
>>>>>>>>> OpenOffice is available.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a
>>>>>>>> statement to
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> "non_ASF.html" webpage.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The announcement current links to:
>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
>>>>>>> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe not wrong but IMHO totally oudated since months and years and
>>>>>> needs
>>>>>> also a clean-up. ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> IMHO, It is almost always better to clean up (or replace) an existing
>>>>> page at a well-known URL than to create an entirely new page at a new
>>>>> URL. Why? Because the existing page is already linked to, both
>>>>> internally and externally. So if we think the new content is relevant
>>>>> to the purpose of the old webpage, e.g., information on ports, then we
>>>>> should keep the old URL for it.
>>>>
>>>> Sure.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe we can make a deal, so that everybody has a little task:
>>>>
>>>> - I'll clean-up the porting homepage (at least the starting page)
>>>> - Drew is adding text for the ports to the other webpage
>>>> - I'll add this text also to the porting homepage
>>>> - and you just need to keep the link in the announcement ;-)
>>>
>>> I've updated the starting webpage at
>>> "http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html":
>>
>> Ahm, it's still in the stageing area:
>> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>>
>>> @Maho,Pedro,Yuri,Nicolas:
>>>
>>> Like stated with the other ports I would like to list your name and mail
>>> address (if available, the Apache addresses):
>>>
>>> - OpenSolaris by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
>>> - Solaris (Sparc and x86) by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
>>> - FreeBSD by Pedro Giffuni / Maho Nakata
>>> - OS/2 by Yuri Dario
>>>
>>> Is this OK for you?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Marcus
>
> Marcus, on this last part...should Raphael Bircher be added for the
> Solaris ports as well? But, we need to hear from both of them.
>
> Nice job on this update by the way.
Hm, I don't know how much he is involved with the port.
@Raphael:
What do you think?
Marcus
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 08/18/2012 09:53 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Am 08/18/2012 06:34 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>> Am 08/18/2012 04:38 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>>> Am 08/18/2012 04:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
>>>>>>>>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ago:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
>>>>>>>>>>>>> updated,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> yes?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one
>>>>>>>>>>>> page.
>>>>>>>>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the
>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement,
>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the
>>>>>>>>>>>> future.
>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the
>>>>>>>>>>>> porting
>>>>>>>>>>>> page from the download page.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for
>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>> evening.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the
>>>>>>>>>>> task - a
>>>>>>>>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official
>>>>>>>>>>> AOO
>>>>>>>>>>> release regiment.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the
>>>>>>>>>>> act of
>>>>>>>>>>> creating a port, with
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
>>>>>>>>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> and that offers links to places such as
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official
>>>>>>>>>>> ports
>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without
>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a
>>>>>>>>>>> resource
>>>>>>>>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
>>>>>>>>>>> announcement(s) that is.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused
>>>>>>>>>> page?
>>>>>>>>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software /
>>>>>>>>> packages:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage
>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>> was totally outdated.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
>>>>>>>>>> appropriate, yes?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think so.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Morning All;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any
>>>>>>>> consensus
>>>>>>>> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast
>>>>>>>> approaching
>>>>>>>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the
>>>>>>>> information
>>>>>>>> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
>>>>>>>> OpenOffice is available.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a
>>>>>>> statement to
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> "non_ASF.html" webpage.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
>>>>>> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe not wrong but IMHO totally oudated since months and years and
>>>>> needs
>>>>> also a clean-up. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> IMHO, It is almost always better to clean up (or replace) an existing
>>>> page at a well-known URL than to create an entirely new page at a new
>>>> URL. Why? Because the existing page is already linked to, both
>>>> internally and externally. So if we think the new content is relevant
>>>> to the purpose of the old webpage, e.g., information on ports, then we
>>>> should keep the old URL for it.
>>>
>>> Sure.
>>>
>>> Maybe we can make a deal, so that everybody has a little task:
>>>
>>> - I'll clean-up the porting homepage (at least the starting page)
>>> - Drew is adding text for the ports to the other webpage
>>> - I'll add this text also to the porting homepage
>>> - and you just need to keep the link in the announcement ;-)
>>
>> I've updated the starting webpage at
>> "http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html":
>
> Ahm, it's still in the stageing area:
> http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
>> @Maho,Pedro,Yuri,Nicolas:
>>
>> Like stated with the other ports I would like to list your name and mail
>> address (if available, the Apache addresses):
>>
>> - OpenSolaris by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
>> - Solaris (Sparc and x86) by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
>> - FreeBSD by Pedro Giffuni / Maho Nakata
>> - OS/2 by Yuri Dario
>>
>> Is this OK for you?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Marcus
Marcus, on this last part...should Raphael Bircher be added for the
Solaris ports as well? But, we need to hear from both of them.
Nice job on this update by the way.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think."
-- Niels Bohr
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 08/18/2012 06:34 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
> Am 08/18/2012 04:38 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
>> Am 08/18/2012 04:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Am 08/18/2012 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
>>>>>>>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ago:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site
>>>>>>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD
>>>>>>>>>>>>> port.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> port is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
>>>>>>>>>>>> updated,
>>>>>>>>>>>> yes?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one
>>>>>>>>>>> page.
>>>>>>>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the
>>>>>>>>>>> announcement,
>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the
>>>>>>>>>>> future.
>>>>>>>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the
>>>>>>>>>>> porting
>>>>>>>>>>> page from the download page.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for
>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>> evening.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the
>>>>>>>>>> task - a
>>>>>>>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official
>>>>>>>>>> AOO
>>>>>>>>>> release regiment.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the
>>>>>>>>>> act of
>>>>>>>>>> creating a port, with
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
>>>>>>>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and that offers links to places such as
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official
>>>>>>>>>> ports
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
>>>>>>>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a
>>>>>>>>>> resource
>>>>>>>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
>>>>>>>>>> announcement(s) that is.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused
>>>>>>>>> page?
>>>>>>>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software /
>>>>>>>> packages:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage
>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>> was totally outdated.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
>>>>>>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
>>>>>>>>> appropriate, yes?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think so.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Morning All;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any
>>>>>>> consensus
>>>>>>> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
>>>>>>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the
>>>>>>> information
>>>>>>> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
>>>>>>> OpenOffice is available.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a
>>>>>> statement to
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> "non_ASF.html" webpage.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>>>>>
>>>>> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
>>>>> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Maybe not wrong but IMHO totally oudated since months and years and
>>>> needs
>>>> also a clean-up. ;-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> IMHO, It is almost always better to clean up (or replace) an existing
>>> page at a well-known URL than to create an entirely new page at a new
>>> URL. Why? Because the existing page is already linked to, both
>>> internally and externally. So if we think the new content is relevant
>>> to the purpose of the old webpage, e.g., information on ports, then we
>>> should keep the old URL for it.
>>
>> Sure.
>>
>> Maybe we can make a deal, so that everybody has a little task:
>>
>> - I'll clean-up the porting homepage (at least the starting page)
>> - Drew is adding text for the ports to the other webpage
>> - I'll add this text also to the porting homepage
>> - and you just need to keep the link in the announcement ;-)
>
> I've updated the starting webpage at
> "http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html":
Ahm, it's still in the stageing area:
http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/porting/index.html
Marcus
> @Maho,Pedro,Yuri,Nicolas:
>
> Like stated with the other ports I would like to list your name and mail
> address (if available, the Apache addresses):
>
> - OpenSolaris by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
> - Solaris (Sparc and x86) by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
> - FreeBSD by Pedro Giffuni / Maho Nakata
> - OS/2 by Yuri Dario
>
> Is this OK for you?
>
> Thanks
>
> Marcus
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 08/21/2012 10:15 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
> Am 08/21/2012 01:19 PM, schrieb Nicolas Christener:
>> Hi all :)
>>
>> On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 18:34 +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>> [...]
>>> I've updated the starting webpage at
>>> "http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html":
>>>
>>> @Maho,Pedro,Yuri,Nicolas:
>>>
>>> Like stated with the other ports I would like to list your name and mail
>>> address (if available, the Apache addresses):
>>>
>>> - OpenSolaris by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
>>> - Solaris (Sparc and x86) by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
>> [...]
>>> Is this OK for you?
>>
>> That's perfectly fine for me, thanks for your work!
>
> OK, I'll update the webpage shortly after the release.
Done. Now in the staging area. Will be published when AOO 3.4.1 will be
announed.
Marcus
>> Just as a side-note (I'll post more to the dev-list soon):
>> We just got a new SPARC server up and running and now have three systems
>> which we'll use to create new builds for the upcomming releases:
>> * SPARC running OpenSolaris 2009.06
>> * SPARC running Solaris 11
>> * x86 running Solaris 11
>>
>> If time permits, I'll also setup a Solaris 10 machine (maybe a zone) so
>> we can test on Solaris 10, Solaris 11 and OpenSolaris 2009.06
>
> Marcus
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 08/21/2012 01:19 PM, schrieb Nicolas Christener:
> Hi all :)
>
> On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 18:34 +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> [...]
>> I've updated the starting webpage at
>> "http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html":
>>
>> @Maho,Pedro,Yuri,Nicolas:
>>
>> Like stated with the other ports I would like to list your name and mail
>> address (if available, the Apache addresses):
>>
>> - OpenSolaris by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
>> - Solaris (Sparc and x86) by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
> [...]
>> Is this OK for you?
>
> That's perfectly fine for me, thanks for your work!
OK, I'll update the webpage shortly after the release.
> Just as a side-note (I'll post more to the dev-list soon):
> We just got a new SPARC server up and running and now have three systems
> which we'll use to create new builds for the upcomming releases:
> * SPARC running OpenSolaris 2009.06
> * SPARC running Solaris 11
> * x86 running Solaris 11
>
> If time permits, I'll also setup a Solaris 10 machine (maybe a zone) so
> we can test on Solaris 10, Solaris 11 and OpenSolaris 2009.06
Marcus
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Nicolas Christener <ni...@adfinis-sygroup.ch>.
Hi all :)
On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 18:34 +0200, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
[...]
> I've updated the starting webpage at
> "http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html":
>
> @Maho,Pedro,Yuri,Nicolas:
>
> Like stated with the other ports I would like to list your name and mail
> address (if available, the Apache addresses):
>
> - OpenSolaris by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
> - Solaris (Sparc and x86) by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
[...]
> Is this OK for you?
That's perfectly fine for me, thanks for your work!
Just as a side-note (I'll post more to the dev-list soon):
We just got a new SPARC server up and running and now have three systems
which we'll use to create new builds for the upcomming releases:
* SPARC running OpenSolaris 2009.06
* SPARC running Solaris 11
* x86 running Solaris 11
If time permits, I'll also setup a Solaris 10 machine (maybe a zone) so
we can test on Solaris 10, Solaris 11 and OpenSolaris 2009.06
Kind regards
Nicolas Christener
--
Adfinis SyGroup AG
Nicolas Christener, Bereichsleiter Software-Entwicklung
Keltenstrasse 98 | CH-3018 Bern
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Yuri Dario <yd...@os2power.com>.
---------- Messaggio inoltrato ----------
Da: "Yuri Dario" <yd...@os2power.com>
Data: 18/ago/2012 19:30
Oggetto: Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
A: <oo...@incubator.apache.org>
> - OS/2 by Yuri Dario
> Is this OK for you?
Ok for me, apache address is fine :-)
Yuri
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 08/18/2012 04:38 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
> Am 08/18/2012 04:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>> wrote:
>>> Am 08/18/2012 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
>>>>>>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime
>>>>>>>>>>>> ago:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site
>>>>>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the
>>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD
>>>>>>>>>>>> port.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the
>>>>>>>>>>>> port is
>>>>>>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
>>>>>>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
>>>>>>>>>>> updated,
>>>>>>>>>>> yes?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one
>>>>>>>>>> page.
>>>>>>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the announcement,
>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the
>>>>>>>>>> future.
>>>>>>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the
>>>>>>>>>> porting
>>>>>>>>>> page from the download page.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for this
>>>>>>>>> evening.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the
>>>>>>>>> task - a
>>>>>>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official
>>>>>>>>> AOO
>>>>>>>>> release regiment.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the
>>>>>>>>> act of
>>>>>>>>> creating a port, with
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
>>>>>>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and that offers links to places such as
>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official
>>>>>>>>> ports
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
>>>>>>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a
>>>>>>>>> resource
>>>>>>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
>>>>>>>>> announcement(s) that is.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes. ;-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused
>>>>>>>> page?
>>>>>>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software /
>>>>>>> packages:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage
>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>> was totally outdated.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
>>>>>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
>>>>>>>> appropriate, yes?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think so.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Morning All;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any
>>>>>> consensus
>>>>>> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
>>>>>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the
>>>>>> information
>>>>>> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
>>>>>> OpenOffice is available.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a
>>>>> statement to
>>>>> the
>>>>> "non_ASF.html" webpage.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>>>>
>>>> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
>>>> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe not wrong but IMHO totally oudated since months and years and
>>> needs
>>> also a clean-up. ;-)
>>>
>>
>> IMHO, It is almost always better to clean up (or replace) an existing
>> page at a well-known URL than to create an entirely new page at a new
>> URL. Why? Because the existing page is already linked to, both
>> internally and externally. So if we think the new content is relevant
>> to the purpose of the old webpage, e.g., information on ports, then we
>> should keep the old URL for it.
>
> Sure.
>
> Maybe we can make a deal, so that everybody has a little task:
>
> - I'll clean-up the porting homepage (at least the starting page)
> - Drew is adding text for the ports to the other webpage
> - I'll add this text also to the porting homepage
> - and you just need to keep the link in the announcement ;-)
I've updated the starting webpage at
"http://www.openoffice.org/porting/index.html":
@Maho,Pedro,Yuri,Nicolas:
Like stated with the other ports I would like to list your name and mail
address (if available, the Apache addresses):
- OpenSolaris by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
- Solaris (Sparc and x86) by Adfinis SyGroup AG (Nicolas Christener)
- FreeBSD by Pedro Giffuni / Maho Nakata
- OS/2 by Yuri Dario
Is this OK for you?
Thanks
Marcus
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 08/18/2012 04:19 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
>> Am 08/18/2012 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>>
>>>>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
>>>>>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime ago:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site
>>>>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the FreeBSD
>>>>>>>>>>> port.
>>>>>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the
>>>>>>>>>>> port is
>>>>>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
>>>>>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
>>>>>>>>>> updated,
>>>>>>>>>> yes?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one
>>>>>>>>> page.
>>>>>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the announcement,
>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the future.
>>>>>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the
>>>>>>>>> porting
>>>>>>>>> page from the download page.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for this
>>>>>>>> evening.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the task - a
>>>>>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official AOO
>>>>>>>> release regiment.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the act of
>>>>>>>> creating a port, with
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
>>>>>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and that offers links to places such as
>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official ports
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
>>>>>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a
>>>>>>>> resource
>>>>>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
>>>>>>>> announcement(s) that is.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes. ;-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused page?
>>>>>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe that
>>>>>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software / packages:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage which
>>>>>> was totally outdated.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
>>>>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
>>>>>>> appropriate, yes?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think so.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Morning All;
>>>>>
>>>>> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any consensus
>>>>> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
>>>>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
>>>>>
>>>>> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the information
>>>>> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
>>>>> OpenOffice is available.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a statement to
>>>> the
>>>> "non_ASF.html" webpage.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>>>
>>> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
>>> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
>>
>>
>> Maybe not wrong but IMHO totally oudated since months and years and needs
>> also a clean-up. ;-)
>>
>
> IMHO, It is almost always better to clean up (or replace) an existing
> page at a well-known URL than to create an entirely new page at a new
> URL. Why? Because the existing page is already linked to, both
> internally and externally. So if we think the new content is relevant
> to the purpose of the old webpage, e.g., information on ports, then we
> should keep the old URL for it.
Sure.
Maybe we can make a deal, so that everybody has a little task:
- I'll clean-up the porting homepage (at least the starting page)
- Drew is adding text for the ports to the other webpage
- I'll add this text also to the porting homepage
- and you just need to keep the link in the announcement ;-)
Marcus
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> Am 08/18/2012 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>
>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>>
>>>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
>>>>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime ago:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site
>>>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the FreeBSD
>>>>>>>>>> port.
>>>>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the
>>>>>>>>>> port is
>>>>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
>>>>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
>>>>>>>>> updated,
>>>>>>>>> yes?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one
>>>>>>>> page.
>>>>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the announcement,
>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the future.
>>>>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the
>>>>>>>> porting
>>>>>>>> page from the download page.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for this
>>>>>>> evening.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the task - a
>>>>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official AOO
>>>>>>> release regiment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the act of
>>>>>>> creating a port, with
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
>>>>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and that offers links to places such as
>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official ports
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
>>>>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a
>>>>>>> resource
>>>>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
>>>>>>> announcement(s) that is.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes. ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused page?
>>>>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe that
>>>>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software / packages:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage which
>>>>> was totally outdated.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
>>>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>>>>>
>>>>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
>>>>>> appropriate, yes?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think so.
>>>>>
>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Morning All;
>>>>
>>>> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any consensus
>>>> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
>>>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
>>>>
>>>> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the information
>>>> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
>>>> OpenOffice is available.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a statement to
>>> the
>>> "non_ASF.html" webpage.
>>>
>>
>> The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>>
>> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
>> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
>
>
> Maybe not wrong but IMHO totally oudated since months and years and needs
> also a clean-up. ;-)
>
IMHO, It is almost always better to clean up (or replace) an existing
page at a well-known URL than to create an entirely new page at a new
URL. Why? Because the existing page is already linked to, both
internally and externally. So if we think the new content is relevant
to the purpose of the old webpage, e.g., information on ports, then we
should keep the old URL for it.
-Rob
> I'll try something.
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
>
>> I'm happy to change the announcement to point to:
>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>>
>> But we would need to get some content there. It is in the CMS, so
>> anyone can edit it.
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 08/18/2012 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo)<ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
>> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>>
>>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
>>>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime ago:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site though.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the FreeBSD
>>>>>>>>> port.
>>>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the
>>>>>>>>> port is
>>>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
>>>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
>>>>>>>> updated,
>>>>>>>> yes?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one page.
>>>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the announcement, but
>>>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the future.
>>>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the porting
>>>>>>> page from the download page.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for this
>>>>>> evening.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the task - a
>>>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official AOO
>>>>>> release regiment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the act of
>>>>>> creating a port, with
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
>>>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and that offers links to places such as
>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official ports
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
>>>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a resource
>>>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
>>>>>> announcement(s) that is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused page?
>>>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe that
>>>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software / packages:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>>>>
>>>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage which
>>>> was totally outdated.
>>>>
>>>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
>>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>>>>
>>>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
>>>>> appropriate, yes?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think so.
>>>>
>>>> Marcus
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Morning All;
>>>
>>> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any consensus
>>> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
>>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
>>>
>>> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the information
>>> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
>>> OpenOffice is available.
>>
>>
>> As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a statement to the
>> "non_ASF.html" webpage.
>>
>
> The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>
> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
Maybe not wrong but IMHO totally oudated since months and years and
needs also a clean-up. ;-)
I'll try something.
Marcus
> I'm happy to change the announcement to point to:
> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>
> But we would need to get some content there. It is in the CMS, so
> anyone can edit it.
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 11:38 -0400, drew wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 09:57 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >
<snip>
>
> > I think that is what Marcus was suggesting. Should probably have
> > mention of BSD, Solaris, OS/2 ports. And did we also agree on
> > WinPenPack and portableApps (or did they ever release an AOO version?)
>
> Howdy,
>
> I think so, would of expected anyone wanting to object to have done so
> when it was mentioned before, that was with a very clear notice that we
> neither certify or endorse the work product on the page also.
>
> and... I believe they both did - will go double check that and get URLs.
>
For winpenpack[2] - it's still 3.4.0, but that would be expected, IMO,
as they would have to lag the official release - will list them today.
While I can't find a public page for portable apps[1] after 3.2.1,
and will hold off on adding that listing.
//drew
[1] http://portableapps.com/apps/office/openoffice_portable
[2] http://www.winpenpack.com/en/download.php?view.1341
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 09:57 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 9:51 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 08:48 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> >> > Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
> >> >
> >> >> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
> >> >>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime ago:
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site though.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
> >> >>>>>>>> release
> >> >>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the FreeBSD
> >> >>>>>>>> port.
> >> >>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the
> >> >>>>>>>> port is
> >> >>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
> >> >>>>>>>> available
> >> >>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Pedro.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
> >> >>>>>>> updated,
> >> >>>>>>> yes?
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one page.
> >> >>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the announcement, but
> >> >>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the future.
> >> >>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the porting
> >> >>>>>> page from the download page.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> -Rob
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for this
> >> >>>>> evening.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the task - a
> >> >>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official AOO
> >> >>>>> release regiment.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the act of
> >> >>>>> creating a port, with
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> and
> >> >>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
> >> >>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> and that offers links to places such as
> >> >>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official ports
> >> >>>>> that
> >> >>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
> >> >>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a resource
> >> >>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
> >> >>>>> announcement(s) that is.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Yes. ;-)
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused page?
> >> >>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe that
> >> >>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software / packages:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage which
> >> >>> was totally outdated.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
> >> >>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
> >> >>>> appropriate, yes?
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I think so.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Marcus
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >> Morning All;
> >> >>
> >> >> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any consensus
> >> >> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
> >> >> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
> >> >>
> >> >> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the information
> >> >> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
> >> >> OpenOffice is available.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a statement to the
> >> > "non_ASF.html" webpage.
> >> >
> >>
> >> The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
> >>
> >> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
> >> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
> >>
> >> I'm happy to change the announcement to point to:
> >> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
> >>
> >> But we would need to get some content there. It is in the CMS, so
> >> anyone can edit it.
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > Marcus
> >>
> >
> > Ah, I was supposed to make up something for that - well it's Saturday
> > morning and I can do that now..
> >
> > to be sure - it is this page that gets updated:
> >
> > http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
> >
> > yes?
> >
>
> I think that is what Marcus was suggesting. Should probably have
> mention of BSD, Solaris, OS/2 ports. And did we also agree on
> WinPenPack and portableApps (or did they ever release an AOO version?)
Howdy,
I think so, would of expected anyone wanting to object to have done so
when it was mentioned before, that was with a very clear notice that we
neither certify or endorse the work product on the page also.
and... I believe they both did - will go double check that and get URLs.
//drew
>
> -Rob
>
>
> > //drew
> >
> >
>
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 9:51 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 08:48 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
>> > Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>> >
>> >> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
>> >>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime ago:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site though.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
>> >>>>>>>> release
>> >>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the FreeBSD
>> >>>>>>>> port.
>> >>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the
>> >>>>>>>> port is
>> >>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
>> >>>>>>>> available
>> >>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Pedro.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
>> >>>>>>> updated,
>> >>>>>>> yes?
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one page.
>> >>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the announcement, but
>> >>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the future.
>> >>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the porting
>> >>>>>> page from the download page.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> -Rob
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for this
>> >>>>> evening.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the task - a
>> >>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official AOO
>> >>>>> release regiment.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the act of
>> >>>>> creating a port, with
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> and
>> >>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
>> >>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> and that offers links to places such as
>> >>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official ports
>> >>>>> that
>> >>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
>> >>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a resource
>> >>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
>> >>>>> announcement(s) that is.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Yes. ;-)
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused page?
>> >>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe that
>> >>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software / packages:
>> >>>
>> >>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>> >>>
>> >>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage which
>> >>> was totally outdated.
>> >>>
>> >>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
>> >>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>> >>>
>> >>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
>> >>>> appropriate, yes?
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> I think so.
>> >>>
>> >>> Marcus
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >> Morning All;
>> >>
>> >> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any consensus
>> >> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
>> >> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
>> >>
>> >> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the information
>> >> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
>> >> OpenOffice is available.
>> >
>> >
>> > As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a statement to the
>> > "non_ASF.html" webpage.
>> >
>>
>> The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>>
>> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
>> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
>>
>> I'm happy to change the announcement to point to:
>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>>
>> But we would need to get some content there. It is in the CMS, so
>> anyone can edit it.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Marcus
>>
>
> Ah, I was supposed to make up something for that - well it's Saturday
> morning and I can do that now..
>
> to be sure - it is this page that gets updated:
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>
> yes?
>
I think that is what Marcus was suggesting. Should probably have
mention of BSD, Solaris, OS/2 ports. And did we also agree on
WinPenPack and portableApps (or did they ever release an AOO version?)
-Rob
> //drew
>
>
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Sat, 2012-08-18 at 08:48 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> > Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
> >
> >> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
> >>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime ago:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site though.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
> >>>>>>>> release
> >>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the FreeBSD
> >>>>>>>> port.
> >>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the
> >>>>>>>> port is
> >>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
> >>>>>>>> available
> >>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Pedro.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
> >>>>>>> updated,
> >>>>>>> yes?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one page.
> >>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the announcement, but
> >>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the future.
> >>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the porting
> >>>>>> page from the download page.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -Rob
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for this
> >>>>> evening.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the task - a
> >>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official AOO
> >>>>> release regiment.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the act of
> >>>>> creating a port, with
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>> and
> >>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
> >>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
> >>>>>
> >>>>> and that offers links to places such as
> >>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official ports
> >>>>> that
> >>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
> >>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a resource
> >>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
> >>>>> announcement(s) that is.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes. ;-)
> >>>>
> >>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused page?
> >>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
> >>>>
> >>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe that
> >>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software / packages:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
> >>>
> >>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage which
> >>> was totally outdated.
> >>>
> >>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
> >>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
> >>>
> >>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
> >>>> appropriate, yes?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I think so.
> >>>
> >>> Marcus
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Morning All;
> >>
> >> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any consensus
> >> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
> >> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
> >>
> >> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the information
> >> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
> >> OpenOffice is available.
> >
> >
> > As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a statement to the
> > "non_ASF.html" webpage.
> >
>
> The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>
> Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
> searches Google for "openoffice ports.
>
> I'm happy to change the announcement to point to:
> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>
> But we would need to get some content there. It is in the CMS, so
> anyone can edit it.
>
> -Rob
>
>
>
>
> > Marcus
>
Ah, I was supposed to make up something for that - well it's Saturday
morning and I can do that now..
to be sure - it is this page that gets updated:
http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
yes?
//drew
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de> wrote:
> Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
>
>> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>>>
>>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
>>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime ago:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site though.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the FreeBSD
>>>>>>>> port.
>>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the
>>>>>>>> port is
>>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
>>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
>>>>>>> updated,
>>>>>>> yes?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one page.
>>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the announcement, but
>>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the future.
>>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the porting
>>>>>> page from the download page.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for this
>>>>> evening.
>>>>>
>>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>>>>>
>>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the task - a
>>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official AOO
>>>>> release regiment.
>>>>>
>>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the act of
>>>>> creating a port, with
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>>>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>>>>>
>>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
>>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>>>>>
>>>>> and that offers links to places such as
>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official ports
>>>>> that
>>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
>>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a resource
>>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
>>>>> announcement(s) that is.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes. ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused page?
>>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
>>>>
>>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe that
>>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
>>>
>>>
>>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software / packages:
>>>
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>>>
>>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage which
>>> was totally outdated.
>>>
>>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
>>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>>>
>>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
>>>> appropriate, yes?
>>>
>>>
>>> I think so.
>>>
>>> Marcus
>>>
>>>
>> Morning All;
>>
>> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any consensus
>> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
>> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
>>
>> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the information
>> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
>> OpenOffice is available.
>
>
> As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a statement to the
> "non_ASF.html" webpage.
>
The announcement current links to: http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
Is that the wrong place? That URL is the top listing if someone
searches Google for "openoffice ports.
I'm happy to change the announcement to point to:
http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
But we would need to get some content there. It is in the CMS, so
anyone can edit it.
-Rob
> Marcus
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 08/18/2012 06:38 AM, schrieb Keith N. McKenna:
> Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
>>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime ago:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site though.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the FreeBSD
>>>>>>> port.
>>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the
>>>>>>> port is
>>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
>>>>>> updated,
>>>>>> yes?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one page.
>>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the announcement, but
>>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the future.
>>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the porting
>>>>> page from the download page.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Rob
>>>>
>>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for this
>>>> evening.
>>>>
>>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>>>>
>>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the task - a
>>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official AOO
>>>> release regiment.
>>>>
>>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the act of
>>>> creating a port, with
>>>>
>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>>>>
>>>> and
>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>>>>
>>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
>>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>>>>
>>>> and that offers links to places such as
>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official ports
>>>> that
>>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
>>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a resource
>>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
>>>> announcement(s) that is.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes. ;-)
>>>
>>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused page?
>>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
>>>
>>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe that
>>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
>>
>> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software / packages:
>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>>
>> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage which
>> was totally outdated.
>>
>> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
>> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>>
>>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
>>> appropriate, yes?
>>
>> I think so.
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
> Morning All;
>
> Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any consensus
> on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
> release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
>
> As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the information
> out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
> OpenOffice is available.
As I haven't seen any different let's add these OSs with a statement to
the "non_ASF.html" webpage.
Marcus
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Keith N. McKenna" <ke...@comcast.net>.
Marcus (OOo) wrote:
> Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew
>>>> jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime ago:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site though.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the
>>>>>> release
>>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the FreeBSD
>>>>>> port.
>>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the
>>>>>> port is
>>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's
>>>>>> available
>>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>
>>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you
>>>>> updated,
>>>>> yes?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one page.
>>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the announcement, but
>>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the future.
>>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the porting
>>>> page from the download page.
>>>>
>>>> -Rob
>>>
>>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for this
>>> evening.
>>>
>>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>>>
>>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the task - a
>>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official AOO
>>> release regiment.
>>>
>>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the act of
>>> creating a port, with
>>>
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>>>
>>> and
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>>>
>>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
>>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>>>
>>> and that offers links to places such as
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>>>
>>>
>>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official ports that
>>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
>>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a resource
>>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
>>> announcement(s) that is.
>>>
>>
>> Yes. ;-)
>>
>> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused page?
>> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
>>
>> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe that
>> could be a new page in the /download directory?
>
> There is already a page which points to 3rd party software / packages:
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
>
> Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage which
> was totally outdated.
>
> So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
> FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
>
>> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most
>> appropriate, yes?
>
> I think so.
>
> Marcus
>
>
Morning All;
Just checking in on this thread to see if there has been any consensus
on how we should do this or if we should. As we are fast approaching
release of 3.4.1 I would like to get this into the Release Notes.
As a stated bore I believe that it is important to get the information
out that these operating systems are not forgotten and that Apache
OpenOffice is available.
Regards
Keith
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 08/02/2012 02:12 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew<dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew jensen<dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>> Hi Kay;
>>>>>
>>>>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime ago:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site though.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the release
>>>>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the FreeBSD port.
>>>>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the port is
>>>>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's available
>>>>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>>>>
>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>
>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>
>>>> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you updated,
>>>> yes?
>>>>
>>>
>>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one page.
>>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the announcement, but
>>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the future.
>>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the porting
>>> page from the download page.
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>
>> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for this
>> evening.
>>
>> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>>
>> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the task - a
>> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official AOO
>> release regiment.
>>
>> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the act of
>> creating a port, with
>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>>
>> and
>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>>
>> which starts off by pointing to this page:
>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>>
>> and that offers links to places such as
>> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>>
>>
>> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official ports that
>> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
>> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a resource
>> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
>> announcement(s) that is.
>>
>
> Yes. ;-)
>
> Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused page?
> It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
>
> Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe that
> could be a new page in the /download directory?
There is already a page which points to 3rd party software / packages:
http://www.openoffice.org/download/non_ASF.html
Kay has created this to compensate the old distribution webpage which
was totally outdated.
So, what about to extend this new page with a "Ports" section from
FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2 and others?
> For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most appropriate, yes?
I think so.
Marcus
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:37 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>> >> Hi Kay;
>> >>
>> >> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime ago:
>> >>
>> >> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site though.
>> >>
>> >> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the release
>> >> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the FreeBSD port.
>> >> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the port is
>> >> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's available
>> >> on FreeBSD releases.
>> >>
>> >> Pedro.
>> >>
>> > Hi Pedro,
>> >
>> > Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you updated,
>> > yes?
>> >
>>
>> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one page.
>> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the announcement, but
>> also a single place we can link to from other places in the future.
>> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the porting
>> page from the download page.
>>
>> -Rob
>
> hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for this
> evening.
>
> Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
>
> This might not be the right place for what I thought was the task - a
> list of existing known ports which are not part of the official AOO
> release regiment.
>
> The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the act of
> creating a port, with
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
>
> and
> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
>
> which starts off by pointing to this page:
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
>
> and that offers links to places such as
> http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
>
>
> So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official ports that
> are known, a simple information service for our users without and
> explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a resource
> for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
> announcement(s) that is.
>
Yes. ;-)
Maybe the existing porting page remains as a developer-focused page?
It needs to be updated, of course, but maybe not as urgent.
Then we also need a user-facing page about existing ports. Maybe that
could be a new page in the /download directory?
For the announcement the user-facing one would be the most appropriate, yes?
-Rob
> //drew
>
>
>
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 18:28 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> >> Hi Kay;
> >>
> >> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime ago:
> >>
> >> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
> >>
> >>
> >> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site though.
> >>
> >> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the release
> >> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the FreeBSD port.
> >> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the port is
> >> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's available
> >> on FreeBSD releases.
> >>
> >> Pedro.
> >>
> > Hi Pedro,
> >
> > Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you updated,
> > yes?
> >
>
> IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one page.
> That way it gives one clear place to link to in the announcement, but
> also a single place we can link to from other places in the future.
> For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the porting
> page from the download page.
>
> -Rob
hmmm - well, I'm just getting around to looking at things for this
evening.
Looking at the page(s) now... *chuckling*..
This might not be the right place for what I thought was the task - a
list of existing known ports which are not part of the official AOO
release regiment.
The porting page and it's associated pages seem more about the act of
creating a port, with
http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_overview.html
and
http://www.openoffice.org/porting/porting_implement.html
which starts off by pointing to this page:
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Porting_Efforts
and that offers links to places such as
http://www.openoffice.org/udk/cpp/man/cpp_bridges.html
So do we really want a page for listing existing non-official ports that
are known, a simple information service for our users without and
explicitly stating such, endorsing the work - or do we want a resource
for those wanting to perform a port to a new platform - for the
announcement(s) that is.
//drew
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>> Hi Kay;
>>
>> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime ago:
>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>>
>>
>> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site though.
>>
>> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the release
>> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the FreeBSD port.
>> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the port is
>> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's available
>> on FreeBSD releases.
>>
>> Pedro.
>>
> Hi Pedro,
>
> Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you updated,
> yes?
>
IMHO, we should consolidate all the porting links onto that one page.
That way it gives one clear place to link to in the announcement, but
also a single place we can link to from other places in the future.
For example, we should probably eventually have a link to the porting
page from the download page.
-Rob
> //drew
>
> <snip>
>
>
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by drew jensen <dr...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 09:09 -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> Hi Kay;
>
> I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime ago:
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
>
>
> The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site though.
>
> I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the release
> announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the FreeBSD port.
> Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the port is
> fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's available
> on FreeBSD releases.
>
> Pedro.
>
Hi Pedro,
Then for BSD it should be enough to just point to the page you updated,
yes?
//drew
<snip>
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports? (BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>.
Hi Kay;
I did some basic update to the FreeBSD porting site sometime ago:
http://www.openoffice.org/porting/freebsd/
The site doesn't seem linked from the top-level porting site though.
I would prefer to spend my time on the code rather than on the release
announcement, however feel free to mention explicitly the FreeBSD port.
Just to make it clear: we still have some cleanup to do but the port is
fully operational and FreeBSD users are fully aware that it's available
on FreeBSD releases.
Pedro.
>________________________________
> From: Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
>To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Sent: Wednesday, August 1, 2012 10:47 AM
>Subject: Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports? (BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
>
>On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 2:04 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 14:36 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> > I'm drafting the 3.4.1 release announcement blog post. I have a
>> > bullet list where I highlight what is in 3.4.1. I list what platforms
>> > are supported, mention the Windows 8 compatibility improvements, and
>> > then follow with this bullet item:
>> >
>> > "Community members are also working on BSD, Solaris and OS/2 ports,
>> > with plans to release these outside of Apache."
>> >
>>
>> Howdy Rob,
>>
>> > Is this accurate and worth saying?
>>
>> Yes IIRC and yes IMO.
>>
>>
>>
>> > Would it make sense to also
>> > include links for each of these ports, where the reader can go for
>> > more information?
>>
>> I would think a better return if instead of putting direct links for
>> each, create a fixed address (wiki page?) for 'other ports' (or more
>> appropriate for a title).
>>
>
>Hi Drew--
>
>We have a page -- actually a former "project" at --
>
>http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
>
>that needs a LOT of cleanup.
>
>Any volunteers to take the lead on cleaning this up and just highlighting
>what we're dealing with now? FreeBSD, OS/2, and Solaris?
>
>
>
>> Link to that from the announcement/blog and would make that a precedent
>> for future announcements.
>>
>> >
>> > Although these are not Apache releases, they are part of the close
>> > ecosystem, with developers working directly in our project to support
>> > these ports. So I think there is some logic to mentioning them in the
>> > release announcement. But work that happens entirely outside of the
>> > project, like portable applications versions, would not get a mention.
>>
>> I would disagree, somewhat, in that personal preference would be to
>> include the 2 or 3 portable 'wrapper' distributors as this has seemed to
>> be of interest to quite a few folks in the past.
>>
>> Just my .02
>>
>> //drew
>> >
>> > Does this seem fair and appropriate?
>> >
>> > If we agree to do this, I'll need a link for each of BSD, Solaris and
>> > OS/2, for more information.
>> >
>> > The alternative would be to not mention the ports at all.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > -Rob
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>MzK
>
>"I'm just a normal jerk who happens to make music.
>As long as my brain and fingers work, I'm cool."
> -- Eddie Van Halen
>
>
>
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 2:04 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 14:36 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> > I'm drafting the 3.4.1 release announcement blog post. I have a
> > bullet list where I highlight what is in 3.4.1. I list what platforms
> > are supported, mention the Windows 8 compatibility improvements, and
> > then follow with this bullet item:
> >
> > "Community members are also working on BSD, Solaris and OS/2 ports,
> > with plans to release these outside of Apache."
> >
>
> Howdy Rob,
>
> > Is this accurate and worth saying?
>
> Yes IIRC and yes IMO.
>
>
>
> > Would it make sense to also
> > include links for each of these ports, where the reader can go for
> > more information?
>
> I would think a better return if instead of putting direct links for
> each, create a fixed address (wiki page?) for 'other ports' (or more
> appropriate for a title).
>
Hi Drew--
We have a page -- actually a former "project" at --
http://www.openoffice.org/porting/
that needs a LOT of cleanup.
Any volunteers to take the lead on cleaning this up and just highlighting
what we're dealing with now? FreeBSD, OS/2, and Solaris?
> Link to that from the announcement/blog and would make that a precedent
> for future announcements.
>
> >
> > Although these are not Apache releases, they are part of the close
> > ecosystem, with developers working directly in our project to support
> > these ports. So I think there is some logic to mentioning them in the
> > release announcement. But work that happens entirely outside of the
> > project, like portable applications versions, would not get a mention.
>
> I would disagree, somewhat, in that personal preference would be to
> include the 2 or 3 portable 'wrapper' distributors as this has seemed to
> be of interest to quite a few folks in the past.
>
> Just my .02
>
> //drew
> >
> > Does this seem fair and appropriate?
> >
> > If we agree to do this, I'll need a link for each of BSD, Solaris and
> > OS/2, for more information.
> >
> > The alternative would be to not mention the ports at all.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > -Rob
> >
>
>
>
>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"I'm just a normal jerk who happens to make music.
As long as my brain and fingers work, I'm cool."
-- Eddie Van Halen
Re: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports?
(BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 14:36 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> I'm drafting the 3.4.1 release announcement blog post. I have a
> bullet list where I highlight what is in 3.4.1. I list what platforms
> are supported, mention the Windows 8 compatibility improvements, and
> then follow with this bullet item:
>
> "Community members are also working on BSD, Solaris and OS/2 ports,
> with plans to release these outside of Apache."
>
Howdy Rob,
> Is this accurate and worth saying?
Yes IIRC and yes IMO.
> Would it make sense to also
> include links for each of these ports, where the reader can go for
> more information?
I would think a better return if instead of putting direct links for
each, create a fixed address (wiki page?) for 'other ports' (or more
appropriate for a title).
Link to that from the announcement/blog and would make that a precedent
for future announcements.
>
> Although these are not Apache releases, they are part of the close
> ecosystem, with developers working directly in our project to support
> these ports. So I think there is some logic to mentioning them in the
> release announcement. But work that happens entirely outside of the
> project, like portable applications versions, would not get a mention.
I would disagree, somewhat, in that personal preference would be to
include the 2 or 3 portable 'wrapper' distributors as this has seemed to
be of interest to quite a few folks in the past.
Just my .02
//drew
>
> Does this seem fair and appropriate?
>
> If we agree to do this, I'll need a link for each of BSD, Solaris and
> OS/2, for more information.
>
> The alternative would be to not mention the ports at all.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
Re: EXTERNAL: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the
ports? (BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Keith N. McKenna <
keith.mckenna@comcast.net> wrote:
> Steele, Raymond wrote:
>
>> Information about the Solaris port is useful to me.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2012 11:37 AM
>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: EXTERNAL: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about
>> the ports? (BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
>>
>> I'm drafting the 3.4.1 release announcement blog post. I have a bullet
>> list where I highlight what is in 3.4.1. I list what platforms are
>> supported, mention the Windows 8 compatibility improvements, and then
>> follow with this bullet item:
>>
>> "Community members are also working on BSD, Solaris and OS/2 ports, with
>> plans to release these outside of Apache."
>>
>> Is this accurate and worth saying? Would it make sense to also
>> include links for each of these ports, where the reader can go for more
>> information?
>>
>> Although these are not Apache releases, they are part of the close
>> ecosystem, with developers working directly in our project to support these
>> ports. So I think there is some logic to mentioning them in the release
>> announcement. But work that happens entirely outside of the project, like
>> portable applications versions, would not get a mention.
>>
>> Does this seem fair and appropriate?
>>
>
>> If we agree to do this, I'll need a link for each of BSD, Solaris and
>> OS/2, for more information.
>>
>
yes...I was thinking about this also. I thik we should mention them. This
goes back to the "porting" project -- a web site area we still have not
dealt with really, but part of the legacy "ecosystem". However, readers may
wonder why they are not part of the "standard" release. So, I'm not sure
what we should say in this regard.
But, yes, we should definitely mention them them in the release notes and
provide links. I know where to get FreeBSD, and I think OS/2 or Solaris.
Also, I'm not sure at this point what the status is of those with respect
to incorporating current fixes for 3.4.1. But, they will be at whatever
release level they are I guess.
>> The alternative would be to not mention the ports at all.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> Hi Rob;
>
> I was just considering asking the same question in regards to the 3.4.1
> Release Notes. I believe that is is worth mentioning all three platforms as
> even though they may not as yet release through the Apache infrastructure
> the work is being done within the project by people, some of whom if not
> all, are committers.
>
> Regards
> Keith
>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"I'm just a normal jerk who happens to make music.
As long as my brain and fingers work, I'm cool."
-- Eddie Van Halen
Re: EXTERNAL: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about
the ports? (BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Keith N. McKenna" <ke...@comcast.net>.
Steele, Raymond wrote:
> Information about the Solaris port is useful to me.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2012 11:37 AM
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: EXTERNAL: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports? (BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
>
> I'm drafting the 3.4.1 release announcement blog post. I have a bullet list where I highlight what is in 3.4.1. I list what platforms are supported, mention the Windows 8 compatibility improvements, and then follow with this bullet item:
>
> "Community members are also working on BSD, Solaris and OS/2 ports, with plans to release these outside of Apache."
>
> Is this accurate and worth saying? Would it make sense to also
> include links for each of these ports, where the reader can go for more information?
>
> Although these are not Apache releases, they are part of the close ecosystem, with developers working directly in our project to support these ports. So I think there is some logic to mentioning them in the release announcement. But work that happens entirely outside of the project, like portable applications versions, would not get a mention.
>
> Does this seem fair and appropriate?
>
> If we agree to do this, I'll need a link for each of BSD, Solaris and OS/2, for more information.
>
> The alternative would be to not mention the ports at all.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
Hi Rob;
I was just considering asking the same question in regards to the 3.4.1
Release Notes. I believe that is is worth mentioning all three platforms
as even though they may not as yet release through the Apache
infrastructure the work is being done within the project by people, some
of whom if not all, are committers.
Regards
Keith
RE: EXTERNAL: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports? (BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
Posted by "Steele, Raymond" <ra...@lmco.com>.
Information about the Solaris port is useful to me.
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2012 11:37 AM
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: EXTERNAL: What to say in AOO 3.4.1 release announcement about the ports? (BSD, Solaris, OS/2)?
I'm drafting the 3.4.1 release announcement blog post. I have a bullet list where I highlight what is in 3.4.1. I list what platforms are supported, mention the Windows 8 compatibility improvements, and then follow with this bullet item:
"Community members are also working on BSD, Solaris and OS/2 ports, with plans to release these outside of Apache."
Is this accurate and worth saying? Would it make sense to also
include links for each of these ports, where the reader can go for more information?
Although these are not Apache releases, they are part of the close ecosystem, with developers working directly in our project to support these ports. So I think there is some logic to mentioning them in the release announcement. But work that happens entirely outside of the project, like portable applications versions, would not get a mention.
Does this seem fair and appropriate?
If we agree to do this, I'll need a link for each of BSD, Solaris and OS/2, for more information.
The alternative would be to not mention the ports at all.
Regards,
-Rob