You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@openoffice.apache.org by Inger Rehn <in...@telia.com> on 2012/11/27 20:41:15 UTC
Open Office in Swedish
I do not understand why I have to write in English - But, anyway, that is the core problem - I have been using Open Office for quite a few years - Now, there came a request to update the program - done it appears to be something apache - and it comes in English - I want it in Swedish or I will change to another program - An excuse of the Swedish site to instal Swedish files via Arkiv (yours file) does not work because the suptitle "guider (yours guides)" does not exist under the Arkiv title -
Very disappointing and I ask for your immediate attention to solve this major problem
H�lsningar Inger
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by in...@localnet.com.
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012 20:41:15 +0100
"Inger Rehn" <in...@telia.com> wrote:
> I do not understand why I have to write in English - But, anyway, that is the core
> problem - I have been using Open Office for quite a few years - Now, there came a
> request to update the program - done it appears to be something apache - and it
> comes in English - I want it in Swedish or I will change to another program - An
> excuse of the Swedish site to instal Swedish files via Arkiv (yours file) does not
> work because the suptitle "guider (yours guides)" does not exist under the Arkiv
> title - Very disappointing and I ask for your immediate attention to solve this
> major problem
>
>
> Hälsningar Inger
Why don't *YOU* do a translation for it? If AOo doesn't have Swedish yet, here's
your chance to quit ragging people who have no control over language translations
and do it yourself and help others in your position. I mean, what do you expect
the AOo people to do - go out and kidnap a Swede and force him/her to do the
translating?
--
FTG FTI FTP
Registered Linux user #214117 at http://linuxcounter.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by Maurice Howe <ma...@stny.rr.com>.
I am continually impressed with the tact and courtesy with which your
dedicated OpenOffice staff responds to being yelled at from every direction.
Somehow you manage to keep your cool, for the most part. And in spite of it
all, you find time to improve an already-quality line of products Bless
you.
Maurice Howe
[A user, not a developer]
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pescetti@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 1:02 PM
To: users@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Open Office in Swedish
On 28/11/2012 M Henri Day wrote:
> Unlike in the case of AOo, where the latest stable version, 3.4.1
> still remains unavailable in Swedish, LibreOffice 3.6.3, the latest
> stable version of LO, is available in *ärans och hjältarnas språk*....
This is widely repeated, but only partially true. We could package and
distribute OpenOffice in more than 100 languages tomorrow (so to say; of
course it would need some infrastructure work, but the translations are
there).
Swedish is at 95% in OpenOffice (which means 96% after the, now useless,
TestTool strings are removed) and at 96% in LibreOffice, as one can find
from the respective Pootle statistics. Of course, these numbers are not very
significant since they should be taken at release time, but this is what I
could find now.
So, for the vast majority of languages, this is only a matter of release
policy: so far, OpenOffice only releases translations where there are active
volunteers who bring the translation to 100%. We already have a couple of
volunteers working on Swedish, so I'm confident we can reach 100% and
release 3.4.1 in Swedish in January.
The recent post from Juergen at
https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/apache_openoffice_reached_out_to
is quite informative in this respect.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2793 / Virus Database: 2634/5924 - Release Date: 11/28/12
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 28/11/2012 M Henri Day wrote:
> Unlike in the case of AOo, where the latest stable version, 3.4.1
> still remains unavailable in Swedish, LibreOffice 3.6.3, the latest stable
> version of LO, is available in *ärans och hjältarnas språk*....
This is widely repeated, but only partially true. We could package and
distribute OpenOffice in more than 100 languages tomorrow (so to say; of
course it would need some infrastructure work, but the translations are
there).
Swedish is at 95% in OpenOffice (which means 96% after the, now useless,
TestTool strings are removed) and at 96% in LibreOffice, as one can find
from the respective Pootle statistics. Of course, these numbers are not
very significant since they should be taken at release time, but this is
what I could find now.
So, for the vast majority of languages, this is only a matter of release
policy: so far, OpenOffice only releases translations where there are
active volunteers who bring the translation to 100%. We already have a
couple of volunteers working on Swedish, so I'm confident we can reach
100% and release 3.4.1 in Swedish in January.
The recent post from Juergen at
https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/apache_openoffice_reached_out_to
is quite informative in this respect.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by M Henri Day <mh...@gmail.com>.
2012/11/27 Inger Rehn <in...@telia.com>
> **
> I do not understand why I have to write in English - But, anyway, that is
> the core problem - I have been using Open Office for quite a few years -
> Now, there came a request to update the program - done it appears to be
> something apache - and it comes in English - I want it in Swedish or I will
> change to another program - An excuse of the Swedish site to instal Swedish
> files via Arkiv (yours file) does not work because the suptitle "guider
> (yours guides)" does not exist under the Arkiv title -
> Very disappointing and I ask for your immediate attention to solve this
> major problem
>
>
> Hälsningar Inger
>
Inger, I suggest you investigate LibreOffice (
https://www.libreoffice.org/download/). If, as I presume, you are writing
from Sweden, you should be directed to a web page which automatically
presents you with the opportunity to download the so-called «Main
Installer» plus the supplementary programme(s) for the Swedish language ;
if not, you can click the « Change System, Version or
Language<https://www.libreoffice.org/download/?nodetect>»
button and choose firstly your operating system and then the Swedish
language. Unlike in the case of AOo, where the latest stable version, 3.4.1
still remains unavailable in Swedish, LibreOffice 3.6.3, the latest stable
version of LO, is available in *ärans och hjältarnas språk*....
Henri
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by M Henri Day <mh...@gmail.com>.
2012/11/28 Johnny Rosenberg <gu...@gmail.com>
> 2012/11/28 M Henri Day <mh...@gmail.com>:
> > 2012/11/28 Johnny Rosenberg <gu...@gmail.com>
> >
> >> 2012/11/28 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>:
> >> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Inger Rehn <in...@telia.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> I do not understand why I have to write in English - But, anyway,
> that
> >> is
> >> >> the core problem - I have been using Open Office for quite a few
> years -
> >> >> Now, there came a request to update the program - done it appears to
> be
> >> >> something apache - and it comes in English - I want it in Swedish or
> I
> >> will
> >> >> change to another program - An excuse of the Swedish site to instal
> >> Swedish
> >> >> files via Arkiv (yours file) does not work because the suptitle
> "guider
> >> >> (yours guides)" does not exist under the Arkiv title -
> >> >> Very disappointing and I ask for your immediate attention to solve
> this
> >> >> major problem
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> <snip>
> >
> >>
> >> Unfortunately it seems like most of the Swedish translators moved to
> >> LibreOffice, which is a shame, because LibreOffice is crap these days.
> >> For every new feature they introduce a dozen of bugs which will never
> >> be corrected. Something like that, anyway. I was planning to go back
> >> to OpenOffice, but I'd like to have it in Swedish, so maybe not… :(
> >>
> >>
> >> Kind regards
> >>
> >> Johnny Rosenberg
> >> ジョニー・ローゼンバーグ
> >>
> >
> > The above statement to the effect that «LibreOffice is crap these days»
> > does not at all correspond to my experience ; quite the contrary....
>
> Maybe we use it for different things. I use Calc most of the time, so
> I don't know about Writer and the others. Math works OK though.
>
And I use it mainly for the excellent word processor, Writer. Different
strokes for different folks - but I hope you realise that «LibreOffice is
crap these days» was over the top and hardly corresponds to the general
user's experience....
Henri
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by Johnny Rosenberg <gu...@gmail.com>.
2012/11/28 M Henri Day <mh...@gmail.com>:
> 2012/11/28 Johnny Rosenberg <gu...@gmail.com>
>
>> 2012/11/28 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>:
>> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Inger Rehn <in...@telia.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> I do not understand why I have to write in English - But, anyway, that
>> is
>> >> the core problem - I have been using Open Office for quite a few years -
>> >> Now, there came a request to update the program - done it appears to be
>> >> something apache - and it comes in English - I want it in Swedish or I
>> will
>> >> change to another program - An excuse of the Swedish site to instal
>> Swedish
>> >> files via Arkiv (yours file) does not work because the suptitle "guider
>> >> (yours guides)" does not exist under the Arkiv title -
>> >> Very disappointing and I ask for your immediate attention to solve this
>> >> major problem
>> >>
>> >
>>
>> <snip>
>
>>
>> Unfortunately it seems like most of the Swedish translators moved to
>> LibreOffice, which is a shame, because LibreOffice is crap these days.
>> For every new feature they introduce a dozen of bugs which will never
>> be corrected. Something like that, anyway. I was planning to go back
>> to OpenOffice, but I'd like to have it in Swedish, so maybe not… :(
>>
>>
>> Kind regards
>>
>> Johnny Rosenberg
>> ジョニー・ローゼンバーグ
>>
>
> The above statement to the effect that «LibreOffice is crap these days»
> does not at all correspond to my experience ; quite the contrary....
Maybe we use it for different things. I use Calc most of the time, so
I don't know about Writer and the others. Math works OK though.
Kind regards
Johnny Rosenberg
ジョニー・ローゼンバーグ
>
> Henri
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by M Henri Day <mh...@gmail.com>.
2012/11/28 Johnny Rosenberg <gu...@gmail.com>
> 2012/11/28 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>:
> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Inger Rehn <in...@telia.com>
> wrote:
> >> I do not understand why I have to write in English - But, anyway, that
> is
> >> the core problem - I have been using Open Office for quite a few years -
> >> Now, there came a request to update the program - done it appears to be
> >> something apache - and it comes in English - I want it in Swedish or I
> will
> >> change to another program - An excuse of the Swedish site to instal
> Swedish
> >> files via Arkiv (yours file) does not work because the suptitle "guider
> >> (yours guides)" does not exist under the Arkiv title -
> >> Very disappointing and I ask for your immediate attention to solve this
> >> major problem
> >>
> >
>
> <snip>
>
> Unfortunately it seems like most of the Swedish translators moved to
> LibreOffice, which is a shame, because LibreOffice is crap these days.
> For every new feature they introduce a dozen of bugs which will never
> be corrected. Something like that, anyway. I was planning to go back
> to OpenOffice, but I'd like to have it in Swedish, so maybe not… :(
>
>
> Kind regards
>
> Johnny Rosenberg
> ジョニー・ローゼンバーグ
>
The above statement to the effect that «LibreOffice is crap these days»
does not at all correspond to my experience ; quite the contrary....
Henri
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Johnny Rosenberg
<gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2012/11/28 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>:
>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Inger Rehn <in...@telia.com> wrote:
>>> I do not understand why I have to write in English - But, anyway, that is
>>> the core problem - I have been using Open Office for quite a few years -
>>> Now, there came a request to update the program - done it appears to be
>>> something apache - and it comes in English - I want it in Swedish or I will
>>> change to another program - An excuse of the Swedish site to instal Swedish
>>> files via Arkiv (yours file) does not work because the suptitle "guider
>>> (yours guides)" does not exist under the Arkiv title -
>>> Very disappointing and I ask for your immediate attention to solve this
>>> major problem
>>>
>>
>> Hello Inger,
>>
>> As you probably know, Apache OpenOffice is a volunteer-led project.
>> So the coding, the tessting, even the user support on this mailing
>> list is done by volunteers. We have volunteer translators as well.
>> We're making good progress on the Scandinavian languages. Danish is
>> now done. Norwegian Bokmål is close as well. We'd like to release a
>> Swedish version of OpenOffice 3.4.1, along with Danish and Norwegian,
>> in January. But we need volunteers to help with the translation and
>> testing. We're close -- 95% done for Swedish.
>>
>> If you are interested in this, or know someone who can help, you can
>> find more information here:
>> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/translate.html
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> -Rob
>
> Unfortunately it seems like most of the Swedish translators moved to
> LibreOffice, which is a shame, because LibreOffice is crap these days.
> For every new feature they introduce a dozen of bugs which will never
> be corrected. Something like that, anyway. I was planning to go back
> to OpenOffice, but I'd like to have it in Swedish, so maybe not… :(
>
Sweden has a population of almost 10 million people. The fact that a
handful of translators went on direction or another doesn't really
matter. If there is sufficient demand for a high quality Swedish
translation of Apache OpenOffice then we will have one. It does not
require extremely rare skills. There are probably 50,000 people in
Sweden who could do this if they wanted to.
-Rob
>
> Kind regards
>
> Johnny Rosenberg
> ジョニー・ローゼンバーグ
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<de...@acm.org> wrote:
> Well, it is not entirely symmetrical, although that is a technicality in the bigger issues perhaps.
>
I didn't mean to say that the licenses were symmetrical (whatever that
would mean). I was addressing the inane comment that if Oracle had
assigned rights to TDF the fork would end. Of course, if LO
developers assigned rights under Apache license the fork would end as
well. Perhaps this is too obvious to state.
-Rob
> The ASF does not need to multi-license anything, since ALv2 is the most permissive of the ones mentioned. So ALv2 is sufficient, including on the current Apache OpenOffice releases, for use on projects using one of the others without having to do anything further (apart from what the ALv2 requires to be honored).
>
> That seems to be baked into the public-interest mission of the Apache Software Foundation and it can be counted on.
>
>
> - Dennis
>
> Aside: I don't think that the dual-licensing of current contributions to LibreOffice (LGPL and MPL) does much. That is insufficient to dual-license the original code base (which is only LGPL). I'm not sure what the theory behind that is. Contributions of code to LibreOffice (and Apache OpenOffice) can always be contributed elsewhere by their original contributors of course. Contributions to neither project are exclusive in any way.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 13:03
> To: users@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Open Office in Swedish
>
> [ ... ]
>>> When LO wanted to change frm LGPL to MPL they simply sent a note to
>>> their developers and asked them to return a statement saying that they
>>> agreed to include MPL license on their past and future contributions.
>>> It was simple and painless. If they wanted to end the fork a similar
>>> note, asking for agreement to attach the Apache License, would also
>>> work.
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>
>> Presumably, Rob, that would work for Apache as well - or is it a case of *quod
>> licet Iovi non licet bovi* ? As we know, it takes two to tango....
>>
>
> As I said, it is symmetrical. We should avoid the portrayal that one
> side is a viper's den of corporate interests and the other side
> consists of cloistered monks. There are various interests on both
> projects.
>
> -Rob
>
>
>> Henri
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
Well, it is not entirely symmetrical, although that is a technicality in the bigger issues perhaps.
The ASF does not need to multi-license anything, since ALv2 is the most permissive of the ones mentioned. So ALv2 is sufficient, including on the current Apache OpenOffice releases, for use on projects using one of the others without having to do anything further (apart from what the ALv2 requires to be honored).
That seems to be baked into the public-interest mission of the Apache Software Foundation and it can be counted on.
- Dennis
Aside: I don't think that the dual-licensing of current contributions to LibreOffice (LGPL and MPL) does much. That is insufficient to dual-license the original code base (which is only LGPL). I'm not sure what the theory behind that is. Contributions of code to LibreOffice (and Apache OpenOffice) can always be contributed elsewhere by their original contributors of course. Contributions to neither project are exclusive in any way.
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 13:03
To: users@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Open Office in Swedish
[ ... ]
>> When LO wanted to change frm LGPL to MPL they simply sent a note to
>> their developers and asked them to return a statement saying that they
>> agreed to include MPL license on their past and future contributions.
>> It was simple and painless. If they wanted to end the fork a similar
>> note, asking for agreement to attach the Apache License, would also
>> work.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>
> Presumably, Rob, that would work for Apache as well - or is it a case of *quod
> licet Iovi non licet bovi* ? As we know, it takes two to tango....
>
As I said, it is symmetrical. We should avoid the portrayal that one
side is a viper's den of corporate interests and the other side
consists of cloistered monks. There are various interests on both
projects.
-Rob
> Henri
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by M Henri Day <mh...@gmail.com>.
2012/11/28 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:39 PM, M Henri Day <mh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2012/11/28 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
> >
> >> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:07 PM, M Henri Day <mh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> > 2012/11/28 Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net>
> >> >
> >> >> Le 28/11/2012 19:43, M Henri Day a écrit :
> >> >>
> >> >>> Agree - but the responsibility for the forking should be placed
> >> squarely
> >> >>> where it lies - on Oracle. Moreover, the forked paths would have
> >> >>> automatically rejoined had Oracle, when it decided to dump OOo,
> chosen
> >> to
> >> >>> assign it to the Document Foundation, which was already up and
> running
> >> and
> >> >>> which requested that this be done. Instead, the firm decided to
> assign
> >> all
> >> >>> the rights to Apache, in the knowledge that doing so would
> perpetuate
> >> the
> >> >>> fork. Thank you, Mr Ellison....
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >> But you're forgetting the license difference!
> >> >> Apache license has been chosen because it allows a more permissive
> reuse
> >> >> of the code. Of course I understand the fears that it can draw but it
> >> can
> >> >> also attract big players. Even if some code is note given back to the
> >> >> community, they know that if they want to benefit from the support of
> >> the
> >> >> community, the community need to know about the new code those big
> >> players
> >> >> are injecting too.
> >> >> So let them customize for their own need and help the community with
> >> code
> >> >> that is not strategical for them, with manpower, with ODF support,
> ...
> >> >>
> >> >> BTW, Isn't LO investigating a license change (to Al v2, like AOO)?
> What
> >> >> would happen to the already submitted code that is based on OOo code
> and
> >> >> not AOO? The mere thinking about switching is a proof that in the
> end,
> >> the
> >> >> Apache license may be the best way to attract resources.
> >> >>
> >> >> Hagar
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Hagar, are the differences between the Apache License version 2 and
> the
> >> GNU
> >> > Lesser General Public License version 3 really so great that they
> >> preclude
> >> > a recombination of the forked paths ? In my view, it should be
> possible
> >> to
> >> > overcome the differences, but the longer things go on in the present
> >> > manner, the greater the risk that both sides will become more and more
> >> > entrenched in their present positions. In any event, my suggestion to
> the
> >> > OP was based upon her evident desire to obtain an updated
> >> Swedish-language
> >> > version of the suite, one of which is offered by LibreOffice, but
> alas,
> >> not
> >> > (yet ?) by Apache OpenOffice....
> >> >
> >>
> >> When LO wanted to change frm LGPL to MPL they simply sent a note to
> >> their developers and asked them to return a statement saying that they
> >> agreed to include MPL license on their past and future contributions.
> >> It was simple and painless. If they wanted to end the fork a similar
> >> note, asking for agreement to attach the Apache License, would also
> >> work.
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >
> > Presumably, Rob, that would work for Apache as well - or is it a case of
> *quod
> > licet Iovi non licet bovi* ? As we know, it takes two to tango....
> >
>
> As I said, it is symmetrical. We should avoid the portrayal that one
> side is a viper's den of corporate interests and the other side
> consists of cloistered monks. There are various interests on both
> projects.
>
> -Rob
>
I am unaware of having portrayed any «side» as being «cloistered monks» -
and besides, having a certain professional acquaintance with East Asian
history, I'm not particularly impressed by the presumed innocence or
other-worldliness of «cloistered monks». Nor did I imply that Apache is «a
viper's den of corporate interests» - although I certainly did question
Oracle' motives. But if you truly believe, Rob, that the situation is
symmetrical, then your suggestion that all that it is necessary to resolve
it is for LO to abandon its license and require of developers that they
accept Apache's license is rather odd....
Henri
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:39 PM, M Henri Day <mh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2012/11/28 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>
>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:07 PM, M Henri Day <mh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > 2012/11/28 Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net>
>> >
>> >> Le 28/11/2012 19:43, M Henri Day a écrit :
>> >>
>> >>> Agree - but the responsibility for the forking should be placed
>> squarely
>> >>> where it lies - on Oracle. Moreover, the forked paths would have
>> >>> automatically rejoined had Oracle, when it decided to dump OOo, chosen
>> to
>> >>> assign it to the Document Foundation, which was already up and running
>> and
>> >>> which requested that this be done. Instead, the firm decided to assign
>> all
>> >>> the rights to Apache, in the knowledge that doing so would perpetuate
>> the
>> >>> fork. Thank you, Mr Ellison....
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> But you're forgetting the license difference!
>> >> Apache license has been chosen because it allows a more permissive reuse
>> >> of the code. Of course I understand the fears that it can draw but it
>> can
>> >> also attract big players. Even if some code is note given back to the
>> >> community, they know that if they want to benefit from the support of
>> the
>> >> community, the community need to know about the new code those big
>> players
>> >> are injecting too.
>> >> So let them customize for their own need and help the community with
>> code
>> >> that is not strategical for them, with manpower, with ODF support, ...
>> >>
>> >> BTW, Isn't LO investigating a license change (to Al v2, like AOO)? What
>> >> would happen to the already submitted code that is based on OOo code and
>> >> not AOO? The mere thinking about switching is a proof that in the end,
>> the
>> >> Apache license may be the best way to attract resources.
>> >>
>> >> Hagar
>> >
>> >
>> > Hagar, are the differences between the Apache License version 2 and the
>> GNU
>> > Lesser General Public License version 3 really so great that they
>> preclude
>> > a recombination of the forked paths ? In my view, it should be possible
>> to
>> > overcome the differences, but the longer things go on in the present
>> > manner, the greater the risk that both sides will become more and more
>> > entrenched in their present positions. In any event, my suggestion to the
>> > OP was based upon her evident desire to obtain an updated
>> Swedish-language
>> > version of the suite, one of which is offered by LibreOffice, but alas,
>> not
>> > (yet ?) by Apache OpenOffice....
>> >
>>
>> When LO wanted to change frm LGPL to MPL they simply sent a note to
>> their developers and asked them to return a statement saying that they
>> agreed to include MPL license on their past and future contributions.
>> It was simple and painless. If they wanted to end the fork a similar
>> note, asking for agreement to attach the Apache License, would also
>> work.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>
> Presumably, Rob, that would work for Apache as well - or is it a case of *quod
> licet Iovi non licet bovi* ? As we know, it takes two to tango....
>
As I said, it is symmetrical. We should avoid the portrayal that one
side is a viper's den of corporate interests and the other side
consists of cloistered monks. There are various interests on both
projects.
-Rob
> Henri
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by M Henri Day <mh...@gmail.com>.
2012/11/28 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:07 PM, M Henri Day <mh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2012/11/28 Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net>
> >
> >> Le 28/11/2012 19:43, M Henri Day a écrit :
> >>
> >>> Agree - but the responsibility for the forking should be placed
> squarely
> >>> where it lies - on Oracle. Moreover, the forked paths would have
> >>> automatically rejoined had Oracle, when it decided to dump OOo, chosen
> to
> >>> assign it to the Document Foundation, which was already up and running
> and
> >>> which requested that this be done. Instead, the firm decided to assign
> all
> >>> the rights to Apache, in the knowledge that doing so would perpetuate
> the
> >>> fork. Thank you, Mr Ellison....
> >>>
> >>
> >> But you're forgetting the license difference!
> >> Apache license has been chosen because it allows a more permissive reuse
> >> of the code. Of course I understand the fears that it can draw but it
> can
> >> also attract big players. Even if some code is note given back to the
> >> community, they know that if they want to benefit from the support of
> the
> >> community, the community need to know about the new code those big
> players
> >> are injecting too.
> >> So let them customize for their own need and help the community with
> code
> >> that is not strategical for them, with manpower, with ODF support, ...
> >>
> >> BTW, Isn't LO investigating a license change (to Al v2, like AOO)? What
> >> would happen to the already submitted code that is based on OOo code and
> >> not AOO? The mere thinking about switching is a proof that in the end,
> the
> >> Apache license may be the best way to attract resources.
> >>
> >> Hagar
> >
> >
> > Hagar, are the differences between the Apache License version 2 and the
> GNU
> > Lesser General Public License version 3 really so great that they
> preclude
> > a recombination of the forked paths ? In my view, it should be possible
> to
> > overcome the differences, but the longer things go on in the present
> > manner, the greater the risk that both sides will become more and more
> > entrenched in their present positions. In any event, my suggestion to the
> > OP was based upon her evident desire to obtain an updated
> Swedish-language
> > version of the suite, one of which is offered by LibreOffice, but alas,
> not
> > (yet ?) by Apache OpenOffice....
> >
>
> When LO wanted to change frm LGPL to MPL they simply sent a note to
> their developers and asked them to return a statement saying that they
> agreed to include MPL license on their past and future contributions.
> It was simple and painless. If they wanted to end the fork a similar
> note, asking for agreement to attach the Apache License, would also
> work.
>
> -Rob
>
Presumably, Rob, that would work for Apache as well - or is it a case of *quod
licet Iovi non licet bovi* ? As we know, it takes two to tango....
Henri
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:07 PM, M Henri Day <mh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2012/11/28 Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net>
>
>> Le 28/11/2012 19:43, M Henri Day a écrit :
>>
>>> Agree - but the responsibility for the forking should be placed squarely
>>> where it lies - on Oracle. Moreover, the forked paths would have
>>> automatically rejoined had Oracle, when it decided to dump OOo, chosen to
>>> assign it to the Document Foundation, which was already up and running and
>>> which requested that this be done. Instead, the firm decided to assign all
>>> the rights to Apache, in the knowledge that doing so would perpetuate the
>>> fork. Thank you, Mr Ellison....
>>>
>>
>> But you're forgetting the license difference!
>> Apache license has been chosen because it allows a more permissive reuse
>> of the code. Of course I understand the fears that it can draw but it can
>> also attract big players. Even if some code is note given back to the
>> community, they know that if they want to benefit from the support of the
>> community, the community need to know about the new code those big players
>> are injecting too.
>> So let them customize for their own need and help the community with code
>> that is not strategical for them, with manpower, with ODF support, ...
>>
>> BTW, Isn't LO investigating a license change (to Al v2, like AOO)? What
>> would happen to the already submitted code that is based on OOo code and
>> not AOO? The mere thinking about switching is a proof that in the end, the
>> Apache license may be the best way to attract resources.
>>
>> Hagar
>
>
> Hagar, are the differences between the Apache License version 2 and the GNU
> Lesser General Public License version 3 really so great that they preclude
> a recombination of the forked paths ? In my view, it should be possible to
> overcome the differences, but the longer things go on in the present
> manner, the greater the risk that both sides will become more and more
> entrenched in their present positions. In any event, my suggestion to the
> OP was based upon her evident desire to obtain an updated Swedish-language
> version of the suite, one of which is offered by LibreOffice, but alas, not
> (yet ?) by Apache OpenOffice....
>
When LO wanted to change frm LGPL to MPL they simply sent a note to
their developers and asked them to return a statement saying that they
agreed to include MPL license on their past and future contributions.
It was simple and painless. If they wanted to end the fork a similar
note, asking for agreement to attach the Apache License, would also
work.
-Rob
> Henri
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by M Henri Day <mh...@gmail.com>.
2012/11/28 Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net>
> Le 28/11/2012 19:43, M Henri Day a écrit :
>
>> Agree - but the responsibility for the forking should be placed squarely
>> where it lies - on Oracle. Moreover, the forked paths would have
>> automatically rejoined had Oracle, when it decided to dump OOo, chosen to
>> assign it to the Document Foundation, which was already up and running and
>> which requested that this be done. Instead, the firm decided to assign all
>> the rights to Apache, in the knowledge that doing so would perpetuate the
>> fork. Thank you, Mr Ellison....
>>
>
> But you're forgetting the license difference!
> Apache license has been chosen because it allows a more permissive reuse
> of the code. Of course I understand the fears that it can draw but it can
> also attract big players. Even if some code is note given back to the
> community, they know that if they want to benefit from the support of the
> community, the community need to know about the new code those big players
> are injecting too.
> So let them customize for their own need and help the community with code
> that is not strategical for them, with manpower, with ODF support, ...
>
> BTW, Isn't LO investigating a license change (to Al v2, like AOO)? What
> would happen to the already submitted code that is based on OOo code and
> not AOO? The mere thinking about switching is a proof that in the end, the
> Apache license may be the best way to attract resources.
>
> Hagar
Hagar, are the differences between the Apache License version 2 and the GNU
Lesser General Public License version 3 really so great that they preclude
a recombination of the forked paths ? In my view, it should be possible to
overcome the differences, but the longer things go on in the present
manner, the greater the risk that both sides will become more and more
entrenched in their present positions. In any event, my suggestion to the
OP was based upon her evident desire to obtain an updated Swedish-language
version of the suite, one of which is offered by LibreOffice, but alas, not
(yet ?) by Apache OpenOffice....
Henri
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by Hagar Delest <ha...@laposte.net>.
Le 28/11/2012 19:43, M Henri Day a écrit :
> Agree - but the responsibility for the forking should be placed squarely
> where it lies - on Oracle. Moreover, the forked paths would have
> automatically rejoined had Oracle, when it decided to dump OOo, chosen to
> assign it to the Document Foundation, which was already up and running and
> which requested that this be done. Instead, the firm decided to assign all
> the rights to Apache, in the knowledge that doing so would perpetuate the
> fork. Thank you, Mr Ellison....
But you're forgetting the license difference!
Apache license has been chosen because it allows a more permissive reuse of the code. Of course I understand the fears that it can draw but it can also attract big players. Even if some code is note given back to the community, they know that if they want to benefit from the support of the community, the community need to know about the new code those big players are injecting too.
So let them customize for their own need and help the community with code that is not strategical for them, with manpower, with ODF support, ...
BTW, Isn't LO investigating a license change (to Al v2, like AOO)? What would happen to the already submitted code that is based on OOo code and not AOO? The mere thinking about switching is a proof that in the end, the Apache license may be the best way to attract resources.
Hagar
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 1:43 PM, M Henri Day <mh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2012/11/28 Coll-Barth, Michael <Mi...@verizonwireless.com>
>
>>
>> > From: M Henri Day [mailto:mhenriday@gmail.com]
>>
>> >
>> > 2012/11/28 Johnny Rosenberg <gu...@gmail.com>
>> >
>> > > Unfortunately it seems like most of the Swedish translators moved to
>> > > LibreOffice, which is a shame, because LibreOffice is crap these days.
>> > > For every new feature they introduce a dozen of bugs which will never
>> > > be corrected. Something like that, anyway. I was planning to go back
>> > > to OpenOffice, but I'd like to have it in Swedish, so maybe not… :(
>> > >
>> >
>> > The above statement to the effect that «LibreOffice is crap these days»
>> > does not at all correspond to my experience ; quite the contrary....
>> >
>> > Henri
>>
>> It is truly a shame that there had to be this fork. The 'eyes' have been
>> effectively cut in half between the two products. And for what, minor
>> differences? Is one product really so much better than the other? Yeah, I
>> see the differences, but they are less than between versions of MS Office.
>>
>
> Agree - but the responsibility for the forking should be placed squarely
> where it lies - on Oracle. Moreover, the forked paths would have
> automatically rejoined had Oracle, when it decided to dump OOo, chosen to
> assign it to the Document Foundation, which was already up and running and
> which requested that this be done. Instead, the firm decided to assign all
> the rights to Apache, in the knowledge that doing so would perpetuate the
> fork. Thank you, Mr Ellison....
>
And the fork would automatically end if SUSE today decided to end
LibreOffice and work with Apache. It is entirely symmetrical.
-Rob
> Henri
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by M Henri Day <mh...@gmail.com>.
2012/11/28 Coll-Barth, Michael <Mi...@verizonwireless.com>
>
> > From: M Henri Day [mailto:mhenriday@gmail.com]
>
> >
> > 2012/11/28 Johnny Rosenberg <gu...@gmail.com>
> >
> > > Unfortunately it seems like most of the Swedish translators moved to
> > > LibreOffice, which is a shame, because LibreOffice is crap these days.
> > > For every new feature they introduce a dozen of bugs which will never
> > > be corrected. Something like that, anyway. I was planning to go back
> > > to OpenOffice, but I'd like to have it in Swedish, so maybe not… :(
> > >
> >
> > The above statement to the effect that «LibreOffice is crap these days»
> > does not at all correspond to my experience ; quite the contrary....
> >
> > Henri
>
> It is truly a shame that there had to be this fork. The 'eyes' have been
> effectively cut in half between the two products. And for what, minor
> differences? Is one product really so much better than the other? Yeah, I
> see the differences, but they are less than between versions of MS Office.
>
Agree - but the responsibility for the forking should be placed squarely
where it lies - on Oracle. Moreover, the forked paths would have
automatically rejoined had Oracle, when it decided to dump OOo, chosen to
assign it to the Document Foundation, which was already up and running and
which requested that this be done. Instead, the firm decided to assign all
the rights to Apache, in the knowledge that doing so would perpetuate the
fork. Thank you, Mr Ellison....
Henri
RE: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by "Coll-Barth, Michael" <Mi...@VerizonWireless.com>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: M Henri Day [mailto:mhenriday@gmail.com]
> >
>
> Agree - but the responsibility for the forking should be placed squarely
> where it lies - on Oracle. Moreover, the forked paths would have
> automatically rejoined had Oracle, when it decided to dump OOo, chosen to
> assign it to the Document Foundation, which was already up and running and
> which requested that this be done. Instead, the firm decided to assign all
> the rights to Apache, in the knowledge that doing so would perpetuate the
> fork. Thank you, Mr Ellison....
>
Apache is open source as well. So, I don't buy that argument. Oracle bought Sun and acquired OpenOffice.
To an outsider, namely me and one that is not vested in either side, it appears that someone didn't like the notion that Oracle was in control of OO and decided to fork it.
For giggles sake, let's say that it was not a good thing to have OO in the hands of Oracle. Once OO was out of Oracle's control and in the hands of Apache, LO should have simply disappeared with the LO developers flocking back to OO bringing with them the new ideas they built into LO. Oh, and of course, the squandered resources could be put to better use; building a solid, open source Office Suite.
RE: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by "Coll-Barth, Michael" <Mi...@VerizonWireless.com>.
> From: M Henri Day [mailto:mhenriday@gmail.com]
>
> 2012/11/28 Johnny Rosenberg <gu...@gmail.com>
>
> > Unfortunately it seems like most of the Swedish translators moved to
> > LibreOffice, which is a shame, because LibreOffice is crap these days.
> > For every new feature they introduce a dozen of bugs which will never
> > be corrected. Something like that, anyway. I was planning to go back
> > to OpenOffice, but I'd like to have it in Swedish, so maybe not… :(
> >
>
> The above statement to the effect that «LibreOffice is crap these days»
> does not at all correspond to my experience ; quite the contrary....
>
> Henri
It is truly a shame that there had to be this fork. The 'eyes' have been effectively cut in half between the two products. And for what, minor differences? Is one product really so much better than the other? Yeah, I see the differences, but they are less than between versions of MS Office.
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by Johnny Rosenberg <gu...@gmail.com>.
2012/11/28 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Inger Rehn <in...@telia.com> wrote:
>> I do not understand why I have to write in English - But, anyway, that is
>> the core problem - I have been using Open Office for quite a few years -
>> Now, there came a request to update the program - done it appears to be
>> something apache - and it comes in English - I want it in Swedish or I will
>> change to another program - An excuse of the Swedish site to instal Swedish
>> files via Arkiv (yours file) does not work because the suptitle "guider
>> (yours guides)" does not exist under the Arkiv title -
>> Very disappointing and I ask for your immediate attention to solve this
>> major problem
>>
>
> Hello Inger,
>
> As you probably know, Apache OpenOffice is a volunteer-led project.
> So the coding, the tessting, even the user support on this mailing
> list is done by volunteers. We have volunteer translators as well.
> We're making good progress on the Scandinavian languages. Danish is
> now done. Norwegian Bokmål is close as well. We'd like to release a
> Swedish version of OpenOffice 3.4.1, along with Danish and Norwegian,
> in January. But we need volunteers to help with the translation and
> testing. We're close -- 95% done for Swedish.
>
> If you are interested in this, or know someone who can help, you can
> find more information here:
> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/translate.html
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
Unfortunately it seems like most of the Swedish translators moved to
LibreOffice, which is a shame, because LibreOffice is crap these days.
For every new feature they introduce a dozen of bugs which will never
be corrected. Something like that, anyway. I was planning to go back
to OpenOffice, but I'd like to have it in Swedish, so maybe not… :(
Kind regards
Johnny Rosenberg
ジョニー・ローゼンバーグ
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Open Office in Swedish
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Inger Rehn <in...@telia.com> wrote:
> I do not understand why I have to write in English - But, anyway, that is
> the core problem - I have been using Open Office for quite a few years -
> Now, there came a request to update the program - done it appears to be
> something apache - and it comes in English - I want it in Swedish or I will
> change to another program - An excuse of the Swedish site to instal Swedish
> files via Arkiv (yours file) does not work because the suptitle "guider
> (yours guides)" does not exist under the Arkiv title -
> Very disappointing and I ask for your immediate attention to solve this
> major problem
>
Hello Inger,
As you probably know, Apache OpenOffice is a volunteer-led project.
So the coding, the tessting, even the user support on this mailing
list is done by volunteers. We have volunteer translators as well.
We're making good progress on the Scandinavian languages. Danish is
now done. Norwegian Bokmål is close as well. We'd like to release a
Swedish version of OpenOffice 3.4.1, along with Danish and Norwegian,
in January. But we need volunteers to help with the translation and
testing. We're close -- 95% done for Swedish.
If you are interested in this, or know someone who can help, you can
find more information here:
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/translate.html
Regards,
-Rob
>
> Hälsningar Inger
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org