WollMux adoption proposal for The Document Foundation

Board Discuss
#5

Hi Sophie,

sophi wrote:

Will that stay as an extension or will it be integrated to
LibreOffice core?

There's currently no plans to do so, no. I don't think that is
technically desirable, since the implementation is
Java-only.

Is everything (code comments, strings, doc) still in German?

See proposal, pretty far down the list - start with code & comment
translation DE->EN.

So the answer is, the work has started. :wink:

Are there some examples of how it works and what it does and for
which users it is expected?

Can I refer you to our LibOCon talk? I can ask Mike if the video is
perhaps ready soonish, so that can then be part of the public
information here.

Best,

-- Thorsten

#6

Hi Thorsten,

Your answer bring me some more questions :slight_smile:

Hi Sophie,

sophi wrote:

Will that stay as an extension or will it be integrated to
LibreOffice core?

There's currently no plans to do so, no. I don't think that is
technically desirable, since the implementation is
Java-only.

ok, thanks, just for clarity for all, what would prevent it to be released as an extension on the extension site? is it too complex?

Is everything (code comments, strings, doc) still in German?

See proposal, pretty far down the list - start with code & comment
translation DE->EN.

So the answer is, the work has started. :wink:

great, is it a lot of work? do you have an idea of when it will be available for the whole community?

Are there some examples of how it works and what it does and for
which users it is expected?

Can I refer you to our LibOCon talk? I can ask Mike if the video is
perhaps ready soonish, so that can then be part of the public
information here.

Thanks a lot, I'll find the video and will have a look
Cheers
Sophie

#7

Hi Susanne, all,

Susanne LO wrote:

I will try to install wollmux, it does not work today.
If it works, ipost some examples.

WollMux 18.2.10
(https://github.com/WollMux/WollMux/releases/tag/RELEASE_18.2.10), the
latest release, is only tested to work with LibreOffice 6.4.

For 7.3/7.4, please everyone build directly from source, the current
master branch was fixed to work with newest LibreOffice releases.

Best,

-- Thorsten

#8

Hi Sophie,

sophi wrote:

just for clarity for all, what would prevent it to be released as an
extension on the extension site? is it too complex?

No, not at all, just needs someone updating it there (an older release
is available already:
https://extensions.libreoffice.org/en/extensions/show/wollmux).

> > Is everything (code comments, strings, doc) still in German?
> >
> See proposal, pretty far down the list - start with code & comment
> translation DE->EN.
>
> So the answer is, the work has started. :wink:

great, is it a lot of work? do you have an idea of when it will be
available for the whole community?

It is not massive (but it's still large enough that we'd like to ask
people to jump in & help). Code has around 80 kLOC, but quite a lot of
the main sources are already in English (comments, variable names, test
assertion outputs etc).

Documentation is in markdown, and currently only in German. Looking at
the most recent version (for 18.2), this is the size:

$ find WollMuxHandbuch/markdown/18.2 -iname '*.md' | xargs wc
...
lines: 9870 words: 86501 in total

Best,

-- Thorsten

#9

Dear community,

Hello Thorsten, hello all,

as announced during LibOCon, and subsequently discussed in the ESC,
here's the formal adoption proposal for the "WollMux" template / form
letter / mail merge engine / Java extension, from the City of Munich.

Reply-To: board-discuss please, unless there's technical questions to
discuss (for those, I copy the developer list).

I would like to ask some questions but I'm keeping the dev-list out for not disturbing them.
@Thorsten, please, feel free to pull the dev list again in if you think that their feedback is needed too.

My memory of WollMux is a bit rusty and I had a look at the source code on GitHub[0].

# Topic: license
The license is "EUPL-1.1" but looking at some of the subfolders I found for example also mentions to GNU LGPLv2 [1].
Did the ESC (or anyone else) make an analysis of the source code looking for other licenses mentioned? Could it be possible to make use of the REUSE[2] project started by FSFE?
In the potential move under the TDF umbrella, is there any plan to also re-license it following the usual licenses of LibreOffice?

# Topic: naming and conventions

I'm aware that there's an ongoing translation from German to English.
In this translation and renaming, is there any plan/agreement to also look at harmful and exclusionary language[3]?
For example, looking at the GitHub project the main branch is called "master".
Some comments are also affected by a similar non inclusive writing like for example here [4] where the comment states "the bookmarks aren't deleted and the user is request to confirm, that he wants to create a" and there's the assumption that the user can be only a male.

# Topic: pull requests and issues

## pull requests
As per today, there are 8 open pull requests[5] and some of them are in German. Is there any plan to translate the content or close the PRs in German and reopen new PRs in English?
Some of the existing pull requests use a tag "trac" but I could't find any reference to this naming convention? Is this something private that the mentioned maintainers from 2 organizations will take care of document? Could it be possible to know more about those tags?

## issues
As per today, there are 14 open issues[6] and some of them are in German. Like for the case of the pull requests, is there any plan to translate the content or close the issues in German and reopen new issues in English?

# Topic: security
The security policy[7] seems to be not defined. Which is the agreement here? Are the two mentioned maintainers supposed to take over everything or WollMux will also be covered by the LibreOffice security[8] policy? With that amount of lines of code I suppose the ESC should have a clear view of the status of the project.
The jenkinsfile is mentioning the integration with SonarQube[9] for the the security scans, is there any plan to also move the SonarQube setup under the TDF infra?

# Topic: localization
The proposal mentions the move of the localization to Weblate. There's also an open issue intended for modernizing the localization environment from "one config file" to .po files[10].
Which is the potential timeline for having the localization on Weblate? Is there any ongoing discussion with the L10N team at LibreOffice? Should the L10N community consider also WollMux as a priority project to be translated with high priority like LibreOffice (UI, Help, Guides)?

# Topic: support
The main WollmMux website[11] has a link to a catalog on JoinUp[12] that describes WollMux as an extension for OpenOffice. Is this just an old catalog description or WollMux is really intended for working with both LibreOffice and Apache OpenOffice (and it will need to support both?)
On which operating systems WollMux is suppose to be supported?

Thanks a lot for your feedback.
Happy hacking,
Marina

[0] https://github.com/WollMux/WollMux
[1] https://github.com/WollMux/WollMux/blob/master/bin/text_cat/Copyright
[2] https://reuse.software/
[3] https://inclusivenaming.org/
[4] https://github.com/WollMux/WollMux/blob/011270779d9fce4efc195eae66d95c95a64a3cee/core/src/main/java/de/muenchen/allg/itd51/wollmux/slv/events/OnMarkBlock.java#L150
[5] https://github.com/WollMux/WollMux/pulls
[6] https://github.com/WollMux/WollMux/issues
[7] https://github.com/WollMux/WollMux/security
[8] https://www.libreoffice.org/about-us/security/
[9] https://github.com/WollMux/WollMux/blob/011270779d9fce4efc195eae66d95c95a64a3cee/Jenkinsfile
[10] https://github.com/WollMux/WollMux/issues/398
[11] https://wollmux.org/
[12] https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/collection/egovernment/solution/wollmux

#10

Hi Marina,

Thanks a lot for your analysis, I jump on two subjects:

Dear community,

Hello Thorsten, hello all,

[...]

# Topic: naming and conventions

I'm aware that there's an ongoing translation from German to English.
In this translation and renaming, is there any plan/agreement to also look at harmful and exclusionary language[3]?
For example, looking at the GitHub project the main branch is called "master".
Some comments are also affected by a similar non inclusive writing like for example here [4] where the comment states "the bookmarks aren't deleted and the user is request to confirm, that he wants to create a" and there's the assumption that the user can be only a male.

This one is something I would like we work on, have inclusive language all over our pages, so thanks for mentioning it.
I've added this link to our wiki for reference:
https://www.linuxfoundation.org/research/the-2021-linux-foundation-report-on-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-in-open-source
I think we, as a inclusive community, should show and be exemplary here

[...]

# Topic: localization
The proposal mentions the move of the localization to Weblate. There's also an open issue intended for modernizing the localization environment from "one config file" to .po files[10].
Which is the potential timeline for having the localization on Weblate? Is there any ongoing discussion with the L10N team at LibreOffice? Should the L10N community consider also WollMux as a priority project to be translated with high priority like LibreOffice (UI, Help, Guides)?

There is no discussion currently on the l10n list. In my view it's not needed right now as there is a lot of translation that have to happen in the code (and we are not far from a major release too).
Thorsten confirmed yesterday that it's an extension. Our l10n team doesn't translate external extensions or it will be a never ending work that could hamper translation of UI and help files with any extension creator requesting translation.
What is possible and already happened, is to post the request for translation to the l10n list with a link to the files. That way, it doesn't make the translation mandatory for the teams like UI and help are.

Cheers
Sophie

#11

Hi Marina,

Marina Latini wrote:

The license is "EUPL-1.1" but looking at some of the subfolders I found for
example also mentions to GNU LGPLv2 [1].

Yep, that's part of the LibreOffice l10n tools, that Samuel was
cloning recently from there (and as such a build-time, not a runtime
component).

Did the ESC (or anyone else) make an analysis of the source code
looking for other licenses mentioned? Could it be possible to make
use of the REUSE[2] project started by FSFE?

REUSE is AFAIK working with already-existing metadata. I did run
scancode a while ago without anything surprising sticking out, but
it's a good point to run it again, before any possible final switch.

In the potential move under the TDF umbrella, is there any plan to
also re-license it following the usual licenses of LibreOffice?

I can ask LHM if that is an option. But would we really need that?
LibreOffice itself only has the core code (mostly) under MPL. The
binary itself has a massive bouquet of other licenses, and other
libraries TDF is hosting, feature licenses ranging from GPL to ASL or
BSD.

For example, looking at the GitHub project the main branch is called
"master".

Ah yep, thx for mentioning. That's an easy fix, and I'll also run the
usual greps regarding other anachronisms in the code. Branch rename
might though only happen immediately before or after the move (if/when
approved).

Some comments are also affected by a similar non inclusive writing like for
example here [4] where the comment states "the bookmarks aren't deleted and
the user is request to confirm, that he wants to create a" and there's the
assumption that the user can be only a male.

If you share your greps with me, I can have a look.

As per today, there are 8 open pull requests[5] and some of them are in
German. Is there any plan to translate the content or close the PRs in
German and reopen new PRs in English?

I'd leave that to the maintainers. But sure, having PRs in English would
presumably increase the chances of getting them merged.

Some of the existing pull requests use a tag "trac" but I could't find any
reference to this naming convention? Is this something private that the
mentioned maintainers from 2 organizations will take care of document? Could
it be possible to know more about those tags?

trac# is like the internal StarOffice bugtracker references in
OOo/LibreOffice commit messages and code. I'm near certain that data
cannot be published.

As per today, there are 14 open issues[6] and some of them are in German.
Like for the case of the pull requests, is there any plan to translate the
content or close the issues in German and reopen new issues in English?

Same answer as for PRs, that should be decided by those doing the work.

The security policy[7] seems to be not defined. Which is the
agreement here? Are the two mentioned maintainers supposed to take
over everything or WollMux will also be covered by the LibreOffice
security[8] policy? With that amount of lines of code I suppose the
ESC should have a clear view of the status of the project.

At least for the foreseeable future, we (allotropia) can look into any
security reports. If/when the move happens, my suggestion would be
reporting to security@documentfoundation.org, just like for DLP and
LibreOffice. The only relevant issues over the time I see there is
third party stuff, e.g. WollMux was affected by the log4j fallout.

The jenkinsfile is mentioning the integration with SonarQube[9] for
the the security scans, is there any plan to also move the SonarQube
setup under the TDF infra?

I'd also leave that to the maintainers, and our infra team. SonarQube
needs an extra server (I think), and has an opencore business model -
so whether that's a good fit for TDF infra needs discussion.

Which is the potential timeline for having the localization on
Weblate? Is there any ongoing discussion with the L10N team at
LibreOffice?

Hard to say, those things can I guess only happen (and then be
discussed with the community), if/when the move has happened.

Should the L10N community consider also WollMux as a priority
project to be translated with high priority like LibreOffice (UI,
Help, Guides)?

I would not expect that. Then again, the effort (after initial
translation) is likely very, very small per release.

The main WollmMux website[11] has a link to a catalog on JoinUp[12] that
describes WollMux as an extension for OpenOffice. Is this just an old
catalog description or WollMux is really intended for working with both
LibreOffice and Apache OpenOffice (and it will need to support both?)

Pretty sure that's stale. Then again, the OXT has this:

<OpenOffice.org-minimal-version value="2.1" name="OpenOffice.org 2.1"/>

, so there's even more staleness (given that there was no sidebar
support in that version, which is required now). Ultimately, which
version(s) of LibreOffice and/or OpenOffice the maintainers want to
support, is up to them (I'd certainly not expect a project hosted at
TDF to continue OOo support).

On which operating systems WollMux is suppose to be supported?

Again a maintainer question, but if I'd put my TDF hat on, I'd say:
ideally it should run on all desktop platforms TDF ships LibreOffice
binaries for (if they permit a JRE installations).

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

#12

Hi Marina, all,

to keep this conversation going -

I wrote:

Marina Latini wrote:
> As per today, there are 8 open pull requests[5] and some of them are in
> German. Is there any plan to translate the content or close the PRs in
> German and reopen new PRs in English?
>
I'd leave that to the maintainers. But sure, having PRs in English would
presumably increase the chances of getting them merged.

To clarify - my expectation is, once the project would be at TDF's,
that future PRs would be done in English (as the most inclusive way).

> As per today, there are 14 open issues[6] and some of them are in German.
> Like for the case of the pull requests, is there any plan to translate the
> content or close the issues in German and reopen new issues in English?
>
Same answer as for PRs, that should be decided by those doing the work.

But yeah, my preference would be switching also the existing ones to
English (Samuel or Björn, what's your take here?).

> The jenkinsfile is mentioning the integration with SonarQube[9] for
> the the security scans, is there any plan to also move the SonarQube
> setup under the TDF infra?
>
I'd also leave that to the maintainers, and our infra team. SonarQube
needs an extra server (I think), and has an opencore business model -
so whether that's a good fit for TDF infra needs discussion.

Samuel or Björn: is there any value in migrating that Jenkinsfile
wholesale?

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

#13

Hi,

Hi Marina, all,

to keep this conversation going -

I wrote:

Marina Latini wrote:

As per today, there are 8 open pull requests[5] and some of them are in
German. Is there any plan to translate the content or close the PRs in
German and reopen new PRs in English?

I'd leave that to the maintainers. But sure, having PRs in English would
presumably increase the chances of getting them merged.

To clarify - my expectation is, once the project would be at TDF's,
that future PRs would be done in English (as the most inclusive way).

All current PRs against master are in English already.

There are a few German ones left which are against the 18.2 branch which is still maintained by LHM. Over time, these should be merged or closed. Sure, any contributor can port those PRs against master, and then they should be filed in English of course.

As per today, there are 14 open issues[6] and some of them are in German.
Like for the case of the pull requests, is there any plan to translate the
content or close the issues in German and reopen new issues in English?

Same answer as for PRs, that should be decided by those doing the work.

But yeah, my preference would be switching also the existing ones to
English (Samuel or Björn, what's your take here?).

Yes, these should be converted to master (after checking they are still valid).

The jenkinsfile is mentioning the integration with SonarQube[9] for
the the security scans, is there any plan to also move the SonarQube
setup under the TDF infra?

I'd also leave that to the maintainers, and our infra team. SonarQube
needs an extra server (I think), and has an opencore business model -
so whether that's a good fit for TDF infra needs discussion.

Samuel or Björn: is there any value in migrating that Jenkinsfile
wholesale?

I think it does make sense to either use the Cloud version of SonarQube (as we do with Coverity), or host it ourselves (up to Infra team to decide). Might add value to other TDF java projects as well (Java parts of LibreOffice, LOEclipse, etc).

Regards

Samuel

#14

Hi,

Hi Samuel,
nice to read you :slight_smile:

To clarify - my expectation is, once the project would be at TDF's,
that future PRs would be done in English (as the most inclusive way).

All current PRs against master are in English already.

There are a few German ones left which are against the 18.2 branch
which is still maintained by LHM. Over time, these should be merged or
closed. Sure, any contributor can port those PRs against master, and
then they should be filed in English of course.

Thanks for the clarification :slight_smile:
And, just to spell it out, I have nothing against German, it's just that having PRs and issues in English could increase that chance to involve more contributors. But for sure, I don't want to add extra work for the maintainers just for having things translated from German to English :wink:

But yeah, my preference would be switching also the existing ones to
English (Samuel or Björn, what's your take here?).

Yes, these should be converted to master (after checking they are still valid).

yes, some help in closing invalid issues will be extremely valuable.

I think it does make sense to either use the Cloud version of
SonarQube (as we do with Coverity), or host it ourselves (up to Infra
team to decide). Might add value to other TDF java projects as well
(Java parts of LibreOffice, LOEclipse, etc).

yep, from my experience, sonarcloud seems to be good too.

P.S: @Thorsten, I saw that some of the feedback we shared in this discussion are now listed as new GitHub issues. Thanks for that. :slight_smile:

Happy hacking and have a lot of fun,
Marina

#15

Moin moin
(north german for good morning)

Does anyone know, where the wollmux comes from?
Change it to English?
MUX comes from Linux for Munic.
And Woll? It's the german name for wool.

It wood be very nice us in Schleswig-Holstein to have this AddIn.

Susanne

#16

Servus Susanne,

=
Foreword:
I here speak in my capacity as a Member of the Board of Trustees.

And Woll? It's the german name for wool.

AFAICS, in this case it makes reference to the German/Bavarian "Eierlegendewollmilchsau".
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eierlegende_Wollmilchsau
and
https://bar.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oarlengde_Woimuichsau

At the time I was involved with the City of Munich and this was the saying. But perhaps I am wrong.

Moin Moin :slight_smile:
Stephan

#17

Moin moin Stephan

Wie know this Word in the North of Germany too.
Translate it with deepl.com:
Translate "Eierlegendewollmilchsau" : Egg Laying Wooly Pig

That is not a good name for a good tool like WollMux.

Susanne

#18

Dear all,

Marina Latini wrote:

> Yes, these should be converted to master (after checking they are still
> valid).

yes, some help in closing invalid issues will be extremely valuable.

We can certainly look into that next year (CI needs going first, so
we've got something to distribute & test).

> I think it does make sense to either use the Cloud version of
> SonarQube (as we do with Coverity), or host it ourselves (up to Infra
> team to decide). Might add value to other TDF java projects as well
> (Java parts of LibreOffice, LOEclipse, etc).
>

yep, from my experience, sonarcloud seems to be good too.

Ok, I'll try to get this setup then (alongside the Jenkins job).

P.S: @Thorsten, I saw that some of the feedback we shared in this discussion
are now listed as new GitHub issues. Thanks for that. :slight_smile:

..and we made some progress on the translation front already - after
talking to Sophie and Ilmari, the originally-German WollMux handbook
is now (almost) converted to translatable mediawiki content, with the
source language being English.

See the work-in-progress from Gabor linked from here:

https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Documentation/WollMux/en

Since there seems to be no general concerns, I'd then use the quiet
period next week, to switch the github repos over to the libreoffice
org. After that, we can look into the Jenkins setup.

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

#19

Dear all,

I wrote:

Since there seems to be no general concerns, I'd then use the quiet
period next week, to switch the github repos over to the libreoffice
org. After that, we can look into the Jenkins setup.

This has happened meanwhile:

- WollMux - https://github.com/LibreOffice/WollMux
- UnoHelper - https://github.com/LibreOffice/UNOHelper
- wollmux-config - https://github.com/LibreOffice/wollmux-config

I've renamed 'master' branch to 'main' for all three repos. FWICT
github will issue a useful warning if you accidentally try to push
into master. All pending pull requests got auto-transmogrified, with
the new branch name as destination.

Leaving behind all archived repos under https://github.com/WollMux,
plus the following, defacto dormant ones:

- WollMuxHandbuch (now moved into the wiki - we should probably set
  the 'archived' flag on the repo, to avoid content diverging?)

- wollmux-core (not needed for main anymore, nor in 18.2 - I'd also
  prefer this to somehow stated that more clearly, or perhaps also
  archive it?)

- wollmux-config-service (not used in WollMux yet, might be
  effectively abandoned - Björn, what do you think?)

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

#20

Dear all,

I wrote:

Since there seems to be no general concerns, I'd then use the quiet
period next week, to switch the github repos over to the libreoffice
org. After that, we can look into the Jenkins setup.

This has happened meanwhile:

- WollMux - https://github.com/LibreOffice/WollMux
- UnoHelper - https://github.com/LibreOffice/UNOHelper
- wollmux-config - https://github.com/LibreOffice/wollmux-config

I've renamed 'master' branch to 'main' for all three repos. FWICT
github will issue a useful warning if you accidentally try to push
into master. All pending pull requests got auto-transmogrified, with
the new branch name as destination.

Leaving behind all archived repos under https://github.com/WollMux,
plus the following, defacto dormant ones:

- WollMuxHandbuch (now moved into the wiki - we should probably set
  the 'archived' flag on the repo, to avoid content diverging?)

- wollmux-core (not needed for main anymore, nor in 18.2 - I'd also
  prefer this to somehow stated that more clearly, or perhaps also
  archive it?)

- wollmux-config-service (not used in WollMux yet, might be
  effectively abandoned - Björn, what do you think?)

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

#21

Hello Thorsten, hi all,

Thanks for taking care of those changes. I have a doubt that I would like to clarify before starting to have contributors pushing changes to this new place.

The WollMux repos are now under the LibreOffice GitHub organisation that, to my understanding, should be just a read only mirror from our git instance hosting the LibreOffice source code.

We also have a different organisation (https://github.com/tdf) where we moved in the past the ODFtoolkit. The same place is also hosting other tools and collateral repos like the LibreOffice metadata.
I’m wondering if the TDF organisation could be a better place for WollMux instead of the LibreOffice one.

Looking forward to hearing from you,
Marina

#22

Hi Marina, all,

marina latini wrote:

The WollMux repos are now under the LibreOffice GitHub organisation
that, to my understanding, should be just a read only mirror from
our git instance hosting the LibreOffice source code.

That place was picked on purpose, since (in contrast to e.g. the ODF
toolkit), WollMux is exclusively meant for LibreOffice. You'll also
find other repos there, with equally strong ties to the main code base
(impress_remote, loeclipse, noa-libre, the barcode extension, and the
DLP libraries).

I'm wondering if the TDF organisation could be a better place for
WollMux instead of the LibreOffice one.

It's of course not a problem to move the repos further, but - at least
to me it appears currently more consistent with the existing layout.

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

#23

Hi Marina, all,

marina latini wrote:

The WollMux repos are now under the LibreOffice GitHub organisation
that, to my understanding, should be just a read only mirror from
our git instance hosting the LibreOffice source code.

That place was picked on purpose, since (in contrast to e.g. the ODF
toolkit), WollMux is exclusively meant for LibreOffice. You'll also
find other repos there, with equally strong ties to the main code base
(impress_remote, loeclipse, noa-libre, the barcode extension, and the
DLP libraries).

I'm wondering if the TDF organisation could be a better place for
WollMux instead of the LibreOffice one.

It's of course not a problem to move the repos further, but - at least
to me it appears currently more consistent with the existing layout.

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

#24

Hi Marina, all,

marina latini wrote:

The WollMux repos are now under the LibreOffice GitHub organisation
that, to my understanding, should be just a read only mirror from
our git instance hosting the LibreOffice source code.

That place was picked on purpose, since (in contrast to e.g. the ODF
toolkit), WollMux is exclusively meant for LibreOffice. You'll also
find other repos there, with equally strong ties to the main code base
(impress_remote, loeclipse, noa-libre, the barcode extension, and the
DLP libraries).

...indeed, the LibreOffice organisation is a mix of read-only and push allowed repos.

I got fooled by the main description:
"Read Only Mirror fo Libreoffice-related git repos (see url for code submission)"
and I didn't noticed that only some repos are read-only.

I'm wondering if the TDF organisation could be a better place for
WollMux instead of the LibreOffice one.

It's of course not a problem to move the repos further, but - at least
to me it appears currently more consistent with the existing layout.

No no, it makes sense to keep WollMux under the LibreOffice org, I agree. If you are fine with the current status, can we start to work on WollMux?

But, apart from WollMux... I think we could take this opportunity also for a clean-up of repos in https://github.com/tdf. :wink:
You mentioned the DLP libraries, but libcmis is hosted under the TDF organisation, and, if I'm not mistaken, the libraries from the DLP aren't LibreOffice only but can be reused also elsewhere.
Under the TDF organisation there are also other repos that should probably be archived (but we are going semi off-topic now). :wink:
We could also mention that we have the other LibreOffice organisation and cross link from tdf to LibreOffice too.
But...for this clean-up, where we can continue this discussion? this list doesn't look like the right place to me. :slight_smile:

Cheers,
Marina

Impressum (Legal Info) | Datenschutzerklärung (Privacy Policy)   Content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 license.