Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8B664CBCF for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:13:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 47888 invoked by uid 500); 27 Jun 2012 09:13:45 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 47693 invoked by uid 500); 27 Jun 2012 09:13:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 47449 invoked by uid 99); 27 Jun 2012 09:13:45 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:13:45 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jogischmidt@googlemail.com designates 209.85.214.47 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.214.47] (HELO mail-bk0-f47.google.com) (209.85.214.47) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:13:38 +0000 Received: by bkcjm2 with SMTP id jm2so664287bkc.6 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 02:13:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xXwPZM3QnbxIviqsMREHYWTAdkU9Z/Dg6RWASMYKrqU=; b=aL65nkeJIagggsh3xa4NTjvqqbVe9uHKvgqsK8CoRMGx+7DTKcZy+keUdLBEdyLUQ+ VlanTRBUwpAmVIubJFrKuhEfPwWV+fFkm0RyGQ9anxYi1FP7IK506KYv9uADRcrkK+Ss XbAysoCoJiuOvf/XFFduqaY6k7iLHvmAw/ymvPW7IOnJhidQX6Zmv3QdpDOdof3hWF7I IJUfqiT8k13E/A9xAqYrKeFEZemsVyogi2VrGgMSKZPOLKxN33p1bdcOomzqrfXlnpX6 c2XqSaxvNe0jgoHqYIWB73ytyHJ3kuEqJiVnVMKmy5crrltsYL1okfpmWit0YKdY3lsl caqQ== Received: by 10.204.128.88 with SMTP id j24mr6814061bks.89.1340788397919; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 02:13:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [9.155.131.47] (deibp9eh1--blueice2n2.emea.ibm.com. [195.212.29.172]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m2sm53975102bkm.2.2012.06.27.02.13.17 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 27 Jun 2012 02:13:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4FEACEAA.2070007@googlemail.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 11:13:14 +0200 From: =?windows-1252?Q?J=FCrgen_Schmidt?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [Call for UX review] [Windows 8 certification]Test for "Section 11 Apps must support multi-user sessions" is not tested by Windows App Certification Kit References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 6/27/12 3:23 AM, Lin Yuan wrote: > Currently in AOO, only part of the data in user profile is locked and can > not access by mutiple instances. So as tested on Windows Server 2008, AOO > will crash in such situation. The patch is not to really support one user > to launch multiple instances on mutiple sessions case. According to the > suggestion in Windows 8 Certification below: > *Note*: If an app does not support multiple user sessions or remote access, > it must clearly state this when launched from this kind of session. > With the patch, AOO will popup a warning dialog and exit in this case. So > it will still not support mutiple user sessions for one user but the UX is > more frendly than the current crash issue. we have to define fast if we want include it for 3.4.1 or not. It will require some translation effort that we have to organize in time (e.g. updating Pootle etc.) Juergen > > Thanks, > Lin Yuan > > 2012/6/27 Joost Andrae > >> Hi Rob, >> >> >> >>>> but in a Windows Terminal Server session you have user profiles for each >>>> user. >>>> >>>> >>> This patch is for if you connect with Terminal Services twice using >>> the same user account. >>> >>> >> I just wanted to make sure that there is no real problem to get OpenOffice >> configured so it can be used within a multi user environment (MS TS, >> Citrix, Sun SGD, or UNIX profiles). If the same user connects a second time >> then there might be a locking problem with his profile data. If you want to >> fix this then it's OK but in my opinion it's not really needed because >> usually it should be prevented that one user accesses the same user profile >> from another terminal (RDP, X11) session. >> >> Just my two � Cents, Joost >> >> >