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 46A0FD35A for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 06:19:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 57660 invoked by uid 500); 29 Jun 2012 06:19:49 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 57570 invoked by uid 500); 29 Jun 2012 06:19:49 -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 57550 invoked by uid 99); 29 Jun 2012 06:19:48 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 06:19:48 +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 209.85.215.175 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.215.175] (HELO mail-ey0-f175.google.com) (209.85.215.175) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 06:19:41 +0000 Received: by eaal1 with SMTP id l1so1177370eaa.6 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 23:19:21 -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=U3zCpaEeTbrwFKUcUHnmOYPsT9bXeGErZOfF9Fh48Ag=; b=QNdW8y0EexwJE3NS2de8LkvnUR9zmj43m1Bvhu63oJdDMsVe/gPN/4dwdTt+M4lUcn MMUszF4YksARaUFF53ZH8e7gIW7Vj2P6t+7caTOznbeMbX33SkJA0/rhEhWTVTHZXbS0 pfi97rZ3PnTUoPJ8qt95+p08aVyBDRth3aYNT/AgKQRYEa6M3MzK72lM3sYzH+wsk9t4 qBZP3CetV50f36kW8nN4r//gz+qWUpNzqhjjQ7J6/q8VDDUfBz/G6g08moG1JluLWViD jlsG8jdZXlxgkrHyKwRLOhDolISR30h7/SoJxBl5oFYHklR+yD7HTkAlVDKOo8Aj25Zc Mgbw== Received: by 10.180.81.65 with SMTP id y1mr2196481wix.1.1340950761483; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 23:19:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [9.155.131.47] (deibp9eh1--blueice2n2.emea.ibm.com. [195.212.29.172]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id db7sm4043197wib.6.2012.06.28.23.19.20 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 28 Jun 2012 23:19:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4FED48F0.7040208@googlemail.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 08:19:28 +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: [IMPORTANT][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: <4FEACEAA.2070007@googlemail.com> <4FEC6ED7.1040408@googlemail.com> <4FEC8266.9010006@googlemail.com> <4FEC8320.9000407@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 6/28/12 6:23 PM, zhangjf wrote: > On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 12:15 AM, J�rgen Schmidt > wrote: >> On 6/28/12 6:12 PM, J�rgen Schmidt wrote: >>> On 6/28/12 5:33 PM, zhangjf wrote: >>>> If it still needs more time for discussion, I think it is also one >>>> option to only commit the new string change at first to catch up >>>> translation. It should have no impacts on function without committing >>>> the code. In this way, please review the new dialog and string first. >>>> >>>> Is it acceptable? >>> >>> sure, the way how it works is to check in the src file running localize >>> to create a new sdf, convert it, update pootle, doing the translation on >>> Pootle (to speed up and simplify the process) and finally merge it back >>> in svn. >>> >> >> I thunk the proposed solution is good and fulfill the requirements. Can >> we make a screenshot with the warning box and the English strings for >> review? >> > > Yuanlin's original first post in this mail thread contains the dialog > snapshot url at https://issues.apache.org/ooo/attachment.cgi?id=78482. ok thanks, I have overseen this. I have 2 questions: 1. dialog title shows "Fatal Error", is it really a Fatal Error? I don't think so, we detect a running instance and close the application or better don't continue to start. I think it's more a warning, isn't it? 2. in case of error I think we have a better error icon, in case of a warning the used icon is ok from my pov. Juergen > >> In general I would support the proposed solution with a clear +1 to move >> forward immediately. >> >> Juergen >> >> >>> Juergen >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> zhangjf >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 10:48 PM, J�rgen Schmidt >>>> wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> sorry for my top posting but I think this is very urgent and important. >>>>> When we want to integrate this in 3.4.1 we have to do it immediately, >>>>> means by the end of this week. >>>>> >>>>> The warning messages have to translated!!! >>>>> >>>>> Any opinions >>>>> >>>>> Juergen >>>>> >>>>> On 6/27/12 11:13 AM, J�rgen Schmidt wrote: >>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> >>