incubator-ooo-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From NoOp <>
Subject Re: Allowing Attachments on List Posts (was RE: a wild conversion issue between OOo and Word)
Date Tue, 15 Nov 2011 05:59:04 GMT
On 11/14/2011 08:51 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Gary,
> I am not sure what the policy is for ooo-users regarding attachments.  I know 
> that LO doesn't allow them.
> Bug reports accept them, but that is a stretch for random users.  Still, 
> sending an attachment to everyone on a list has its own hazards.
> I have seen lists where attachments are moved to an archive and a link is 
> added to the list message that allows the attachment to be downloaded.
> That would solve the problem of message size and even allow the attachment to 
> be screened for toxins.
> Is that the kind of thing the users@ OO.o provides or are you thinking of 
> simply allowing attachments through?
> I am going to see where I can find out what the Apache policy is with regard 
> to attachments.
>  = Dennis

Both the original OOo users & general lists allow attachments.
That is why when you connect OOo general list & look at the orginal post
(Subject: Problem with the Open Office Text Processing) you'll find the
.docx that Dr. Kostopoulos provided. The archived .bin file is due to's nntp archive of that post and the attachment is stored as a
.bin. However, downloading & saving the .bin from and renaming
to it's original .docx results in the orginal.

You'll also find many similar attachments on the original OOo users
list. The ability for a user to attach a .od(x), .doc, .docx etc., on
those lists has been of considerable help over the years. List users
could/can easily test the attachment & respond immedately.

LO made a decision from the start (a mistake IMO) to not allow
attachments. I didn't follow the why/reasoning, but I suspect it was
more due to lack of technology setup issues than actual problems with
toxins et al.  Apache had some similar discussions on the dev list, but
I grew tired of trying to keep up.

In all of the years of downloading and testing users attachments on OOo
lists I can't recall ever downloading one that was contaminated (I have
had one of two false alerts on some of the bug report files). Nor do I
recall anyone one the user/general lists that have actually reported a
valid contaminated file. So, I'm not sure of what the existing paranoia
is regarding attachments. It seems to me that if the original OOo lists
were capable of vetting contaminated files over the years, that the new
lists should be able to do this as well.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: NoOp []
> Sent: Monday, November 14, 2011 20:37
> To:
> Subject: Re: a wild conversion issue between OOo and Word
> On 11/14/2011 08:19 PM, NoOp wrote:
> ...
>> Please see:
>> <>
>> [Problem with the Open Office Text Processing}
>> which I picked up from the OOo General list, that displays similar
>> issues with a .docx file. Only in this case the file crashes with
>> OOo-Dev (and all LO versions). OOo 3.3.0 OOO330m20 (build:9567) opens
>> the file, but omits the reference page.
>> Gary Lee (NoOp)
> Added note: this is why it's important to allow .od(x) files (and
> screenshots etc) to be posted to the list(s). Were it not for this
> ability on the OOo lists, Dr. Kostopoulos most likely wouldn't have
> posted the offending file so that it can be examined. Or, if he posted
> the file elsewhere it may not have ever been looked at.

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message