Project

General

Profile

Task #1872

update own-/Nextcloud and install LibO online

Added by Klaus-Jürgen Weghorn over 1 year ago. Updated about 1 year ago.

Status:
Rejected
Priority:
Normal
Category:
-
Target version:
Team - Qlater
Start date:
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Estimated time:
Tags:
URL:

Description

Providing LibO Online in TDF's OwnCloud for community members to do the work with our own "dog food".


Related issues

Has duplicate Marketing - Task #2003: deploy own-/Nextcloud as central upload resource and for document editing (LibO)Closed

History

#1 Updated by Florian Effenberger over 1 year ago

  • Target version set to Qlater

Shifting to later due to the infra changes

#2 Updated by Florian Effenberger about 1 year ago

  • Subject changed from Providing LibO Online in TDF's OwnCloud to update own-/Nextcloud and install LibO online
  • Category deleted (Redmine)
  • Assignee changed from Alexander Werner to Guilhem Moulin

re-assigning to Guilhem in order to clean up Redmine queues
nothing concrete to do at the moment

#3 Updated by Florian Effenberger about 1 year ago

  • Has duplicate Task #2003: deploy own-/Nextcloud as central upload resource and for document editing (LibO) added

#4 Updated by Florian Effenberger about 1 year ago

  • Status changed from New to Rejected

Rejecting as this is essentially the same as #2003

#5 Updated by Klaus-Jürgen Weghorn about 1 year ago

Why is it rejected? It isn't the same as #2003. The ticket is for providing LibO Online. It only depends on a new OwnCloud/NextCloud version. If we reject it, maybe we don't get it, although we have a new OwnCloud/NextCloud.

#6 Updated by Florian Effenberger about 1 year ago

Why is it rejected? It isn't the same as #2003
<https://redmine.documentfoundation.org/issues/2003&gt;. The ticket is for
providing LibO Online. It only depends on a new OwnCloud/NextCloud
version. If we reject it, maybe we don't get it, although we have a new
OwnCloud/NextCloud.

Sorry, seems I messed things up and rejected both tickets in the end
instead of merging.

It should now be merged all in #2003 - does this look right for you?

#7 Updated by Klaus-Jürgen Weghorn about 1 year ago

Florian Effenberger wrote:

It should now be merged all in #2003 - does this look right for you?

It's ok for me.

#8 Updated by Florian Effenberger about 1 year ago

It's ok for me.

Thanks for noticing!
I am doing mass-changes to Redmine and obviously that glitch made it
through. ;-)

Also available in: Atom PDF