You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org> on 2014/12/13 22:37:31 UTC
Staging 4.1.2 (was RE: Budapest and thereafter.)
Looking around for some other matters, I notice there is no 4.1.1 branch in the SVN. Is this intentional?
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pescetti@apache.org]
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2014 12:45
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Budapest and thereafter.
On 08/12/2014 jan i wrote:
> So may I politely ask, what have changed, that we now believe this will all
> go away, and we can have it all solved in a short time ?
Not much has changed indeed. I pushed to have buildbots running before
the release, but indeed if buildbots are problematic and the same
volunteers who built the previous releases can still commit to doing so
for the next one, it is no major problem.
Very honestly, I would like that we don't depend on individuals for
project resources, but maybe it is easier for a developer to share an
existing virtual machine (and possibly get it running at Apache) than to
prepare a buildbot environment.
> do we really want to wait until this magically happens ?
No, since it won't magically happen. So, what is the minimum we can do
for a 4.1.2 release? I would set it at:
- New/updated translations
- New/updated dictionaries
- Bugfixes (to be discussed)
- Signed Windows binaries
- Binaries for all other systems as usual
I can volunteer for the first two items (coordinating translations and
adding/updating dictionaries).
But I'm actually missing some information maybe. Out of the following
releases, which ones were built on individuals' machines for 4.1.1? All?
Some? And are these built in a VM that we could consider moving to
Apache hardware or not?
1) Windows
2) Linux 64 bit (RPM+DEB)
3) Linux 32 bit (RPM+DEB)
4) Mac
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: Staging 4.1.2 (was RE: Budapest and thereafter.)
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
Correction:
" The RAT scan linked to in the [VOTE] message for 4.1.1 lists only seven files for aoo410/main/writerperfect." (not aoo401)
-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamilton@acm.org]
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2014 17:00
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: RE: Staging 4.1.2 (was RE: Budapest and thereafter.)
OK, here is why I was looking for this. Thanks for the links, Kay.
The RAT scan linked to in the [VOTE] message for 4.1.1 lists only seven files for aoo401/main/writerperfect.
Looking in the apache-openoffice-4.1.1-r1517669-src.zip, I see 33 files that could have comments and notices.
Looking at aoo-4.1.1/writerperfect/source/filter/DocumentCollector.cxx, the first one I chose to examine, I see three Copyright notices and an LGPL license notice in the comments at the top of the file.
The same file, and the others, appear at
<https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO410/main/writerperfect/>
as well as <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/writerperfect/>
at revision 1645375.
I'm no expert on RAT. I can't account for the peculiar situation. I think it would be good to have a stronger check for 4.1.2 though.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.schenk@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2014 15:20
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Staging 4.1.2 (was RE: Budapest and thereafter.)
On 12/13/2014 01:37 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Looking around for some other matters, I notice there is no 4.1.1 branch in the SVN. Is this intentional?
yes...see the following mail threads
http://markmail.org/message/qrjxespr3di7dxh7
http://markmail.org/message/cpqm4zysz4sd4ley
[ ... ]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Staging 4.1.2 (was RE: Budapest and thereafter.)
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 15/12/2014 Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>> Il giorno 14/dic/2014, alle ore 17:20, Andrea Pescetti ha scritto:
>> On 14/12/2014 Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/writerperfect/
>>> at revision 1645375. ...
>>> I think it would be good to have a stronger check for 4.1.2 though.
>> I'm CCing Pedro who told me something similar (possibly the very same issue)
> Yes. According to my records the PMC was notified
OK, I verified that everything builds fine without it and I removed
main/writerperfect:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1648122
Please note that the status is not completely clear, see
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=118919 for more (but if we
are not using it, maybe the discussion is not worth it anyway).
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Staging 4.1.2 (was RE: Budapest and thereafter.)
Posted by Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>.
Hello;
> Il giorno 14/dic/2014, alle ore 17:20, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> ha scritto:
>
> On 14/12/2014 Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>> Looking at
>> aoo-4.1.1/writerperfect/source/filter/DocumentCollector.cxx, the first
>> one I chose to examine, I see three Copyright notices and an LGPL
>> license notice in the comments at the top of the file.
>> The same file, and the others, appear at
>> <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO410/main/writerperfect/>
>> as well as <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/writerperfect/>
>> at revision 1645375. ...
>> I think it would be good to have a stronger check for 4.1.2 though.
>
> I'm CCing Pedro who told me something similar (possibly the very same issue) at ApacheCon last month. If I understand correctly, these files are unused for the build and should simply be removed.
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
Yes. According to my records the PMC was notified about a couple of licensing issues, including this one, on March 12, 2014.
Pedro.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: Staging 4.1.2 (was RE: Budapest and thereafter.)
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
I agree. If the build doesn't depend on them being there in some manner, simple removal of the writerperfect directory from the trunk should be sufficient. If there is a config dependency for creating builds, that should be removed as well.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pescetti@apache.org]
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2014 14:20
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; Pedro Giffuni
Subject: Re: Staging 4.1.2 (was RE: Budapest and thereafter.)
On 14/12/2014 Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Looking at
> aoo-4.1.1/writerperfect/source/filter/DocumentCollector.cxx, the first
> one I chose to examine, I see three Copyright notices and an LGPL
> license notice in the comments at the top of the file.
> The same file, and the others, appear at
> <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO410/main/writerperfect/>
> as well as <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/writerperfect/>
> at revision 1645375. ...
> I think it would be good to have a stronger check for 4.1.2 though.
I'm CCing Pedro who told me something similar (possibly the very same
issue) at ApacheCon last month. If I understand correctly, these files
are unused for the build and should simply be removed.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Staging 4.1.2 (was RE: Budapest and thereafter.)
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 14/12/2014 Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Looking at
> aoo-4.1.1/writerperfect/source/filter/DocumentCollector.cxx, the first
> one I chose to examine, I see three Copyright notices and an LGPL
> license notice in the comments at the top of the file.
> The same file, and the others, appear at
> <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO410/main/writerperfect/>
> as well as <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/writerperfect/>
> at revision 1645375. ...
> I think it would be good to have a stronger check for 4.1.2 though.
I'm CCing Pedro who told me something similar (possibly the very same
issue) at ApacheCon last month. If I understand correctly, these files
are unused for the build and should simply be removed.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: Staging 4.1.2 (was RE: Budapest and thereafter.)
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
OK, here is why I was looking for this. Thanks for the links, Kay.
The RAT scan linked to in the [VOTE] message for 4.1.1 lists only seven files for aoo401/main/writerperfect.
Looking in the apache-openoffice-4.1.1-r1517669-src.zip, I see 33 files that could have comments and notices.
Looking at aoo-4.1.1/writerperfect/source/filter/DocumentCollector.cxx, the first one I chose to examine, I see three Copyright notices and an LGPL license notice in the comments at the top of the file.
The same file, and the others, appear at
<https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/branches/AOO410/main/writerperfect/>
as well as <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk/main/writerperfect/>
at revision 1645375.
I'm no expert on RAT. I can't account for the peculiar situation. I think it would be good to have a stronger check for 4.1.2 though.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.schenk@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2014 15:20
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Staging 4.1.2 (was RE: Budapest and thereafter.)
On 12/13/2014 01:37 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Looking around for some other matters, I notice there is no 4.1.1 branch in the SVN. Is this intentional?
yes...see the following mail threads
http://markmail.org/message/qrjxespr3di7dxh7
http://markmail.org/message/cpqm4zysz4sd4ley
[ ... ]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Staging 4.1.2 (was RE: Budapest and thereafter.)
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 12/13/2014 01:37 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Looking around for some other matters, I notice there is no 4.1.1 branch in the SVN. Is this intentional?
yes...see the following mail threads
http://markmail.org/message/qrjxespr3di7dxh7
http://markmail.org/message/cpqm4zysz4sd4ley
>
> - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pescetti@apache.org]
> Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2014 12:45
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Budapest and thereafter.
>
> On 08/12/2014 jan i wrote:
>> So may I politely ask, what have changed, that we now believe this will all
>> go away, and we can have it all solved in a short time ?
>
> Not much has changed indeed. I pushed to have buildbots running before
> the release, but indeed if buildbots are problematic and the same
> volunteers who built the previous releases can still commit to doing so
> for the next one, it is no major problem.
>
> Very honestly, I would like that we don't depend on individuals for
> project resources, but maybe it is easier for a developer to share an
> existing virtual machine (and possibly get it running at Apache) than to
> prepare a buildbot environment.
>
>> do we really want to wait until this magically happens ?
>
> No, since it won't magically happen. So, what is the minimum we can do
> for a 4.1.2 release? I would set it at:
> - New/updated translations
> - New/updated dictionaries
> - Bugfixes (to be discussed)
> - Signed Windows binaries
> - Binaries for all other systems as usual
>
> I can volunteer for the first two items (coordinating translations and
> adding/updating dictionaries).
>
> But I'm actually missing some information maybe. Out of the following
> releases, which ones were built on individuals' machines for 4.1.1? All?
> Some? And are these built in a VM that we could consider moving to
> Apache hardware or not?
> 1) Windows
> 2) Linux 64 bit (RPM+DEB)
> 3) Linux 32 bit (RPM+DEB)
> 4) Mac
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"There's a bit of magic in everything,
and some loss to even things out."
-- Lou Reed
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org