You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> on 2016/09/07 22:40:48 UTC
Releasing OpenOffice 4.1.3 (reopening the AOO410 branch)
Recent events make it clear we will have to release OpenOffice 4.1.3
sooner or later, with some duplication of work with respect to
4.1.2-patch1 but with more clarity for those who couldn't see that we
made a release last month.
I'll thus consider the AOO410 branch to be open again for the needed
structural fixes, like version numbering and similar. And I can take
care of fixing version numbers as I already did for 4.1.2.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Releasing OpenOffice 4.1.3 (reopening the AOO410 branch)
Posted by Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 09/08/2016 03:09 PM, schrieb Patricia Shanahan:
> On 9/8/2016 6:04 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>>> On Sep 7, 2016, at 6:40 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Recent events make it clear we will have to release OpenOffice 4.1.3
>>> sooner or later, with some duplication of work with respect to
>>> 4.1.2-patch1 but with more clarity for those who couldn't see that we
>>> made a release last month.
>>>
>>> I'll thus consider the AOO410 branch to be open again for the needed
>>> structural fixes, like version numbering and similar. And I can take
>>> care of fixing version numbers as I already did for 4.1.2.
>>>
>>
>> We should likely make some sort of public notice that work on 4.1.3
>> in effort for a release is in the works, to sooth and reassure our
>> user community.
>
> I would like to get an idea how soon we can release 4.1.3 first. If we
> keep it simple, we may be able to aim earlier.
maybe there is one simple fix - at least what I can see from the fix -
that could be included:
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=114963
Marcus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Releasing OpenOffice 4.1.3 (reopening the AOO410 branch)
Posted by Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>.
On 9/8/2016 6:04 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>> On Sep 7, 2016, at 6:40 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Recent events make it clear we will have to release OpenOffice 4.1.3 sooner or later, with some duplication of work with respect to 4.1.2-patch1 but with more clarity for those who couldn't see that we made a release last month.
>>
>> I'll thus consider the AOO410 branch to be open again for the needed structural fixes, like version numbering and similar. And I can take care of fixing version numbers as I already did for 4.1.2.
>>
>
> We should likely make some sort of public notice that work on 4.1.3
> in effort for a release is in the works, to sooth and reassure our
> user community.
I would like to get an idea how soon we can release 4.1.3 first. If we
keep it simple, we may be able to aim earlier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Releasing OpenOffice 4.1.3 (reopening the AOO410 branch)
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
> On Sep 7, 2016, at 6:40 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Recent events make it clear we will have to release OpenOffice 4.1.3 sooner or later, with some duplication of work with respect to 4.1.2-patch1 but with more clarity for those who couldn't see that we made a release last month.
>
> I'll thus consider the AOO410 branch to be open again for the needed structural fixes, like version numbering and similar. And I can take care of fixing version numbers as I already did for 4.1.2.
>
We should likely make some sort of public notice that work on 4.1.3
in effort for a release is in the works, to sooth and reassure our
user community.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Releasing OpenOffice 4.1.3 (reopening the AOO410 branch)
Posted by Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>.
On 9/10/2016 2:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>> On 9/10/2016 12:55 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
>>> only code with a bug and release blocker flag approved by the Release
>>> Manager can be checked in that branch; that is: if you want to include
>>> changes in the AOO413 branch:
>>> 1) open a bug
>>> 2) request releaser blocker status
>>> 3) only once the release manager approves the release blocker status,
>>> commit your changes
>
> Yes, this is the rule to follow. In my case, the changes I referred to
> are https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127103 which is an obvious
> release blocker.
>
>> Andrea argues that it is traditional to put all point releases in the
>> same branch. Following that tradition we would use AOO410 for all 4.1.x
>> releases.
>
> Correct. This is traditional but wrong (or at least awkward). So I also
> agree we should change it. I'm unsure about doing it for 4.1.3, but at
> latest we should change this (and communicate the change) upon releasing
> 4.1.3. This ensures we can consider all downstream packagers to be
> informed.
I feel, very strongly, that the creation of the 4.1.4 branch should not
wait for completion of the 4.1.3 release. We should be making decisions
about 4.1.4 content, and checking in code for it, while 4.1.3 is
undergoing testing, voting, and file copying.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Releasing OpenOffice 4.1.3 (reopening the AOO410 branch)
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> On 9/10/2016 12:55 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
>> only code with a bug and release blocker flag approved by the Release
>> Manager can be checked in that branch; that is: if you want to include
>> changes in the AOO413 branch:
>> 1) open a bug
>> 2) request releaser blocker status
>> 3) only once the release manager approves the release blocker status,
>> commit your changes
Yes, this is the rule to follow. In my case, the changes I referred to
are https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127103 which is an obvious
release blocker.
> Andrea argues that it is traditional to put all point releases in the
> same branch. Following that tradition we would use AOO410 for all 4.1.x
> releases.
Correct. This is traditional but wrong (or at least awkward). So I also
agree we should change it. I'm unsure about doing it for 4.1.3, but at
latest we should change this (and communicate the change) upon releasing
4.1.3. This ensures we can consider all downstream packagers to be informed.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Releasing OpenOffice 4.1.3 (reopening the AOO410 branch)
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> My view on this is that we should check in the changes for 4.1.3, freeze
> its code, and then create AOO414 as a copy of AOO413.
Sure, this will work too. Then when you really release 4.1.3 with any
last-minute fixes, a single "svn merge" command will update the AOO414
branch; the other option would be to make frequent merges and get the
same result in the end. But with only one "active" branch at a time, the
above will work well.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Releasing OpenOffice 4.1.3 (reopening the AOO410 branch)
Posted by Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>.
On 9/10/2016 3:10 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>> I'm going to wait a few hours to see if someone claims to depend on us
>> not changing the branch. Absent a specific issue, I plan to create a
>> 4.1.3 branch, and expect the, not yet selected, 4.1.4 Release Manager to
>> create a branch for it.
>
> OK. After all, I would assume that a downstream packager knows better
> than tracking a side branch, so my concerns might have been exaggerated;
> I know of no real issues.
>
> Note: the branch should be named AOO413 (but I assume you mean this by
> "a 4.1.3 branch"). It should be an "svn copy" of AOO410.
Yes, the convention I would like is that Release x.y.z is associated
with branch AOOxyz. We may need to change the format if any layer goes
beyond one digit, but we can cross that bridge when we get to it.
>
> No problem in creating an AOO414 branch even today, and even without an
> appointed Release Manager. Then if we decide not to release 4.1.4 for
> any reasons, we'll trash it or merge it somewhere else; branches are
> quite flexible.
My view on this is that we should check in the changes for 4.1.3, freeze
its code, and then create AOO414 as a copy of AOO413.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Releasing OpenOffice 4.1.3 (reopening the AOO410 branch)
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> I'm going to wait a few hours to see if someone claims to depend on us
> not changing the branch. Absent a specific issue, I plan to create a
> 4.1.3 branch, and expect the, not yet selected, 4.1.4 Release Manager to
> create a branch for it.
OK. After all, I would assume that a downstream packager knows better
than tracking a side branch, so my concerns might have been exaggerated;
I know of no real issues.
Note: the branch should be named AOO413 (but I assume you mean this by
"a 4.1.3 branch"). It should be an "svn copy" of AOO410.
No problem in creating an AOO414 branch even today, and even without an
appointed Release Manager. Then if we decide not to release 4.1.4 for
any reasons, we'll trash it or merge it somewhere else; branches are
quite flexible.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Releasing OpenOffice 4.1.3 (reopening the AOO410 branch)
Posted by Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>.
On 9/10/2016 2:49 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Gavin McDonald wrote:
>> Tags:-
>> .. <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/>
>> AOO340/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO340/>
>> AOO341/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO341/>
>> AOO400/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO400/>
>> AOO401/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO401/>
>> AOO410/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO410/>
>> AOO410_Beta/
>> <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO410_Beta/>
>> AOO411/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO411/>
>> AOO412/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO412/>
>> AOO4121/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO4121/>
>> SNAPSHOT/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/SNAPSHOT/>
>
> The convention is indeed that AOO410 (the branch) actually stands for
> AOO41X (i.e., all 4.1.x releases). One may find it stupid (and I agree
> this is to be changed), but this is the consistent behavior the project
> adopted so far.
>
> This also explains why I believe that someone might be tracking AOO410
> (the branch) to see new commits pertinent to the 4.1.x series.
>
> SNAPSHOT instead is a moveable tag, moved to reflect something we base
> developer snapshots on.
I'm going to wait a few hours to see if someone claims to depend on us
not changing the branch. Absent a specific issue, I plan to create a
4.1.3 branch, and expect the, not yet selected, 4.1.4 Release Manager to
create a branch for it.
Meanwhile, creating bugzilla items and making "release blocker" requests
should continue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Releasing OpenOffice 4.1.3 (reopening the AOO410 branch)
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Gavin McDonald wrote:
> Tags:-
> .. <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/>
> AOO340/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO340/>
> AOO341/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO341/>
> AOO400/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO400/>
> AOO401/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO401/>
> AOO410/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO410/>
> AOO410_Beta/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO410_Beta/>
> AOO411/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO411/>
> AOO412/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO412/>
> AOO4121/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO4121/>
> SNAPSHOT/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/SNAPSHOT/>
The convention is indeed that AOO410 (the branch) actually stands for
AOO41X (i.e., all 4.1.x releases). One may find it stupid (and I agree
this is to be changed), but this is the consistent behavior the project
adopted so far.
This also explains why I believe that someone might be tracking AOO410
(the branch) to see new commits pertinent to the 4.1.x series.
SNAPSHOT instead is a moveable tag, moved to reflect something we base
developer snapshots on.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Releasing OpenOffice 4.1.3 (reopening the AOO410 branch)
Posted by Gavin McDonald <ga...@16degrees.com.au>.
> On 11 Sep 2016, at 7:13 AM, Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org> wrote:
>
> On 9/10/2016 12:55 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 12:40:48AM +0200, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>>> Recent events make it clear we will have to release OpenOffice 4.1.3 sooner
>>> or later, with some duplication of work with respect to 4.1.2-patch1 but
>>> with more clarity for those who couldn't see that we made a release last
>>> month.
>>>
>>> I'll thus consider the AOO410 branch to be open again for the needed
>>> structural fixes, like version numbering and similar. And I can take care of
>>> fixing version numbers as I already did for 4.1.2.
>>
>> I'd suggest we create a AOO413 branch, as suggested on private@.
>>
>> Also, if the procedure didn't change, we should stick to the rule that
>> only code with a bug and release blocker flag approved by the Release
>> Manager can be checked in that branch; that is: if you want to include
>> changes in the AOO413 branch:
>>
>> 1) open a bug
>> 2) request releaser blocker status
>> 3) only once the release manager approves the release blocker status,
>> commit your changes
>
> Andrea argues that it is traditional to put all point releases in the same branch. Following that tradition we would use AOO410 for all 4.1.x releases.
>
> The reasons are lost in the mists of antiquity. The argument for carrying on that way for now is that there may be people following AOO410 and doing downstream packaging that depend on that behaviour.
I really don’t get that reasoning. I’d like examples to understand why people downstream would be using a branch in the first place.
If anything, I’d half expect downstream to depend on the ‘Tag’ that a release was based on , not the branch (that has since changed.)
Tags seem to be labelled correctly, branches should follow suit. But I’ll leave it to you guys.
Gav…
Tags:-
.. <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/>
AOO340/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO340/>
AOO341/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO341/>
AOO400/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO400/>
AOO401/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO401/>
AOO410/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO410/>
AOO410_Beta/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO410_Beta/>
AOO411/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO411/>
AOO412/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO412/>
AOO4121/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/AOO4121/>
SNAPSHOT/ <https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/tags/SNAPSHOT/>
All those 41* tags (5 of them) were based on using the same 410 branch.
>
> A possible compromise is to treat AOO410 as you recommend for AOO413 from now on. We would still create AOO414, which I see as being necessary to become more agile. We should overlap testing, voting, and uploading of 4.1.3 with preparation of 4.1.4. Using the same branch for both would not be good.
>
> I can go either way on this.
>
> Patricia
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
Re: Releasing OpenOffice 4.1.3 (reopening the AOO410 branch)
Posted by Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>.
On 9/10/2016 12:55 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 12:40:48AM +0200, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>> Recent events make it clear we will have to release OpenOffice 4.1.3 sooner
>> or later, with some duplication of work with respect to 4.1.2-patch1 but
>> with more clarity for those who couldn't see that we made a release last
>> month.
>>
>> I'll thus consider the AOO410 branch to be open again for the needed
>> structural fixes, like version numbering and similar. And I can take care of
>> fixing version numbers as I already did for 4.1.2.
>
> I'd suggest we create a AOO413 branch, as suggested on private@.
>
> Also, if the procedure didn't change, we should stick to the rule that
> only code with a bug and release blocker flag approved by the Release
> Manager can be checked in that branch; that is: if you want to include
> changes in the AOO413 branch:
>
> 1) open a bug
> 2) request releaser blocker status
> 3) only once the release manager approves the release blocker status,
> commit your changes
Andrea argues that it is traditional to put all point releases in the
same branch. Following that tradition we would use AOO410 for all 4.1.x
releases.
The reasons are lost in the mists of antiquity. The argument for
carrying on that way for now is that there may be people following
AOO410 and doing downstream packaging that depend on that behavior.
A possible compromise is to treat AOO410 as you recommend for AOO413
from now on. We would still create AOO414, which I see as being
necessary to become more agile. We should overlap testing, voting, and
uploading of 4.1.3 with preparation of 4.1.4. Using the same branch for
both would not be good.
I can go either way on this.
Patricia
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Releasing OpenOffice 4.1.3 (reopening the AOO410 branch)
Posted by Ariel Constenla-Haile <ar...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 12:40:48AM +0200, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Recent events make it clear we will have to release OpenOffice 4.1.3 sooner
> or later, with some duplication of work with respect to 4.1.2-patch1 but
> with more clarity for those who couldn't see that we made a release last
> month.
>
> I'll thus consider the AOO410 branch to be open again for the needed
> structural fixes, like version numbering and similar. And I can take care of
> fixing version numbers as I already did for 4.1.2.
I'd suggest we create a AOO413 branch, as suggested on private@.
Also, if the procedure didn't change, we should stick to the rule that
only code with a bug and release blocker flag approved by the Release
Manager can be checked in that branch; that is: if you want to include
changes in the AOO413 branch:
1) open a bug
2) request releaser blocker status
3) only once the release manager approves the release blocker status,
commit your changes
Regards
--
Ariel Constenla-Haile
Re: Releasing OpenOffice 4.1.3 (reopening the AOO410 branch)
Posted by Carl Marcum <cm...@apache.org>.
On 09/07/2016 06:40 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Recent events make it clear we will have to release OpenOffice 4.1.3
> sooner or later, with some duplication of work with respect to
> 4.1.2-patch1 but with more clarity for those who couldn't see that we
> made a release last month.
>
> I'll thus consider the AOO410 branch to be open again for the needed
> structural fixes, like version numbering and similar. And I can take
> care of fixing version numbers as I already did for 4.1.2.
Thanks Andrea
>
> 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