You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com> on 2013/09/22 10:06:03 UTC
[VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Hi all,
this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
This release candidate contains mainly fixes serious problems and
regressions and new languages. An over view can be found under:
http://people.apache.org/~jsc/developer-snapshots/snapshot/RC3_fixes_1513395_1524958.html
The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
releases for 32 languages) and further information how to verify and
review Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 can be found on the following wiki page:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshot
The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
The vote starts now and will be open until:
UTC at noon on Wednesday, 25 September: 2013-09-25 12:00 UTC.
But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
members.
[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
[ ] 0 Don't care
[ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Michal Hriň <mi...@yahoo.com>.
Dňa Sun, 22 Sep 2013 10:06:03 +0200 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
napísal:
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>
> This release candidate contains mainly fixes serious problems and
> regressions and new languages. An over view can be found under:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/developer-snapshots/snapshot/RC3_fixes_1513395_1524958.html
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 32 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 can be found on the following wiki page:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshot
>
> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> UTC at noon on Wednesday, 25 September: 2013-09-25 12:00 UTC.
>
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
+1
Regards,
Michal Hriň
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Regina Henschel <rb...@t-online.de>.
Jürgen Schmidt schrieb:
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>
> This release candidate contains mainly fixes serious problems and
> regressions and new languages. An over view can be found under:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/developer-snapshots/snapshot/RC3_fixes_1513395_1524958.html
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 32 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 can be found on the following wiki page:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshot
>
> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> UTC at noon on Wednesday, 25 September: 2013-09-25 12:00 UTC.
>
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
+1
Kind regards
Regina
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Vladislav Stevanovic <st...@gmail.com>.
Hello,
Instaler for Serbian language is now OK. It is showing fonts properly,
except untraslated buttons on one dialog (optional dialog, when you want
manualy to browse folder where you want to unpack AOO). For me, if I have
right to vote,
+1
Wlada
2013/9/24 Marcus (OOo) <ma...@wtnet.de>
> +1
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
> Am 09/22/2013 10:06 AM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
>
> Hi all,
>>
>> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
>> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
>> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
>> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>>
>> This release candidate contains mainly fixes serious problems and
>> regressions and new languages. An over view can be found under:
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/**developer-snapshots/snapshot/**
>> RC3_fixes_1513395_1524958.html<http://people.apache.org/~jsc/developer-snapshots/snapshot/RC3_fixes_1513395_1524958.html>
>>
>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>> releases for 32 languages) and further information how to verify and
>> review Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 can be found on the following wiki page:
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**
>> Development+Snapshot+Builds#**DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-**AOOSnapshot<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshot>
>>
>> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>>
>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>>
>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>
>> UTC at noon on Wednesday, 25 September: 2013-09-25 12:00 UTC.
>>
>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>> members.
>>
>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@openoffice.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
+1
Marcus
Am 09/22/2013 10:06 AM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>
> This release candidate contains mainly fixes serious problems and
> regressions and new languages. An over view can be found under:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/developer-snapshots/snapshot/RC3_fixes_1513395_1524958.html
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 32 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 can be found on the following wiki page:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshot
>
> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> UTC at noon on Wednesday, 25 September: 2013-09-25 12:00 UTC.
>
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Armin Le Grand <Ar...@me.com>.
Hi,
played around quite some with the RC3, looks good, no bad stuff popped
up till now, (also taking a look at german translation after all that
en-US developer usage).
+1
Sincerely,
Armin
On 22.09.2013 10:06, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>
> This release candidate contains mainly fixes serious problems and
> regressions and new languages. An over view can be found under:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/developer-snapshots/snapshot/RC3_fixes_1513395_1524958.html
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 32 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 can be found on the following wiki page:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshot
>
> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> UTC at noon on Wednesday, 25 September: 2013-09-25 12:00 UTC.
>
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
--
ALG
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Ricardo Berlasso <rg...@gmail.com>.
2013/9/22 Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>
> This release candidate contains mainly fixes serious problems and
> regressions and new languages. An over view can be found under:
>
>
> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/developer-snapshots/snapshot/RC3_fixes_1513395_1524958.html
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 32 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 can be found on the following wiki page:
>
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshot
>
> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> UTC at noon on Wednesday, 25 September: 2013-09-25 12:00 UTC.
>
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
+1
Regards,
Ricardo
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Kazunari Hirano <kh...@gmail.com>.
+1
Thanks,
khirano
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 5:06 PM, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>
> This release candidate contains mainly fixes serious problems and
> regressions and new languages. An over view can be found under:
>
>
> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/developer-snapshots/snapshot/RC3_fixes_1513395_1524958.html
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 32 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 can be found on the following wiki page:
>
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshot
>
> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> UTC at noon on Wednesday, 25 September: 2013-09-25 12:00 UTC.
>
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
khirano@apache.org
Apache OpenOffice
http://openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Bonnie Kim <bo...@gmail.com>.
+1
Bonnie
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:26 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
>
> On 22.09.2013 10:06, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
>> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
>> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
>> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>>
>> This release candidate contains mainly fixes serious problems and
>> regressions and new languages. An over view can be found under:
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/**developer-snapshots/snapshot/**
>> RC3_fixes_1513395_1524958.html<http://people.apache.org/~jsc/developer-snapshots/snapshot/RC3_fixes_1513395_1524958.html>
>>
>> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
>> releases for 32 languages) and further information how to verify and
>> review Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 can be found on the following wiki page:
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**
>> Development+Snapshot+Builds#**DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-**AOOSnapshot<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshot>
>>
>> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>>
>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>>
>> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>>
>> UTC at noon on Wednesday, 25 September: 2013-09-25 12:00 UTC.
>>
>> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
>> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
>> members.
>>
>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@openoffice.apache.org>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@openoffice.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
Bonnie Kim
University of California, Berkeley
English, B. A.
bonniekim@berkeley.edu
(510) 908-0479
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
+1
Best regards, Oliver.
On 22.09.2013 10:06, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>
> This release candidate contains mainly fixes serious problems and
> regressions and new languages. An over view can be found under:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/developer-snapshots/snapshot/RC3_fixes_1513395_1524958.html
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 32 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 can be found on the following wiki page:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshot
>
> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> UTC at noon on Wednesday, 25 September: 2013-09-25 12:00 UTC.
>
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 22/09/2013 Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. ...
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
+1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 1:06 AM, Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>
> This release candidate contains mainly fixes serious problems and
> regressions and new languages. An over view can be found under:
>
>
> http://people.apache.org/~jsc/developer-snapshots/snapshot/RC3_fixes_1513395_1524958.html
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 32 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 can be found on the following wiki page:
>
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshot
>
> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> UTC at noon on Wednesday, 25 September: 2013-09-25 12:00 UTC.
>
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
+1
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged
to stick to possibilities. Truth isn't."
-- "Following the Equator", Mark Twain
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
On 25.09.2013 12:17, Yuzhen Fan wrote:
> -1:
>
> I vote -1 for RC3 because of these 3 issues, the first two are function
> regressions from 3.4.1 and 4.0.0, the last one is for bad user experience
> on Redhat 64bit installation.
>
> Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
> Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx file
> in AOO
> Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4 64bit
>
I can confirm that 123345 and 123346 are regressions which had been
introduced in AOO 4.0.0
On the one hand I agree that regressions introduced in the latest
release should be fixed in the next release.
On the other hand we are already quite far in our planned AOO 4.0.1
release schedule and AOO401rc3 contains a lot of important bug fixes and
improvements regarding our supported languages. Thus, I strongly vote
for releasing AOO401rc3 as AOO 4.0.1 under these circumstances.
From my point of view 123345 and 123346 should be release blocker for
our next release.
Regarding issue 123348:
As far as I know this issue is not new and already known. I think a
workaround exist. Thus, for me this is not a release blocker.
Yu Zhen, do you think you can change your mind regarding your vote?
Best regards, Oliver.
>
> Regards,
> Yu Zhen
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
>>> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
>>> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
>>> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>>>
>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>
>>
>> +1 : release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>>
>> Herbert
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@openoffice.apache.org>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: qa-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: qa-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Yuzhen Fan <fa...@gmail.com>.
Considering that:
1. The first two defects[1] are regressions introduced in AOO 4.0 and not
AOO 4.0.1 release blockers
2. The installation defect[1] on Redhat6.4 64bit has workaround
I agree to release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
[1]
Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx file
in AOO
Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4 64bit
Regards,
Yu Zhen
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Shenfeng Liu <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/9/26 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>
> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
> > <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > resending as my "reply to list" goes only to qa@o.a.o
> > >
> > >
> > > On 25.09.2013 12:17, Yuzhen Fan wrote:
> > >>
> > >> -1:
> > >>
> > >> I vote -1 for RC3 because of these 3 issues, the first two are
> function
> > >> regressions from 3.4.1 and 4.0.0, the last one is for bad user
> > experience
> > >> on Redhat 64bit installation.
> > >>
> > >> Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
> > >> Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx
> > >> file
> > >> in AOO
> > >> Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4
> > 64bit
> > >>
> > >
> > > I can confirm that 123345 and 123346 are regressions which had been
> > > introduced in AOO 4.0.0
> > >
> >
> > So these are not new defects in 4.0.1?
> >
>
> I confirmed that the 2 defects are also in 4.0. Then I agree that they are
> not 4.0.1 ship blocker.
>
> - Shenfeng (Simon)
>
>
> >
> > > On the one hand I agree that regressions introduced in the latest
> release
> > > should be fixed in the next release.
> > > On the other hand we are already quite far in our planned AOO 4.0.1
> > release
> > > schedule and AOO401rc3 contains a lot of important bug fixes and
> > > improvements regarding our supported languages. Thus, I strongly vote
> for
> > > releasing AOO401rc3 as AOO 4.0.1 under these circumstances.
> > > From my point of view 123345 and 123346 should be release blocker for
> our
> > > next release.
> > >
> >
> > It is important that we understand the different role of a minor x.y.1
> > release.
> >
> > When we have a major release, like 4.0.0, we're making tons of code
> > changes, adding new features, and potentially (and very likely
> > actually) introducing many regressions. So the QA effort for a major
> > release has many aims:
> >
> > -- test new features
> > -- verify new fixes
> > -- identify the regressions introduced in the code
> >
> > We can never test 100% of a product. Maybe computer-based proofs of
> > correctness have been done in some chip designs, but generally
> > complete coverage is never possible. So we focus on the most-commonly
> > used features of the product, across a large matrix of platforms and
> > applications.
> >
> > The goal, if you think about it is: to increase the confidence that
> > we are *not* releasing a product that has a bug in it that will make
> > it unusable for our users.
> >
> > We can never guarantee this. We can only increase our confidence in
> > this. At whatever finite point we stop our testing it is always
> > possible that the next test would have found a killer defect. So the
> > challenge in designing a test plan is to identify what tests can be
> > performed in a reasonable finite test pass (or passes) that will
> > reduce the chances of a killer defect still being in the code. I
> > think Yuzhen did a great job at designing the test plans for the
> > releases.
> >
> > The quality approach in a minor maintenance release like 4.0.1 is
> > different. We don't make tons of code changes. In fact we are very
> > restrictive. We only fixed showstopper bugs that were proposed on the
> > mailing list, discussed and approved by the Release Manager. The goal
> > is have no new regressions introduced. The goal is to fix targeted
> > bugs, and get those fixes out to users quickly. If we didn't think
> > that speed of release was an important thing here then we would all be
> > working on 4.1.0, not 4.0.1. So the fact that we are working on 4.0.1
> > at all shows that there is some urgency to get bug fixes released.
> >
> > In any case, if new bugs are found in 4.0.1 testing, I don't think it
> > matters whether they were found in RC1, RC2, RC3, during the vote or
> > the day after the vote. It doesn't matter who discovered the bug or
> > when they discovered it. The question is: How severe is the defect?
> > Is it a showstopper? Is it something we hold back 4.0.1 for? Or
> > something less severe that we put in 4.1.0?
> >
> >
> > > Regarding issue 123348:
> > > As far as I know this issue is not new and already known. I think a
> > > workaround exist. Thus, for me this is not a release blocker.
> > >
> > > Yu Zhen, do you think you can change your mind regarding your vote?
> > >
> >
> > I don't think we should ask anyone to change their votes. A release
> > is approved by majority vote. It does not need to be unanimous. We
> > should not be afraid to have a dissenting vote. But I do hope we can
> > develop a shared view of the true value of QA and its role in the
> > project. It is not just the defects found and reported. The true
> > value is that the tests were completed and that *nothing worse than
> > these three bugs was found*. That is the information we needed to
> > know. That is what gives us increased confidence that 4.0.1 is ready
> > to release. It also helps ensure that 4.1.0 (or even 4.0.2, if
> > needed) will be even better.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> > >
> > > Best regards, Oliver.
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Yu Zhen
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release
> for
> > >>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to
> introduce
> > >>>> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian
> > Cyrillic,
> > >>>> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a
> further
> > >>>> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
> > >>>> [...]
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
> > >>>> [...]
> > >>>>
> > >>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> > >>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
> > >>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> +1 : release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> > >>>
> > >>> Herbert
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > >>> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
> > 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
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: qa-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: qa-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Yuzhen Fan <fa...@gmail.com>.
Considering that:
1. The first two defects[1] are regressions introduced in AOO 4.0 and not
AOO 4.0.1 release blockers
2. The installation defect[1] on Redhat6.4 64bit has workaround
I agree to release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
[1]
Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx file
in AOO
Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4 64bit
Regards,
Yu Zhen
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Shenfeng Liu <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/9/26 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>
> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
> > <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > resending as my "reply to list" goes only to qa@o.a.o
> > >
> > >
> > > On 25.09.2013 12:17, Yuzhen Fan wrote:
> > >>
> > >> -1:
> > >>
> > >> I vote -1 for RC3 because of these 3 issues, the first two are
> function
> > >> regressions from 3.4.1 and 4.0.0, the last one is for bad user
> > experience
> > >> on Redhat 64bit installation.
> > >>
> > >> Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
> > >> Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx
> > >> file
> > >> in AOO
> > >> Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4
> > 64bit
> > >>
> > >
> > > I can confirm that 123345 and 123346 are regressions which had been
> > > introduced in AOO 4.0.0
> > >
> >
> > So these are not new defects in 4.0.1?
> >
>
> I confirmed that the 2 defects are also in 4.0. Then I agree that they are
> not 4.0.1 ship blocker.
>
> - Shenfeng (Simon)
>
>
> >
> > > On the one hand I agree that regressions introduced in the latest
> release
> > > should be fixed in the next release.
> > > On the other hand we are already quite far in our planned AOO 4.0.1
> > release
> > > schedule and AOO401rc3 contains a lot of important bug fixes and
> > > improvements regarding our supported languages. Thus, I strongly vote
> for
> > > releasing AOO401rc3 as AOO 4.0.1 under these circumstances.
> > > From my point of view 123345 and 123346 should be release blocker for
> our
> > > next release.
> > >
> >
> > It is important that we understand the different role of a minor x.y.1
> > release.
> >
> > When we have a major release, like 4.0.0, we're making tons of code
> > changes, adding new features, and potentially (and very likely
> > actually) introducing many regressions. So the QA effort for a major
> > release has many aims:
> >
> > -- test new features
> > -- verify new fixes
> > -- identify the regressions introduced in the code
> >
> > We can never test 100% of a product. Maybe computer-based proofs of
> > correctness have been done in some chip designs, but generally
> > complete coverage is never possible. So we focus on the most-commonly
> > used features of the product, across a large matrix of platforms and
> > applications.
> >
> > The goal, if you think about it is: to increase the confidence that
> > we are *not* releasing a product that has a bug in it that will make
> > it unusable for our users.
> >
> > We can never guarantee this. We can only increase our confidence in
> > this. At whatever finite point we stop our testing it is always
> > possible that the next test would have found a killer defect. So the
> > challenge in designing a test plan is to identify what tests can be
> > performed in a reasonable finite test pass (or passes) that will
> > reduce the chances of a killer defect still being in the code. I
> > think Yuzhen did a great job at designing the test plans for the
> > releases.
> >
> > The quality approach in a minor maintenance release like 4.0.1 is
> > different. We don't make tons of code changes. In fact we are very
> > restrictive. We only fixed showstopper bugs that were proposed on the
> > mailing list, discussed and approved by the Release Manager. The goal
> > is have no new regressions introduced. The goal is to fix targeted
> > bugs, and get those fixes out to users quickly. If we didn't think
> > that speed of release was an important thing here then we would all be
> > working on 4.1.0, not 4.0.1. So the fact that we are working on 4.0.1
> > at all shows that there is some urgency to get bug fixes released.
> >
> > In any case, if new bugs are found in 4.0.1 testing, I don't think it
> > matters whether they were found in RC1, RC2, RC3, during the vote or
> > the day after the vote. It doesn't matter who discovered the bug or
> > when they discovered it. The question is: How severe is the defect?
> > Is it a showstopper? Is it something we hold back 4.0.1 for? Or
> > something less severe that we put in 4.1.0?
> >
> >
> > > Regarding issue 123348:
> > > As far as I know this issue is not new and already known. I think a
> > > workaround exist. Thus, for me this is not a release blocker.
> > >
> > > Yu Zhen, do you think you can change your mind regarding your vote?
> > >
> >
> > I don't think we should ask anyone to change their votes. A release
> > is approved by majority vote. It does not need to be unanimous. We
> > should not be afraid to have a dissenting vote. But I do hope we can
> > develop a shared view of the true value of QA and its role in the
> > project. It is not just the defects found and reported. The true
> > value is that the tests were completed and that *nothing worse than
> > these three bugs was found*. That is the information we needed to
> > know. That is what gives us increased confidence that 4.0.1 is ready
> > to release. It also helps ensure that 4.1.0 (or even 4.0.2, if
> > needed) will be even better.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> > >
> > > Best regards, Oliver.
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Yu Zhen
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release
> for
> > >>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to
> introduce
> > >>>> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian
> > Cyrillic,
> > >>>> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a
> further
> > >>>> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
> > >>>> [...]
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
> > >>>> [...]
> > >>>>
> > >>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> > >>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
> > >>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> +1 : release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> > >>>
> > >>> Herbert
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > >>> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
> > 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
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: qa-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: qa-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Yuzhen Fan <fa...@gmail.com>.
Considering that:
1. The first two defects[1] are regressions introduced in AOO 4.0 and not
AOO 4.0.1 release blockers
2. The installation defect[1] on Redhat6.4 64bit has workaround
I agree to release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
[1]
Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx file
in AOO
Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4 64bit
Regards,
Yu Zhen
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Shenfeng Liu <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/9/26 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>
> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
> > <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > resending as my "reply to list" goes only to qa@o.a.o
> > >
> > >
> > > On 25.09.2013 12:17, Yuzhen Fan wrote:
> > >>
> > >> -1:
> > >>
> > >> I vote -1 for RC3 because of these 3 issues, the first two are
> function
> > >> regressions from 3.4.1 and 4.0.0, the last one is for bad user
> > experience
> > >> on Redhat 64bit installation.
> > >>
> > >> Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
> > >> Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx
> > >> file
> > >> in AOO
> > >> Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4
> > 64bit
> > >>
> > >
> > > I can confirm that 123345 and 123346 are regressions which had been
> > > introduced in AOO 4.0.0
> > >
> >
> > So these are not new defects in 4.0.1?
> >
>
> I confirmed that the 2 defects are also in 4.0. Then I agree that they are
> not 4.0.1 ship blocker.
>
> - Shenfeng (Simon)
>
>
> >
> > > On the one hand I agree that regressions introduced in the latest
> release
> > > should be fixed in the next release.
> > > On the other hand we are already quite far in our planned AOO 4.0.1
> > release
> > > schedule and AOO401rc3 contains a lot of important bug fixes and
> > > improvements regarding our supported languages. Thus, I strongly vote
> for
> > > releasing AOO401rc3 as AOO 4.0.1 under these circumstances.
> > > From my point of view 123345 and 123346 should be release blocker for
> our
> > > next release.
> > >
> >
> > It is important that we understand the different role of a minor x.y.1
> > release.
> >
> > When we have a major release, like 4.0.0, we're making tons of code
> > changes, adding new features, and potentially (and very likely
> > actually) introducing many regressions. So the QA effort for a major
> > release has many aims:
> >
> > -- test new features
> > -- verify new fixes
> > -- identify the regressions introduced in the code
> >
> > We can never test 100% of a product. Maybe computer-based proofs of
> > correctness have been done in some chip designs, but generally
> > complete coverage is never possible. So we focus on the most-commonly
> > used features of the product, across a large matrix of platforms and
> > applications.
> >
> > The goal, if you think about it is: to increase the confidence that
> > we are *not* releasing a product that has a bug in it that will make
> > it unusable for our users.
> >
> > We can never guarantee this. We can only increase our confidence in
> > this. At whatever finite point we stop our testing it is always
> > possible that the next test would have found a killer defect. So the
> > challenge in designing a test plan is to identify what tests can be
> > performed in a reasonable finite test pass (or passes) that will
> > reduce the chances of a killer defect still being in the code. I
> > think Yuzhen did a great job at designing the test plans for the
> > releases.
> >
> > The quality approach in a minor maintenance release like 4.0.1 is
> > different. We don't make tons of code changes. In fact we are very
> > restrictive. We only fixed showstopper bugs that were proposed on the
> > mailing list, discussed and approved by the Release Manager. The goal
> > is have no new regressions introduced. The goal is to fix targeted
> > bugs, and get those fixes out to users quickly. If we didn't think
> > that speed of release was an important thing here then we would all be
> > working on 4.1.0, not 4.0.1. So the fact that we are working on 4.0.1
> > at all shows that there is some urgency to get bug fixes released.
> >
> > In any case, if new bugs are found in 4.0.1 testing, I don't think it
> > matters whether they were found in RC1, RC2, RC3, during the vote or
> > the day after the vote. It doesn't matter who discovered the bug or
> > when they discovered it. The question is: How severe is the defect?
> > Is it a showstopper? Is it something we hold back 4.0.1 for? Or
> > something less severe that we put in 4.1.0?
> >
> >
> > > Regarding issue 123348:
> > > As far as I know this issue is not new and already known. I think a
> > > workaround exist. Thus, for me this is not a release blocker.
> > >
> > > Yu Zhen, do you think you can change your mind regarding your vote?
> > >
> >
> > I don't think we should ask anyone to change their votes. A release
> > is approved by majority vote. It does not need to be unanimous. We
> > should not be afraid to have a dissenting vote. But I do hope we can
> > develop a shared view of the true value of QA and its role in the
> > project. It is not just the defects found and reported. The true
> > value is that the tests were completed and that *nothing worse than
> > these three bugs was found*. That is the information we needed to
> > know. That is what gives us increased confidence that 4.0.1 is ready
> > to release. It also helps ensure that 4.1.0 (or even 4.0.2, if
> > needed) will be even better.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> > >
> > > Best regards, Oliver.
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Yu Zhen
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release
> for
> > >>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to
> introduce
> > >>>> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian
> > Cyrillic,
> > >>>> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a
> further
> > >>>> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
> > >>>> [...]
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
> > >>>> [...]
> > >>>>
> > >>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> > >>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
> > >>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> +1 : release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> > >>>
> > >>> Herbert
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > >>> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
> > 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
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: qa-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: qa-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Shenfeng Liu <li...@gmail.com>.
2013/9/26 Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
> <or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > resending as my "reply to list" goes only to qa@o.a.o
> >
> >
> > On 25.09.2013 12:17, Yuzhen Fan wrote:
> >>
> >> -1:
> >>
> >> I vote -1 for RC3 because of these 3 issues, the first two are function
> >> regressions from 3.4.1 and 4.0.0, the last one is for bad user
> experience
> >> on Redhat 64bit installation.
> >>
> >> Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
> >> Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx
> >> file
> >> in AOO
> >> Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4
> 64bit
> >>
> >
> > I can confirm that 123345 and 123346 are regressions which had been
> > introduced in AOO 4.0.0
> >
>
> So these are not new defects in 4.0.1?
>
I confirmed that the 2 defects are also in 4.0. Then I agree that they are
not 4.0.1 ship blocker.
- Shenfeng (Simon)
>
> > On the one hand I agree that regressions introduced in the latest release
> > should be fixed in the next release.
> > On the other hand we are already quite far in our planned AOO 4.0.1
> release
> > schedule and AOO401rc3 contains a lot of important bug fixes and
> > improvements regarding our supported languages. Thus, I strongly vote for
> > releasing AOO401rc3 as AOO 4.0.1 under these circumstances.
> > From my point of view 123345 and 123346 should be release blocker for our
> > next release.
> >
>
> It is important that we understand the different role of a minor x.y.1
> release.
>
> When we have a major release, like 4.0.0, we're making tons of code
> changes, adding new features, and potentially (and very likely
> actually) introducing many regressions. So the QA effort for a major
> release has many aims:
>
> -- test new features
> -- verify new fixes
> -- identify the regressions introduced in the code
>
> We can never test 100% of a product. Maybe computer-based proofs of
> correctness have been done in some chip designs, but generally
> complete coverage is never possible. So we focus on the most-commonly
> used features of the product, across a large matrix of platforms and
> applications.
>
> The goal, if you think about it is: to increase the confidence that
> we are *not* releasing a product that has a bug in it that will make
> it unusable for our users.
>
> We can never guarantee this. We can only increase our confidence in
> this. At whatever finite point we stop our testing it is always
> possible that the next test would have found a killer defect. So the
> challenge in designing a test plan is to identify what tests can be
> performed in a reasonable finite test pass (or passes) that will
> reduce the chances of a killer defect still being in the code. I
> think Yuzhen did a great job at designing the test plans for the
> releases.
>
> The quality approach in a minor maintenance release like 4.0.1 is
> different. We don't make tons of code changes. In fact we are very
> restrictive. We only fixed showstopper bugs that were proposed on the
> mailing list, discussed and approved by the Release Manager. The goal
> is have no new regressions introduced. The goal is to fix targeted
> bugs, and get those fixes out to users quickly. If we didn't think
> that speed of release was an important thing here then we would all be
> working on 4.1.0, not 4.0.1. So the fact that we are working on 4.0.1
> at all shows that there is some urgency to get bug fixes released.
>
> In any case, if new bugs are found in 4.0.1 testing, I don't think it
> matters whether they were found in RC1, RC2, RC3, during the vote or
> the day after the vote. It doesn't matter who discovered the bug or
> when they discovered it. The question is: How severe is the defect?
> Is it a showstopper? Is it something we hold back 4.0.1 for? Or
> something less severe that we put in 4.1.0?
>
>
> > Regarding issue 123348:
> > As far as I know this issue is not new and already known. I think a
> > workaround exist. Thus, for me this is not a release blocker.
> >
> > Yu Zhen, do you think you can change your mind regarding your vote?
> >
>
> I don't think we should ask anyone to change their votes. A release
> is approved by majority vote. It does not need to be unanimous. We
> should not be afraid to have a dissenting vote. But I do hope we can
> develop a shared view of the true value of QA and its role in the
> project. It is not just the defects found and reported. The true
> value is that the tests were completed and that *nothing worse than
> these three bugs was found*. That is the information we needed to
> know. That is what gives us increased confidence that 4.0.1 is ready
> to release. It also helps ensure that 4.1.0 (or even 4.0.2, if
> needed) will be even better.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
> >
> > Best regards, Oliver.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Yu Zhen
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
> >>>>
> >>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
> >>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
> >>>> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian
> Cyrillic,
> >>>> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
> >>>> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
> >>>> [...]
> >>>>
> >>>> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
> >>>>
> >>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
> >>>> [...]
> >>>>
> >>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> >>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
> >>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> +1 : release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> >>>
> >>> Herbert
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> >>> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
> 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
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: qa-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: qa-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
<or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> resending as my "reply to list" goes only to qa@o.a.o
>
>
> On 25.09.2013 12:17, Yuzhen Fan wrote:
>>
>> -1:
>>
>> I vote -1 for RC3 because of these 3 issues, the first two are function
>> regressions from 3.4.1 and 4.0.0, the last one is for bad user experience
>> on Redhat 64bit installation.
>>
>> Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
>> Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx
>> file
>> in AOO
>> Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4 64bit
>>
>
> I can confirm that 123345 and 123346 are regressions which had been
> introduced in AOO 4.0.0
>
So these are not new defects in 4.0.1?
> On the one hand I agree that regressions introduced in the latest release
> should be fixed in the next release.
> On the other hand we are already quite far in our planned AOO 4.0.1 release
> schedule and AOO401rc3 contains a lot of important bug fixes and
> improvements regarding our supported languages. Thus, I strongly vote for
> releasing AOO401rc3 as AOO 4.0.1 under these circumstances.
> From my point of view 123345 and 123346 should be release blocker for our
> next release.
>
It is important that we understand the different role of a minor x.y.1 release.
When we have a major release, like 4.0.0, we're making tons of code
changes, adding new features, and potentially (and very likely
actually) introducing many regressions. So the QA effort for a major
release has many aims:
-- test new features
-- verify new fixes
-- identify the regressions introduced in the code
We can never test 100% of a product. Maybe computer-based proofs of
correctness have been done in some chip designs, but generally
complete coverage is never possible. So we focus on the most-commonly
used features of the product, across a large matrix of platforms and
applications.
The goal, if you think about it is: to increase the confidence that
we are *not* releasing a product that has a bug in it that will make
it unusable for our users.
We can never guarantee this. We can only increase our confidence in
this. At whatever finite point we stop our testing it is always
possible that the next test would have found a killer defect. So the
challenge in designing a test plan is to identify what tests can be
performed in a reasonable finite test pass (or passes) that will
reduce the chances of a killer defect still being in the code. I
think Yuzhen did a great job at designing the test plans for the
releases.
The quality approach in a minor maintenance release like 4.0.1 is
different. We don't make tons of code changes. In fact we are very
restrictive. We only fixed showstopper bugs that were proposed on the
mailing list, discussed and approved by the Release Manager. The goal
is have no new regressions introduced. The goal is to fix targeted
bugs, and get those fixes out to users quickly. If we didn't think
that speed of release was an important thing here then we would all be
working on 4.1.0, not 4.0.1. So the fact that we are working on 4.0.1
at all shows that there is some urgency to get bug fixes released.
In any case, if new bugs are found in 4.0.1 testing, I don't think it
matters whether they were found in RC1, RC2, RC3, during the vote or
the day after the vote. It doesn't matter who discovered the bug or
when they discovered it. The question is: How severe is the defect?
Is it a showstopper? Is it something we hold back 4.0.1 for? Or
something less severe that we put in 4.1.0?
> Regarding issue 123348:
> As far as I know this issue is not new and already known. I think a
> workaround exist. Thus, for me this is not a release blocker.
>
> Yu Zhen, do you think you can change your mind regarding your vote?
>
I don't think we should ask anyone to change their votes. A release
is approved by majority vote. It does not need to be unanimous. We
should not be afraid to have a dissenting vote. But I do hope we can
develop a shared view of the true value of QA and its role in the
project. It is not just the defects found and reported. The true
value is that the tests were completed and that *nothing worse than
these three bugs was found*. That is the information we needed to
know. That is what gives us increased confidence that 4.0.1 is ready
to release. It also helps ensure that 4.1.0 (or even 4.0.2, if
needed) will be even better.
Regards,
-Rob
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Yu Zhen
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
>>>>
>>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
>>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
>>>> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
>>>> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
>>>> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>>>>
>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>
>>>
>>> +1 : release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>>>
>>> Herbert
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@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
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 5:55 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> resending as my "reply to list" goes only to qa@o.a.o
>
>
> On 25.09.2013 12:17, Yuzhen Fan wrote:
>
>> -1:
>>
>> I vote -1 for RC3 because of these 3 issues, the first two are function
>> regressions from 3.4.1 and 4.0.0, the last one is for bad user experience
>> on Redhat 64bit installation.
>>
>> Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
>> Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx
>> file
>> in AOO
>> Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4 64bit
>>
>>
> I can confirm that 123345 and 123346 are regressions which had been
> introduced in AOO 4.0.0
>
> On the one hand I agree that regressions introduced in the latest release
> should be fixed in the next release.
> On the other hand we are already quite far in our planned AOO 4.0.1
> release schedule and AOO401rc3 contains a lot of important bug fixes and
> improvements regarding our supported languages. Thus, I strongly vote for
> releasing AOO401rc3 as AOO 4.0.1 under these circumstances.
> From my point of view 123345 and 123346 should be release blocker for our
> next release.
>
yes...+1
A lot of us went through the release blocker list for 4.0.1 and these were
not on it. During my testing, I did do testing on Office docs but not this
particular situation. It's unfortunate these did not come to the fore.
> Regarding issue 123348:
> As far as I know this issue is not new and already known. I think a
> workaround exist. Thus, for me this is not a release blocker.
>
> Yu Zhen, do you think you can change your mind regarding your vote?
>
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
>
>
>
>> Regards,
>> Yu Zhen
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
>>>
>>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
>>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
>>>> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
>>>> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
>>>> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>>>>
>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>
>>>>
>>> +1 : release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>>>
>>> Herbert
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------****----------------------------**
>>> --**---------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**a**pache.org<http://apache.org>
>>> <de...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>> >
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@openoffice.apache.org>
>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged
to stick to possibilities. Truth isn't."
-- "Following the Equator", Mark Twain
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Shenfeng Liu <li...@gmail.com>.
2013/9/30 Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>
> On 25/09/2013 janI wrote:
>
>> I find it disturbing that, 4.0 was postponed due to QA issues, and we even
>> made a blog about it. 4.0.1 goes out despite a public rejection from QA.
>>
>
> The rejection was then retracted, so this isn't an issue any longer, but
> still it deserves some comments.
>
> We won't make a release just because it's time to release: we will
> promptly delay a release if some serious bugs are found at any point in the
> process. OpenOffice[.org] 3.3.0 had 10 Release Candidates.
>
> But the later we are in the process, the most serious a bug must be to be
> considered a release blocker. This is the only way to avoid that a release
> is perpetually postponed. It would be very good that the report from QA
> comes before the final vote, so that the biggest part of QA efforts is
> concentrated in the early RC stage and we still have time to study and
> apply fixes.
>
> When we are at the last voting day, blocking a release because of three
> bugs of minor-medium impact (2 are minor display bugs in DOCX import and
> one isn't an OpenOffice bug but a conflict due to one distribution's
> packaging choice) does not sound reasonable. We should try and get more
> volunteers involved with QA at an early stage, and possibly prepare RC2
> only when we have a full QA report for RC1 and have discussed all possible
> stoppers.
>
Andrea,
Totally agree with you!
While it really takes time to complete a testing with satisfiable
coverage for the big product as AOO. And it takes time to analyze and judge
the impact of the defects found. Then time needed depends on how many
people will participate. IMO Yu Zhen and our QE community did good job in
4.0.1. While I really hope we can have more and more volunteers.
So I wonder if we should define it as a process that we must wait for the
testing to complete before we close the RC vote? It is reasonable to me,
because personally I don't know how to vote without knowing the overall
quality assessment result of the build.
- Shenfeng (Simon)
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@openoffice.apache.org>
>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 25/09/2013 janI wrote:
> I find it disturbing that, 4.0 was postponed due to QA issues, and we even
> made a blog about it. 4.0.1 goes out despite a public rejection from QA.
The rejection was then retracted, so this isn't an issue any longer, but
still it deserves some comments.
We won't make a release just because it's time to release: we will
promptly delay a release if some serious bugs are found at any point in
the process. OpenOffice[.org] 3.3.0 had 10 Release Candidates.
But the later we are in the process, the most serious a bug must be to
be considered a release blocker. This is the only way to avoid that a
release is perpetually postponed. It would be very good that the report
from QA comes before the final vote, so that the biggest part of QA
efforts is concentrated in the early RC stage and we still have time to
study and apply fixes.
When we are at the last voting day, blocking a release because of three
bugs of minor-medium impact (2 are minor display bugs in DOCX import and
one isn't an OpenOffice bug but a conflict due to one distribution's
packaging choice) does not sound reasonable. We should try and get more
volunteers involved with QA at an early stage, and possibly prepare RC2
only when we have a full QA report for RC1 and have discussed all
possible stoppers.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 12:34 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 25 September 2013 17:35, Shenfeng Liu <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 2013/9/25 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > resending as my "reply to list" goes only to qa@o.a.o
>> >
>> >
>> > On 25.09.2013 12:17, Yuzhen Fan wrote:
>> >
>> >> -1:
>> >>
>> >> I vote -1 for RC3 because of these 3 issues, the first two are function
>> >> regressions from 3.4.1 and 4.0.0, the last one is for bad user
>> experience
>> >> on Redhat 64bit installation.
>> >>
>> >> Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
>> >> Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx
>> >> file
>> >> in AOO
>> >> Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4
>> 64bit
>> >>
>> >>
>> > I can confirm that 123345 and 123346 are regressions which had been
>> > introduced in AOO 4.0.0
>> >
>> > On the one hand I agree that regressions introduced in the latest release
>> > should be fixed in the next release.
>> > On the other hand we are already quite far in our planned AOO 4.0.1
>> > release schedule and AOO401rc3 contains a lot of important bug fixes and
>> > improvements regarding our supported languages. Thus, I strongly vote for
>> > releasing AOO401rc3 as AOO 4.0.1 under these circumstances.
>> > From my point of view 123345 and 123346 should be release blocker for our
>> > next release.
>> >
>> > Regarding issue 123348:
>> > As far as I know this issue is not new and already known. I think a
>> > workaround exist. Thus, for me this is not a release blocker.
>> >
>> > Yu Zhen, do you think you can change your mind regarding your vote?
>> >
>> >
>> > Best regards, Oliver.
>> >
>>
>> IMO, if we have quick solution for 123345 and 123346, and the impact is
>> limited, I'd rather to wait for 3~4 more days a RC4. And the testing and
>> voting for RC3 can be inherited. For a quality release, ideally our target
>> should be no regression.
>> If it is difficult to give a save fix quickly and the issues are only about
>> special samples, we can consider to defer them to next release.
>> Just my $0.02.
>>
>
> I agree with the above.
>
> I find it disturbing that, 4.0 was postponed due to QA issues, and we even
> made a blog about it. 4.0.1 goes out despite a public rejection from QA. I
> am sure some of the press will pick this up.
>
I'm sure they will quote you, Jan, if you post inflammatory comments.
That's what the press does. No doubt about that. But the real
question is this: how does the community decide these questions?
> To be consistent we should make a blog telling that we ignore QA just to
> make a fast release. I know this will not (and should not happen), but I am
> afraid we might be reading it in the press.
>
Say it a few more times and your prediction will surely come true.
> I would like to, for the future, have a discussion of the QA role. Are QA
> statements merely a polite advice to the release manager (status today), or
> can we make a rule stating that we do NOT release if QA reject the
> candidate.
>
The process on this is quite clear:
"Votes on whether a package is ready to be released use majority
approval -- i.e. at least three PMC members must vote affirmatively
for release, and there must be more positive than negative votes.
Releases may not be vetoed. Generally the community will cancel the
release vote if anyone identifies serious problems, but in most cases
the ultimate decision, lies with the individual serving as release
manager. The specifics of the process may vary from project to
project, but the 'minimum quorum of three +1 votes' rule is
universal."
See: http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
In this case three issues were identified late in the voting process.
That is not a failure of the voting process. If you recall with 4.0.0
we also had late information and we set aside a RC even though it has
a successful vote. Every defect report and every defect is unique
and trying to paint them as equivalent is not a very good approach.
Just because a bug is reported late does not make it a show stopper.
IMHO the responsible thing is comment on the actual defects that were
reported and make the argument, if you can, that any or all of them
justify delaying the delivery of the more severe (IMHO) defects that
are already fixed in 4.0.1 RC3. If you are concerned about quality
than surely you should be concerned that these fixes are not yet in
the hands of 4.0.0 users.
Observant project members will recall seeing this same argument made
before the release of every release we've ever had. You can always
spend more time finding and fixing more bugs. It does not require a
great open source project to not release but just to endlessly refine.
The skill comes from *prioritizing* and knowing when it is time to
ship. There is no one answer here. Sometimes it makes sense to
delay. But sometimes is does not. The decision is a community
decision, not a decision reserved for QA alone. And they way we make
this decision is via a release vote.
Regards,
-Rob
> rgds
> jan I.
>
>
>>
>> - Shenfeng (Simon)
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Yu Zhen
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
>> >>>
>> >>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
>> >>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
>> >>>> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian
>> Cyrillic,
>> >>>> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
>> >>>> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>> >>>> [...]
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>> >>>> [...]
>> >>>>
>> >>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>> >>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>> >>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>> +1 : release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>> >>>
>> >>> Herbert
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> ------------------------------****----------------------------**
>> >>> --**---------
>> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**a**pache.org<
>> http://apache.org>
>> >>> <dev-unsubscribe@**openoffice.apache.org<
>> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
>> >>> >
>> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> > ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
>> 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: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 25 September 2013 17:35, Shenfeng Liu <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/9/25 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > resending as my "reply to list" goes only to qa@o.a.o
> >
> >
> > On 25.09.2013 12:17, Yuzhen Fan wrote:
> >
> >> -1:
> >>
> >> I vote -1 for RC3 because of these 3 issues, the first two are function
> >> regressions from 3.4.1 and 4.0.0, the last one is for bad user
> experience
> >> on Redhat 64bit installation.
> >>
> >> Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
> >> Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx
> >> file
> >> in AOO
> >> Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4
> 64bit
> >>
> >>
> > I can confirm that 123345 and 123346 are regressions which had been
> > introduced in AOO 4.0.0
> >
> > On the one hand I agree that regressions introduced in the latest release
> > should be fixed in the next release.
> > On the other hand we are already quite far in our planned AOO 4.0.1
> > release schedule and AOO401rc3 contains a lot of important bug fixes and
> > improvements regarding our supported languages. Thus, I strongly vote for
> > releasing AOO401rc3 as AOO 4.0.1 under these circumstances.
> > From my point of view 123345 and 123346 should be release blocker for our
> > next release.
> >
> > Regarding issue 123348:
> > As far as I know this issue is not new and already known. I think a
> > workaround exist. Thus, for me this is not a release blocker.
> >
> > Yu Zhen, do you think you can change your mind regarding your vote?
> >
> >
> > Best regards, Oliver.
> >
>
> IMO, if we have quick solution for 123345 and 123346, and the impact is
> limited, I'd rather to wait for 3~4 more days a RC4. And the testing and
> voting for RC3 can be inherited. For a quality release, ideally our target
> should be no regression.
> If it is difficult to give a save fix quickly and the issues are only about
> special samples, we can consider to defer them to next release.
> Just my $0.02.
>
I agree with the above.
I find it disturbing that, 4.0 was postponed due to QA issues, and we even
made a blog about it. 4.0.1 goes out despite a public rejection from QA. I
am sure some of the press will pick this up.
To be consistent we should make a blog telling that we ignore QA just to
make a fast release. I know this will not (and should not happen), but I am
afraid we might be reading it in the press.
I would like to, for the future, have a discussion of the QA role. Are QA
statements merely a polite advice to the release manager (status today), or
can we make a rule stating that we do NOT release if QA reject the
candidate.
rgds
jan I.
>
> - Shenfeng (Simon)
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >> Regards,
> >> Yu Zhen
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
> >>>
> >>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
> >>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
> >>>> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian
> Cyrillic,
> >>>> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
> >>>> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
> >>>> [...]
> >>>>
> >>>> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
> >>>>
> >>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
> >>>> [...]
> >>>>
> >>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> >>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
> >>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> +1 : release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> >>>
> >>> Herbert
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------****----------------------------**
> >>> --**---------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**a**pache.org<
> http://apache.org>
> >>> <dev-unsubscribe@**openoffice.apache.org<
> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
> >>> >
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> > ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
> >
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Shenfeng Liu <li...@gmail.com>.
2013/9/25 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>
> Hi,
>
> resending as my "reply to list" goes only to qa@o.a.o
>
>
> On 25.09.2013 12:17, Yuzhen Fan wrote:
>
>> -1:
>>
>> I vote -1 for RC3 because of these 3 issues, the first two are function
>> regressions from 3.4.1 and 4.0.0, the last one is for bad user experience
>> on Redhat 64bit installation.
>>
>> Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
>> Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx
>> file
>> in AOO
>> Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4 64bit
>>
>>
> I can confirm that 123345 and 123346 are regressions which had been
> introduced in AOO 4.0.0
>
> On the one hand I agree that regressions introduced in the latest release
> should be fixed in the next release.
> On the other hand we are already quite far in our planned AOO 4.0.1
> release schedule and AOO401rc3 contains a lot of important bug fixes and
> improvements regarding our supported languages. Thus, I strongly vote for
> releasing AOO401rc3 as AOO 4.0.1 under these circumstances.
> From my point of view 123345 and 123346 should be release blocker for our
> next release.
>
> Regarding issue 123348:
> As far as I know this issue is not new and already known. I think a
> workaround exist. Thus, for me this is not a release blocker.
>
> Yu Zhen, do you think you can change your mind regarding your vote?
>
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
IMO, if we have quick solution for 123345 and 123346, and the impact is
limited, I'd rather to wait for 3~4 more days a RC4. And the testing and
voting for RC3 can be inherited. For a quality release, ideally our target
should be no regression.
If it is difficult to give a save fix quickly and the issues are only about
special samples, we can consider to defer them to next release.
Just my $0.02.
- Shenfeng (Simon)
>
>
>
>> Regards,
>> Yu Zhen
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
>>>
>>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
>>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
>>>> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
>>>> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
>>>> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>>>>
>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>
>>>>
>>> +1 : release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>>>
>>> Herbert
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------****----------------------------**
>>> --**---------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**a**pache.org<http://apache.org>
>>> <de...@openoffice.apache.org>
>>> >
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@openoffice.apache.org>
>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
<or...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> resending as my "reply to list" goes only to qa@o.a.o
>
>
> On 25.09.2013 12:17, Yuzhen Fan wrote:
>>
>> -1:
>>
>> I vote -1 for RC3 because of these 3 issues, the first two are function
>> regressions from 3.4.1 and 4.0.0, the last one is for bad user experience
>> on Redhat 64bit installation.
>>
>> Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
>> Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx
>> file
>> in AOO
>> Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4 64bit
>>
>
> I can confirm that 123345 and 123346 are regressions which had been
> introduced in AOO 4.0.0
>
So these are not new defects in 4.0.1?
> On the one hand I agree that regressions introduced in the latest release
> should be fixed in the next release.
> On the other hand we are already quite far in our planned AOO 4.0.1 release
> schedule and AOO401rc3 contains a lot of important bug fixes and
> improvements regarding our supported languages. Thus, I strongly vote for
> releasing AOO401rc3 as AOO 4.0.1 under these circumstances.
> From my point of view 123345 and 123346 should be release blocker for our
> next release.
>
It is important that we understand the different role of a minor x.y.1 release.
When we have a major release, like 4.0.0, we're making tons of code
changes, adding new features, and potentially (and very likely
actually) introducing many regressions. So the QA effort for a major
release has many aims:
-- test new features
-- verify new fixes
-- identify the regressions introduced in the code
We can never test 100% of a product. Maybe computer-based proofs of
correctness have been done in some chip designs, but generally
complete coverage is never possible. So we focus on the most-commonly
used features of the product, across a large matrix of platforms and
applications.
The goal, if you think about it is: to increase the confidence that
we are *not* releasing a product that has a bug in it that will make
it unusable for our users.
We can never guarantee this. We can only increase our confidence in
this. At whatever finite point we stop our testing it is always
possible that the next test would have found a killer defect. So the
challenge in designing a test plan is to identify what tests can be
performed in a reasonable finite test pass (or passes) that will
reduce the chances of a killer defect still being in the code. I
think Yuzhen did a great job at designing the test plans for the
releases.
The quality approach in a minor maintenance release like 4.0.1 is
different. We don't make tons of code changes. In fact we are very
restrictive. We only fixed showstopper bugs that were proposed on the
mailing list, discussed and approved by the Release Manager. The goal
is have no new regressions introduced. The goal is to fix targeted
bugs, and get those fixes out to users quickly. If we didn't think
that speed of release was an important thing here then we would all be
working on 4.1.0, not 4.0.1. So the fact that we are working on 4.0.1
at all shows that there is some urgency to get bug fixes released.
In any case, if new bugs are found in 4.0.1 testing, I don't think it
matters whether they were found in RC1, RC2, RC3, during the vote or
the day after the vote. It doesn't matter who discovered the bug or
when they discovered it. The question is: How severe is the defect?
Is it a showstopper? Is it something we hold back 4.0.1 for? Or
something less severe that we put in 4.1.0?
> Regarding issue 123348:
> As far as I know this issue is not new and already known. I think a
> workaround exist. Thus, for me this is not a release blocker.
>
> Yu Zhen, do you think you can change your mind regarding your vote?
>
I don't think we should ask anyone to change their votes. A release
is approved by majority vote. It does not need to be unanimous. We
should not be afraid to have a dissenting vote. But I do hope we can
develop a shared view of the true value of QA and its role in the
project. It is not just the defects found and reported. The true
value is that the tests were completed and that *nothing worse than
these three bugs was found*. That is the information we needed to
know. That is what gives us increased confidence that 4.0.1 is ready
to release. It also helps ensure that 4.1.0 (or even 4.0.2, if
needed) will be even better.
Regards,
-Rob
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Yu Zhen
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
>>>>
>>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
>>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
>>>> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
>>>> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
>>>> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>>>>
>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>
>>>
>>> +1 : release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>>>
>>> Herbert
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@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
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: qa-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: qa-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <or...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
resending as my "reply to list" goes only to qa@o.a.o
On 25.09.2013 12:17, Yuzhen Fan wrote:
> -1:
>
> I vote -1 for RC3 because of these 3 issues, the first two are function
> regressions from 3.4.1 and 4.0.0, the last one is for bad user experience
> on Redhat 64bit installation.
>
> Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
> Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx file
> in AOO
> Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4 64bit
>
I can confirm that 123345 and 123346 are regressions which had been
introduced in AOO 4.0.0
On the one hand I agree that regressions introduced in the latest
release should be fixed in the next release.
On the other hand we are already quite far in our planned AOO 4.0.1
release schedule and AOO401rc3 contains a lot of important bug fixes and
improvements regarding our supported languages. Thus, I strongly vote
for releasing AOO401rc3 as AOO 4.0.1 under these circumstances.
From my point of view 123345 and 123346 should be release blocker for
our next release.
Regarding issue 123348:
As far as I know this issue is not new and already known. I think a
workaround exist. Thus, for me this is not a release blocker.
Yu Zhen, do you think you can change your mind regarding your vote?
Best regards, Oliver.
>
> Regards,
> Yu Zhen
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
>>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
>>> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
>>> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
>>> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>>>
>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>
>>
>> +1 : release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>>
>> Herbert
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@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: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Yuzhen Fan <fa...@gmail.com>.
-1:
I vote -1 for RC3 because of these 3 issues, the first two are function
regressions from 3.4.1 and 4.0.0, the last one is for bad user experience
on Redhat 64bit installation.
Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx file
in AOO
Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4 64bit
Regards,
Yu Zhen
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org> wrote:
> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
>> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
>> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
>> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>> [...]
>>
>> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>>
>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>> [...]
>>
>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>
>
> +1 : release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>
> Herbert
>
>
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@openoffice.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Yuzhen Fan <fa...@gmail.com>.
-1:
I vote -1 for RC3 because of these 3 issues, the first two are function
regressions from 3.4.1 and 4.0.0, the last one is for bad user experience
on Redhat 64bit installation.
Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx file
in AOO
Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4 64bit
Regards,
Yu Zhen
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org> wrote:
> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
>> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
>> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
>> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>> [...]
>>
>> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>>
>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>> [...]
>>
>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>
>
> +1 : release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>
> Herbert
>
>
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@openoffice.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Yuzhen Fan <fa...@gmail.com>.
-1:
I vote -1 for RC3 because of these 3 issues, the first two are function
regressions from 3.4.1 and 4.0.0, the last one is for bad user experience
on Redhat 64bit installation.
Bug 123345 - [Regression]Docx embedded table display incorrectly
Bug 123346 - [Regression]the bullet display incorrectly when open docx file
in AOO
Bug 123348 - Cannot integrate AOO 4.0.0 in desktop menu in Redhat6.4 64bit
Regards,
Yu Zhen
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org> wrote:
> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
>> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
>> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
>> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
>> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>> [...]
>>
>> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>>
>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>> [...]
>>
>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>> [ ] 0 Don't care
>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>
>
> +1 : release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
>
> Herbert
>
>
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@openoffice.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by Herbert Duerr <hd...@apache.org>.
> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
> [...]
> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
> [...]
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
+1 : release AOO401rc3 (a.k.a. r1524958) as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
Herbert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 (RC3)
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On Sep 22, 2013 10:06 AM, "Jürgen Schmidt" <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> this is a call for vote on releasing the RC3 release candidate as
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1. This will be an important update release for
> Apache OpenOffice 4.0 to fix some serious regressions and to introduce
> some new languages (Basque, Khmer, Lithuaian, Polish, Serbian Cyrillic,
> Swedish, Turkish, Vietnamese and Chinese Traditional). It is a further
> key milestone to continue the success of OpenOffice.
>
> This release candidate contains mainly fixes serious problems and
> regressions and new languages. An over view can be found under:
>
>
http://people.apache.org/~jsc/developer-snapshots/snapshot/RC3_fixes_1513395_1524958.html
>
> The release candidate artifacts (source release, as well as binary
> releases for 32 languages) and further information how to verify and
> review Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1 can be found on the following wiki page:
>
>
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Development+Snapshot+Builds#DevelopmentSnapshotBuilds-AOOSnapshot
>
> The RC is based on the release branch AOO401, revision 1524958!
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1.
>
> The vote starts now and will be open until:
>
> UTC at noon on Wednesday, 25 September: 2013-09-25 12:00 UTC.
>
> But we invite all people to vote (non binding) on this RC. We would like
> to provide a release that is supported by the majority of our project
> members.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache OpenOffice 4.0.1
+1 remark danish is also 100% complete (ui) and has been tested with rc2
rgds
jan i
> [ ] 0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>